Stories about
Roger Stone


Roger Jason Stone Jr. (born August 27, 1952) is an American political consultant,lobbyist and strategist noted for his use of opposition research, usually for candidates of the Republican Party. Since the 1970s, Stone has worked on the campaigns of key Republican politicians such as Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp, Bob Dole and Donald Trump.

RT International

Published  4 weeks ago

After two years of investigation, Mueller’s report “did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” Barr wrote.

Mueller probe did not find that Trump campaign conspired with Russia#MuellersReporthttps://t.co/XNs6OhUs8Upic.twitter.com/D6kOV09l1k

— RT (@RT_com) March 24, 2019

Despite the high profile indictments of several key Trump associates, like former campaign manager Paul Manafort, former lawyer Michael Cohen, and former adviser Roger Stone, none of these indictments were related to collusion, and no further indictments will be issued.

The Special Counsel did not find any collusion and did not find any obstruction. AG Barr and DAG Rosenstein further determined there was no obstruction. The findings of the Department of Justice are a total and complete exoneration of the President of the United States.”

— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) March 24, 2019

Mueller’s report does claim that the Russian government sought to influence the 2016 election, but admits that no “US persons or Trump campaign officials” participated in this effort.

The report accuses an organization, the Internet Research Agency, of conducting "disinformation and social media operations" to sow social discord and alleges Russian hackers obtained emails of Hillary Clinton's associates and passed them to Wikileaks.

While searching for evidence of Collusion was Mueller’s initial purview, the probe soon shifted to examining whether President Trump sought to obstruct the probe itself. Here, Mueller was ambiguous. While the report does not accuse Trump or obstruction, Mueller left it up to Barr to determine whether any of Trump’s acts could possibly constitute obstruction. In his letter, Barr said that the report detailed no such actions.

In light of the very concerning discrepancies and final decision making at the Justice Department following the Special Counsel report, where Mueller did not exonerate the President, we will be calling Attorney General Barr in to testify before @HouseJudiciary in the near future.

— (((Rep. Nadler))) (@RepJerryNadler) March 24, 2019

Mueller’s report is the culmination of two years of investigation. Throughout that time 19 lawyers assisted by around 40 FBI agents and analysts issued 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants and interviewed around 500 witnesses. In total, the probe cost a reported $25.2 million.

Likely anticipating a flop, Democrats have in recent days turned to asking Barr to make the full report public, hoping for some morsel of damning information on the president. In his letter, Barr stated that he will release as much of the report as possible, “consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.”

Aside from pressuring Barr to release the full report and underlying evidence - which Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said “may be even more important to the truth than the report itself” - the Democrats’ focus has now shifted to a raft of further investigations into the president.

A House Judiciary Committee investigation is currently examining in ever more excruciating detail whether Trump or his administration sought to obstruct justice or abuse power. An Oversight Committee is looking at claims that Trump ordered ‘hush money’ payments to porn star Stormy Daniels, and a House Intelligence Committee investigation is poring over the same evidence as Mueller, again looking for the specter of ‘Russian collusion.’

Despite Mueller’s conclusion, Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) told ABC News on Sunday that he believes “compelling” and “significant evidence of collusion” still exists. While Mueller’s report vindicates Trump, Schiff’s determination to find this mysterious evidence means the “witch hunt” so often derided by Trump is far from over.

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

NPR.org

Published  1 month ago

There's already sufficient evidence to support an indictment of President Trump even before the conclusion of the special counsel investigation, California Rep. Adam Schiff said on Tuesday.

The chairman of the House intelligence committee pointed to the case of Michael Cohen, the president's former personal lawyer, in which the government described how "Individual 1" directed and coordinated a campaign fraud scheme.

"Individual 1" is Trump and Cohen is set to begin a three-year prison sentence in part because of those crimes.

"It's very difficult to make the argument that the person who was directed and was coordinated should go to jail but the person who did the directing and did the coordinating should not," Schiff told reporters at a breakfast on Tuesday organized by the Christian Science Monitor.

The evidence therefore already in place argues "very strongly in favor of indicting the president when he is out of office," he said.

Trump says he never directed Cohen to violate the law and the actions in Cohen's case don't even amount to wrongdoing.

Trump and the White House also argue that Cohen's track record of lying means he can't be believed — that he'll say anything to save his image and try to get a lighter punishment for other crimes he's admitted.

Current Justice Department guidelines prohibit indicting a sitting president. But Schiff believes that the department should reconsider this position, or indict Trump if he loses re-election in 2020.

"The Justice Department policy against indictment is the wrong policy particularly when there is any risk that the statute of limitations may allow a president to escape justice," the chairman said.

Schiff stopped short of saying he thought the Congress should impeach Trump and remove him from office in order to prosecute what he called these offenses.

The chairman echoed the position of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi from her interview on Monday and said that without buy-in from congressional Republicans — who control the Senate — embarking upon the process today would be "doomed for failure."

"I see little to be gained by putting the country through that kind of wrenching experience as I've often remarked in the past," he told reporters. "The only thing worse than putting the country through the trauma of an impeachment is putting the country through the trauma of a failed impeachment."

Democrats have been careful not to close the door entirely, however. Pelosi and others argue that Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller or other investigators could uncover evidence of wrongdoing by Trump so egregious that it may compel a bipartisan case for impeachment.

Committee priorities

As for the investigation that he is leading now in the House intelligence committee, Schiff said he'll seek new documents relating to an alleged conversation between Trump and his longtime confidant Roger Stone.

"We are going to be looking at any documentary evidence," he said, when asked by NPR whether he would be seeking phone records that could back up Cohen's allegation that Trump had a speakerphone conversation with Stone about a coming WikiLeaks dump that would be damaging to the Clinton campaign.

"That could take a number of forms, from phone records, to social media records, to other documentary evidence."

Schiff has placed great store in the past on the revelations that he said could be gleaned from phone records in the Russia investigation. He vowed to obtain phone records of Donald Trump Jr. because Democrats suspected they might entangle the elder Trump, but that did not prove to be so.

Ultimately the length of Schiff's investigation could depend on the Mueller investigation, and whether the Justice Department releases the underlying evidence that the Mueller team has gathered.

"If the Justice Department either attempts to conceal the Mueller report or the underlying evidence then requiring Mueller to testify to testify may very well be necessary," Schiff said. "A lot will be impacted ... by the degree to which the Justice Department makes us investigate everything Bob Mueller did all over again ... that will have the most direct impact on the length of our investigation."

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

Every time Democrats tease another 'end of the presidency' bombshell, I laugh. I can’t keep track of the scandals meant to bring Trump's shameful end.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

Every time Democrats tease another 'end of the presidency' bombshell, I laugh. I can’t keep track of the scandals meant to bring Trump's shameful end.

The Federalist

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's decision not to impeach Donald Trump is the clearest indication possible that Democrats do not believe he colluded with Russia.

Daily Intelligencer

Published  1 month ago

Casual conspiracy theorizing has become the new normal.

Rantt

Published  1 month ago

While much of the media continued to focus on Rep. Ilhan Omar, new scandals arose for President Donald Trump that could prove to be quite damning.

TheHill

Published  1 month ago

Conservative author and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi filed a defamation lawsuit against Infowars and its founder Alex Jones on Thursday.

Corsi and his lawyer, conservative activist Larry Klayman, filed the claim against Jones, Jones’s father David Jones and Infowars host Owen Shroyer for allegedly “defaming, intimidating and threatening” them.

The lawsuit notes that Alex Jones said Corsi “seemed to be extremely mentally degraded to the point of what I would call dementia” and that Infowars guests often impugned Corsi's and Klayman’s character. The plaintiffs claim that the allegations have hit them in their wallets, costing them “financial support and sales.”

The plaintiffs noted that Infowars has used its widespread reach, with “a radio audience of over two million people” and a sophisticated digital operation, to spread conspiracy theories, including that the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting was staged and that Hillary and Bill Clinton were running a high-profile pedophile ring out of a Washington, D.C., restaurant.

Corsi too was a promoter of conspiracy theories, often highlighting the “birther” claim that former President Obama was not born in the U.S. He used to work for Alex Jones as Infowars’s Washington bureau chief but left the show last June.

However, Alex Jones has used his show to attack Corsi as special counsel Robert Mueller seeks Corsi’s testimony in his probe into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Mueller is investigating if Corsi connected the Trump campaign with WikiLeaks during the 2016 election and whether Roger Stone, a Trump associate and Infowars host, facilitated the connection.

The lawsuit cites attacks Stone made against Corsi and Klayman while hosting the show, including when Stone said Corsi has a “feeble, alcohol-affected memory” and said Klayman is “an egomaniac, and he could be the single worst lawyer in America.”

Mueller recently indicted Stone on one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements, and one count of witness tampering.

American Greatness

Published  1 month ago

Post by @theamgreatness.

Rantt

Published  1 month ago

”I really believe the Republicans are just too crazy right…He doesn’t like the blacks, he doesn’t like the gays. It’s just incredible that anybody could embrace this guy, and maybe he’ll get 4 or 5 percent of the vote and it’ll be a really staunch right wacko vote.”

Is that a quote from a liberal voter, remarking on Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign? No. It’s from Donald Trump, on October 25, 1999 on NBC‘s “Meet The Press,” criticizing Pat Buchanan and renouncing his registration with the Republican Party.

Buchanan, a former CNN anchor, made multiple presidential bids in the 90s, pushing nationalism amid technological and demographic shifts in the United States. Buchanan called for a wall along the Mexican border, called for the decrease of legal immigration claiming immigration was threatening America’s “identity,” opposed “globalist” trade policies, and criticized the “establishment.” His slogan was “Make America First Again.”

In 1992, he primaried President George H.W. Bush, winning 3 million votes but not the nomination. In 1996, Buchanan ran in the GOP primary and yet again didn’t secure the nomination but still had support. During the 2000 election, Buchanan ran in the Reform Party, which is the party Donald Trump announced he would be joining in the above “Meet The Press” interview while he was exploring a run for President (advised by Roger Stone).

Before Trump dropped out of the race, he joined Buchanan’s critics in condemning him as a bigot who was playing to the fringe of the far right. Trump expanded on this in a separate interview with Larry King in 1999 where he even further blasted Buchanan’s tactics as appealing to the “wacko vote,” in remarks that could easily be considered valid criticism of his 2016 campaign in its early days:

I think it is personality. I think he’s a very — you know, it’s almost gotten to a point where I’m not even so sure he’s far right, I think he’s beyond far right, and, then, on other issues he’s just all over the place. I don’t think he’ll get any votes.

In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times written on October 31, 1999, Trump made more criticisms of Buchanan that echo what we’ve heard leveled at President Trump today:

“On slow days, he attacks gays, immigrants, welfare recipients, even Zulus. When cornered, he says he’s misunderstood.

The fact is, he has a deadly serious purpose. Buchanan is rewriting history and spreading fear for one purpose: To gain political power. That makes him a very dangerous man.”

Donald Trump would go on to run a campaign that was very similar to the one he panned as bigoted, fear-mongering, and appealing to the “staunch right wacko vote.” By the time Trump launched his campaign in 2015, he had already become a star of the anti-establishment Tea Party movement with his conspiracy theory about President Barack Obama’s place of birth. After decades of consuming right-wing content from Fox News, the Republican Party’s base was ready for the style of politics Buchanan had championed. And so, Donald Trump jumped in the race, running a nationalist campaign that called for the building of a wall on the Mexican border, played to the Republican base’s sense of “identity,” criticizing America’s trade deals with other nations, and lambasting the “establishment.” Trump slogans were “Make America Great Again” (used by President Ronald Reagan) and “America First” (used by the KKK).

Just like Buchanan, many saw Trump’s campaign as bigoted and appealing to the far right fringe. This time, however, it wasn’t a fringe. It was now the base of the Republican Party. Donald Trump became President Trump using the very same campaign tactics he condemned 17 years earlier; his timing was just better.

MSNBC‘s Steve Kornacki pointed to these parallels in a segment, and also cited a Politico piece that reported Donald Trump reached out to apologize to Pat Buchanan before his presidential bid.

Also in that Politico piece, was this quote from Buchanan:

“The ideas made it,” Buchanan tells me, letting out a belly laugh. “But I didn’t.”

Although Mr. Buchanan never became President, his legacy is currently sitting in the Oval Office.

Rantt Media’s comprehensive articles source reporting from top news organizations, but they’re also built on brilliant analysis from our team. We are independently-owned and strive for quality, not clicks. But the only way to truly have a media for the people is for media to be funded by the people. We take pride in being reader-funded so that we are beholden to you, not corporate interests. If you like the work we do, please consider supporting us by signing up for a monthly subscription.

CNBC

Published  1 month ago

Prosecutors have described what they believed was a "scheme" to help former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort get "cash" for his pro bono work on Trump's campaign.

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Roughly seven hours into his congressional testimony last week, Donald Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen delivered a grave warning for the future of American democracy if the president does not get

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Senior Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr told congressional investigators in August 2018 that his wife, Nellie Ohr, who worked for Fusion GPS and was tasked with obtaining opposition research against then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016, gave him a flash drive of her research on the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. Ohr admitted to investigators, […]

The American Conservative

Published  1 month ago

With the president of the United States practicing nuclear diplomacy 8,000 miles away in Vietnam, Americans at home got to watch former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen stand up on his hind legs and beg for a reduced jail sentence.

Cohen, testifying on Wednesday before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, told Americans who think they already know exactly what they wanted to hear: Trump is a vulgar con man, a racist, and a cheat. Also, water is wet.

The media is burying the lede: Michael Cohen did not provide any evidence of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, nor of collusion, active coordination, or conspiracy with Wikileaks. Cohen’s accusation of a Trump crime while in office is at best an evidence-free rendering of an unclear violation of a campaign finance law usually settled with a fine.

Any action going forward would be a big ask. It would mean building a criminal case, or even impeachment, around the uncorroborated testimony of a disbarred, convicted felon who violated attorney-client privilege to plead for a shorter sentence. Absent corroborating evidence, it is hard to see Cohen’s testimony leading to much of anything. It all sounded very dramatic and will be played as such by the media, but when read closely, it’s just another faux smoking gun. There’s no meat on these bones.

On Russian collusion, Cohen stated, “Questions have been raised about whether I know of direct evidence that Mr. Trump or his campaign colluded with Russia. I do not. I want to be clear. But I have my suspicions.” Cohen claimed he saw Don, Jr. tell his father that some meeting had been set. “I concluded that Don, Jr. was referring to that June 2016 Trump Tower meeting about dirt on Hillary with the Russian representative when he walked behind his dad’s desk that day.” A defense lawyer would laugh as she labeled Cohen’s “conclusion” speculation and uncorroborated supposition. He had no idea what meeting was mentioned.

On business in Russia, Cohen claimed that Trump “lied to the American people” about negotiations to build a hotel in Moscow. Leaving aside that there is nothing illegal about this, a review of Trump’s statements show that Cohen’s supposed lies would be labeled by a defense lawyer as a careful parsing of words. Slate concluded after its own parsing that at worst Trump may have misled by omission, and even that requires one to dig into tweets where he used the present tense rather than the past.

On Stormy Daniels, Cohen showed a check for $35,000 from Trump to him, which was supposedly part of the total $130,000 paid to Stormy Daniels to keep quiet. The check does not show what the payment was for. It does not have Stormy’s real or fake name on it. Cohen said it was part of the reimbursement for “illegal hush money I paid.” It is a receipt for a crime only because Cohen now says it is.

Under questioning, Cohen claimed there was no corroborating evidence beyond 11 similar checks he received after sending invoices to Trump for “retainer fees.” Don’t bother with Cohen’s invoices because Cohen now says he lied on them, claiming they were retainer fees when he meant “hush money reimbursements.” Those 11 checks will total over $400,000, because supposedly Trump rolled Cohen’s fee and bonus into the amount. So we just have to take his word for it that some of that money was for Stormy. Cohen said some of the checks were signed by Don Junior and the Trump Organization’s CFO. So if the checks are going to be used as evidence, the hope will be to implicate personally someone who did not sign them.

Left unsaid at the hearing was that paying money as part of a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) is not illegal. People legally pay others to be quiet all the time. Legal services such as Cohen provided are a standing campaign cost. (Lawyers regularly obtain discreet resolutions of issues that threaten the interests of their clients. It’s usually called a settlement, not an impeachable offense.) The alleged illegality comes from the supposition by Cohen that he can speak to Trump’s intent. He can affirm that the NDA was not, say, to spare Trump’s marriage from fresh embarrassment, but, as the text of the law puts it, “for the principal purpose of influencing an election.” And that amid everyone already knowing that Trump was a serial philanderer anyway.

Campaign finance law also requires proof that a person willfully violated the law. Cohen’s testimony does not prove Trump knew the payments he was making were illegal. Prosecutors would somehow have to prove that he did if they wanted to charge the president. It is hard to imagine impeachment hearings centered on the intricacies of federal election law.

On Trump ordering Cohen to lie to Congress, Cohen said, “Mr. Trump did not directly tell me to lie to Congress. That’s not how he operates. In conversations…he would look me in the eye and tell me there’s no business in Russia and then go out and lie to the American people by saying the same thing. In his way, he was telling me to lie.” Cohen later referred to some sort of telepathic-like Trump “code” that was used to order him to lie.

On Wikileaks, Cohen stated, “In July 2016, days before the Democratic convention, I was in Mr. Trump’s office when his secretary announced that Roger Stone was on the phone. Mr. Trump put Mr. Stone on the speakerphone. Mr. Stone told Mr. Trump that he had just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange and that Mr. Assange told Mr. Stone that, within a couple of days, there would be a massive dump of emails that would damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign.” The NSA will need to prove the call happened because Cohen says there were no others present to corroborate his claim.

Cohen said the phone call took place July 18 or 19. Trump could have read on Twitter on July 7 that Wikileaks had pending releases. Earlier, in The Guardian on June 12, Assange announced that he’d be releasing more Clinton emails, which the newspaper stated will “provide further ammunition for Donald Trump, her Republican presidential rival, who has used the issue to attack her.” The Stone call, if it took place, was based on public knowledge. The core of Cohen’s bombshell was available online.

The emerging media bleat that Trump lied in writing to Mueller about contact with Stone, and thus, if Cohen is to be believed, committed perjury, is based solely on unconfirmed anonymous sources. No one outside the White House and Mueller’s office knows what Trump wrote in answer to the special prosecutor’s interrogatories.

So that’s it? A saga that began in the summer of 2016, that commanded a special prosecutor to investigate whether the Russian government worked with the current president of the United States as an intelligence asset to help him get elected, is going to hinge on the minutiae of campaign finance law backed up by the word of Michael Cohen? That is going to be lawyered into impeachment? Heaven help us when #BelieveCohen starts trending.

Remember, first it was going to be Comey’s testimony that took down Trump. Then Papadopoulos was going to flip, or maybe Manafort, or Flynn. There were video tapes of something naughty and a Russian spy with red hair. Books by Comey and Clapper were going to blow the roof off. The walls were closing in again and again and again. And then it would be Mueller time! Or maybe Southern District of New York time, because the media seems to be prepping us for a Mueller letdown.

It is all exhausting. We’ll see soon enough whether voters feel like a dog with a mean owner always holding out a Scooby treat he’ll never let go. Eventually that dog might say, I’m either gonna bite that SOB or just stop giving him the satisfaction of salivating.

Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People and Hooper’s War: A Novel of WWII Japan. He is permanently banned from federal employment and Twitter.

National Review

Published  1 month ago

Democrats who have been rightly critical of Trump and his team don’t hold members of their own party as accountable.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Guest post by Joe Hoft The FBI leadership under the Obama Administration took many actions that deviated from standard practice and/or were corrupt and/or criminal in their efforts to exonerate Hillary from her crimes and then spy and frame candidate and then President Trump.  Today current members of the FBI are embarrassed to even turn […]

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

MSNBC’s top conspiracy theorist Rachel Maddow twisted herself in knots on Tuesday in an attempt to link the US case against WikiLeaks for their 2010 release of the Iraq and Afghan War Logs to President Donald Trump.

What did MSNBC conspiracy theorist @maddow do with today's confirmation that the US case against WikiLeaks predates 2016 and has nothing to do with Russia? She simply pulled off its dates and adjusted it for her alternate world. https://t.co/P3QOP2SsJV

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) March 6, 2019

Earlier in the day, Chelsea Manning had appeared in court in the Eastern District of Virginia to fight a subpoena for her to testify before a secret grand jury. The most obvious reason why she would be called to do so is because the US government is intending to go after WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange for his publishing of the documents she provided to him — and they want her to help them do so.

WATCH NOW: New Manning Secret Court Hearing! Are @wikileaks Assange’s Days Limited?https://t.co/G3joCJDF3C pic.twitter.com/EIIXymiP3X

— Luke Rudkowski (@Lukewearechange) March 5, 2019

Before going in, @xychelsea told me that grand juries are “always partial towards the government” narrative, and that particularly the secrecy of the process isn’t in the public interest.#ChelseaResists pic.twitter.com/LsJZGfmNgd

— Ford Fischer (@FordFischer) March 5, 2019

Instead of putting the puzzle together in the most obvious and realistic way, Maddow attempted to link this all to President Trump, Roger Stone, and Russia. To hide the reality of the situation from her loyal fans, Maddow pulled a move straight from the Scientology playbook and warned people against Googling more information about the case for themselves — implying they will get a virus on their computer if they do.

The truth of the matter is that the US government is going after WikiLeaks for publishing documents that they did not want the public to see. Their doing so goes against the great freedom of press that many in this nation hold so dear.

WikiLeaks didn’t hack or steal the war logs, they simply published newsworthy material that was given to them. By this standard, Maddow and her producers should be holed up in an embassy for reading President Trump’s leaked tax return on air.

Be careful what you wish for.

WSJ

Published  1 month ago

In the small favors department, Donald Trump can be thankful for how his renegade lawyer Michael Cohen chose to oblige committee Democrats by fanning the dying embers of Russiagate.

His tale about Roger Stone was refuted before it left his mouth thanks to Robert Mueller’s indictment, which strongly indicated that Mr. Stone’s alleged WikiLeaks connections were so much vaporware that Mr. Stone peddled to the Trump campaign to make himself appear important.

Medium

Published  1 month ago

When it was first revealed in November that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is under secret charges by the Trump administration, I spent…

American Greatness

Published  1 month ago

By all accounts, even from his most devoted propagandists in the news media, Special Counsel Robert Mueller soon is expected to release a report that will devastate Trump antagonists who have been convinced his investigation would result in the president’s removal from office. They are bracing themselves to hear two words from the special counsel that just a few months ago seemed inconceivable: No collusion.

The idea that a nearly two-year long probe conducted by a team of partisan, Trump-hating prosecutors empowered with an unending supply of public resources and shielded from any legitimate scrutiny will come up empty-handed is causing great angst in the Acela Corridor. The List of Shame—journalists, editors, cable news contributors, Democratic lawmakers, and NeverTrump operatives who’ve foisted this outrageous farce on the American people—is long and ignominious.

One man who in many ways sits at the center of this manufactured storm is Pierre Omidyar, the billionaire founder of eBay. After Trump won the election, an outcome Omidyar tried to prevent by spending hundreds of thousands of dollars against Trump in 2016, the Hawaiian-based mogul ratcheted up his opposition to the president through a network of nonprofits.

One of his missions has been to stoke the Trump-Russian collusion conspiracy in an effort to derail Trump’s presidency. “Over the past two years, I have seen alarming and sometimes unprecedented violations of our country’s democratic norms,” wrote Joe Goldman, president of Democracy Fund, one of Omidyar’s well-funded foundations, last summer. “For an organization committed to strengthening democracy on behalf of the American people, this isn’t just disturbing—it’s humbling.”

Goldman disclosed that Democracy Fund has awarded $100 million in grants to dozens of politically oriented groups in just the past four years. (Omidyar’s net worth is about $10 billion.) Several Omidyar-backed outlets have been instrumental in shaping positive news coverage about the Mueller investigation, as well as fueling the notion that Russia somehow poses the most dire threat to the future of the republic and that Trump is a willing agent of Vladimir Putin.

Among Omidyar’s shrewdest moves was to co-opt a number of outcast Republicans who were bitter that Trump won the presidential election over their strong objections. This list includes once-influential Republican officials and lawmakers, as well as conservative opinion-makers and consultants. Since Trump’s surprise election, they have aided the Left in attempting to drive Trump from office. Their greatest hope has been Robert Mueller.

Omidyar’s most dependable stooge on that score has been Bill Kristol, the founder of the now-defunct Weekly Standard. Last year, one of Omidyar’s funds gave $600,000 to an outlet Kristol created to pimp for the Mueller probe. That group, Defending Democracy Together, aired several television ads to tout Mueller’s alleged sterling reputation and to urge lawmakers to protect the special counsel from Trump. (The Bulwark, Kristol’s latest media venture, is a project of Defending Democracy Together’s nonprofit. Charles Sykes, The Bulwark’s editor, sits on the advisory committee for Omidyar’s Democracy Fund.)

As a regular contributor to both CNN and MSNBC, Kristol routinely has warned that Mueller’s various inquiries into Trump family member and associates would spell doom for the president.

“I do think things have changed, the reality has changed,” Kristol opined in August after Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to a number of non-Russia related crimes. “How do we know it’s not Russia? Michael Cohen seems to be cooperating . . . he may well know about the Trump Tower meeting. He has contemporaneous knowledge and probably documentary evidence . . . on the collusion side.”

Kristol also is an advisor for the Alliance for Securing Democracy, which also has received $600,000 from Omidyar since 2017. Other Mueller fanboys including former Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff and David Kramer, a John McCain associate who helped disseminate the infamous Steele dossier in late 2016, also worked with Kristol on that project.

Several NeverTrumpers are aligned with the Niskanen Center, a nominally libertarian D.C.-based think tank that has received at least $200,000 from Omidyar. Board members include vocal Trump-haters on the Right, including David Frum, Tom Nichols, Mindy Finn, and Eliot Cohen, all of whom have vouched for the credibility of the Mueller probe and predict it will doom Trump’s presidency.

In an op-ed for USA Today in January, Nichols hilariously claimed the Russians must have compromising material on the president, called the deep state “nonsense” and blasted Republicans for “attacking the men and women of the FBI.” Writing for The Atlantic in August 2018, Frum concluded that “collusion itself is above all a threat to national security: the installation of a president beholden to some greater or lesser degree to a hostile foreign power.”

In November 2017, the Niskanen Center posted a public letter signed by more than two dozen NeverTrumpers demanding that congressional Republicans prevent any White House interference with Mueller’s work. “It is morally imperative that the Republican Party and the conservative movement stand as bulwarks of the rule of law, not enablers of its erosion and violation. Now is the time for choosing,” they warned. Other signers included Max Boot, Mona Charen, and Evan McMullin. (Finn and McMullin are the beneficiaries of other Omidyar projects as well.)

All have appeared on cable news shows, on political websites, and in national newspapers since May 2017 to insist that Mueller and/or congressional investigators will soon expose the nefarious links between Trump and the Kremlin. “It has become an article of faith in some quarters on the right—well, most—that Robert Mueller’s investigation has found no evidence of collusion with Russia and has accordingly shifted gears to process crimes like lying to the FBI or obstruction of justice,” Charen, a National Review contributor, wrote in December. “Having decided that this must be true, many have called for Mueller to wrap it up. But this requires a lot of wishful thinking.”

The R Street Institute received $650,000 in 2017 from Omidyar’s Democracy Fund. The nonprofit is a conservative/libertarian think tank with offices across the country. The group criticized as “rank politics” the February 2018 memo by then-House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) that exposed the political roots of the fabricated collusion story and claimed the memo was an attempt to undermine “the basis for the Mueller investigation.”

Paul Rosenzweig, a senior fellow at R Street, is also an outspoken defender of Mueller and an avowed Trump foe. Rosenzweig joined George Conway, the husband of Trump confidant Kellyanne Conway, and other “conservative” lawyers last year to form yet another group opposed to the president. “If there were a conspiracy, then the order to reach out to Roger Stone might be an overt act that would make the conspiracy complete,” Rosenzweig told Vice News last month.

Protect Democracy houses a glittering array of NeverTrump cheerleaders for the collusion hoax; Charen, Linda Chavez, McMullin, Finn, Matthew Dowd, and Watergate relic John Dean are among a cast of characters that “engage in specific projects” for the outlet, which received $400,000 in 2017 from Omidyar. Dean, an advisor to Michael Cohen, told CNN last week that Trump’s former lawyer would tell Congress that Trump committed crimes while in the Oval Office. Dowd predicted right before Mueller’s appointment in May 2017 that calls for Trump’s impeachment will build.

Omidyar’s reach also extends to left-leaning think tanks, media outlets and policy groups, which will be outlined in a forthcoming story. But his craftiest move was to enlist gullible, if not dishonest, mouthpieces in the NeverTrump movement to bolster the special counsel, admonish Americans that doomsday was coming, and help do inestimable damage to the country in the process. Their reputations deserve to suffer the same embarrassing fate as the Mueller investigation itself.

Content created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com.

Photo Credit: Brian Harkin/Getty Images

Newsweek

Published  1 month ago

Robert Mueller's highly anticipated report on alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election and possible collusion between Russia and the President Donald Trump's campaign team is expected to be published in a book by The Washington Post.

According to the American Booksellers Association, customers can now place pre-orders for two "upcoming titles" featuring Mueller's closely watched report, which is believed to be nearing completion, on the IndieBound.org website.

The first is the Department of Justice’s own The Mueller Report: The Final Report of the Special Counsel into Donald Trump, Russia, and Collusion, which is being published by Skyhorse Publishing and has an introduction by U.S. lawyer Alan Dershowitz. The full report can be purchased for $12.99 and has a release date of March 26.

The second publication is The Washington Post's The Mueller Report, which is priced at $15 and is also set to be released on March 26.

"One of the most urgent and important investigations ever conducted, the Mueller inquiry focuses on Donald Trump, his presidential campaign, and Russian interference in the 2016 election, and draws on the testimony of dozens of witnesses and the work of some of the country’s most seasoned prosecutors," a description of the book on Indiebound.org states. "The special counsel’s investigation looms as a turning point in American history. The Mueller Report is essential reading for all citizens concerned about the fate of the presidency and the future of our democracy."

In addition to relaying the findings of Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, the Post's book is also expected to include exclusive analysis by reporters who have covered the story since it came to light.

According to the IndieBound.com description, the book will include an introduction by The Washington Post titled "A President, a Prosecutor, and the Protection of American Democracy." It will also contain a timeline of the major events of Mueller's investigation from 2017, when he was appointed, to the present day.

The book is also expected to contain a guide for readers on all the major players involved in the investigation, including those within the Special Counsel's Office, the Department of Justice, and the FBI, as well as within the Trump campaign team, the White House, Trump's legal team and key Russians.

It will also incorporate integral documents in the special counsel's probe, including "filings pertaining to General Michael T. Flynn, Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, Roger Stone, and the Russian internet operation in St. Petersburg," with each document being accompanied with a breakdown of its contents by Washington Post reporters.

A description on IndieBound.org's website of Skyhorse's upcoming publication says Mueller's investigation "will join Watergate, and the Mueller report will join the Starr Report as one of the most important in American history."

TheHill

Published  1 month ago

House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) on Monday issued document requests to 81 individuals and entities as part of a sweeping investigation into President Trump’s campaign, business and administration.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Corrupt Obama-appointed Judge Amy Berman Jackson signaled she may revoke Roger Stone’s bail because his book calling precious King Mueller “crooked” is still on sale despite the full gag order she imposed on Stone. Amy Berman Jackson trampled on Roger Stone’s First Amendment rights when she imposed a total gag order on Stone on February 21st […]

Official Website World Tribune: Window on the Real World

Published  1 month ago

by WorldTribune Staff, February 20, 2019 The first “coup” in U.S. history in which government bureaucrats sought to overturn an election and to remove a sitting U.S. president has faile…

TheHill

Published  1 month ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Monday that Democrats would be introducing a net neutrality bill to replace the set of open internet rules that were repealed in 2017.

Daily Torch

Published  1 month ago

“I’ve never been to Prague. I’ve never been to the Czech Republic.”

That was Michael Cohen, one-time lawyer for President Donald Trump, stating once again for the record before the House Oversight Committee that allegations by former British spy Christopher Steele that in August or September of 2016 Cohen was in Prague meeting with Russian agents could not possibly be true.

Those Steele allegations, paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign, stated that the supposed purpose of the meeting was to, according the Steele dossier, “in order to clean up the mess left behind by western media revelations of Trump ex-campaign manager [Paul] Manafort’s corrupt relationship with the former pro-Russian [Viktor] Yanukovych regime in Ukraine and Trump foreign policy advisor, Carter Page’s secret meetings in Moscow with senior regime figures in July 2016” where the Trump campaign according to Steele allegedly coordinated with Moscow to put the Democratic National Committee emails on Wikileaks.

And, it was to “cover up and damage limitation operation in the attempt to prevent the full details of Trump’s relationship with Russia being exposed” and the “overall objective had been to ‘to sweep it all under the carpet and make sure no connections could be fully established or proven’”.

But, if Cohen was never in Prague, then he very well could not have been there mopping up the fallout of the Trump campaign coordinating with Russia on the DNC email hacks and Wikileaks publication. Because the meeting never happened.

Meaning, Steele might have been taking what he thought were Steele’s travel records — Jake Tapper reported in Jan. 2017 that there was another Michael Cohen who was in Prague at the time — and either he or his sources filled in the blanks with garbage.

Not only that, but Cohen says he has no knowledge of such a conspiracy. Cohen stated before the committee, “Questions have been raised about whether I know of direct evidence that Mr. Trump or his campaign colluded with Russia. I do not…”

Other parts of Cohen’s testimony also appeared to confirm that President Trump had no advance knowledge of the DNC hacks, contradicting another key Steele allegation that Russia hacking the DNC had been with “the full knowledge and support of Trump and senior members of his campaign team.”

According to Cohen, he alleges that Trump found out about the emails just days before the Democratic National Convention in July 2016 when Roger Stone called Trump indicating there would be, in Cohen’s description, “a massive dump of emails [on Wikileaks] that would damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign.” Cohen testified that Trump’s reaction was to say, “Wouldn’t that be great?”

But by then, that the DNC had been hacked and the emails given to Wikileaks were already public knowledge. On June 11, 2016 Julian Assange told ITV that Wikileaks had emails related to Hillary Clinton: “We have upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton … We have emails pending publication, that is correct.” This was an apparent reference to the John Podesta emails that would publish later that year.

Then, on June 14, 2016, the Washington Post had published its story on the DNC hack by Russia.

On June 15, 2016, seven days prior to when Special Counsel Robert Mueller alleges Wikileaks contacted Guccifer 2.0, the WordPress blog by Guccifer 2.0 appeared, taking credit for the DNC hack, and saying everything had already been given to Wikileaks. Guccifer 2.0 claimed, “The main part of the papers, thousands of files and mails, I gave to Wikileaks. They will publish them soon.”

In his indictment of Russian intelligence officers for the DNC and John Podesta hacks, Special Counsel Robert Mueller laid out the timeline for when the government says the hacks took place. The Podesta emails were hacked in March 2016, and the DNC emails were hacked in May and June 2016 and then delivered to Wikileaks in July 2016.

So, if Trump did not learn about the emails until they were about to be published, in July 2016, when the fact that they were going to be published was already public knowledge for a month, then he couldn’t have known about the hacks before they happened and in concert with Russia, as Steele had alleged.

Attorney General William Barr should be cleaning house at the Justice Department. This investigation — which is tearing this country apart — was just wrong. A national disgrace.

There was no advance knowledge of the hacks. No clandestine meetings in Prague. No conspiracy by Trump with Russia.

Oh, and as an aside, Trump never directed Cohen to lie to Congress about the Moscow real estate deal. Readers will remember the breathless reporting on that subject, only to be debunked by none other than Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office. Cohen put that allegation to rest, saying, “Mr. Trump did not directly tell me to lie to Congress.”

The bottom line is that the FBI took the Steele dossier as gospel when it launched the investigation into the Trump and his campaign, using it to obtain Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants and carrying over the investigation into the transition and then after Trump was inaugurated. None of it is panning out. Because it was a lie.

Robert Romano is the Vice President of Public Policy at Americans for Limited Government.

Time

Published  1 month ago

Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, is a practicing lawyer and the host of the On Topic podcast.

After endless hype, special counsel Robert Mueller may be about to submit his report. It is impossible to know what his conclusions will be. But after so much speculation, one outcome seems likely: Mueller will disappoint just about everyone — especially President Trump’s critics. And it won’t be his fault.

This is due in part to Trump’s successful disinformation crusade, which has worked to raise a nearly impossible and definitely illogical bar for Mueller to clear: proving “collusion” and charging a grand criminal conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and the Russian government. But it is also due to Trump’s critics, who have responded to Trump’s “No collusion!” mantra by shouting back, “Yes, collusion!”

The word collusion appears nowhere in the order authorizing Mueller’s investigation. There is not even a relevant crime called “collusion.” What Mueller is tasked with is investigating “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with” the Trump campaign.

If “links and/or coordination” also don’t sound like crimes, that’s because they aren’t. While Mueller is directed to charge and prosecute crimes he discovers, his is primarily a counterintelligence investigation — not a criminal one — the purpose of which is to identify threats to our national security, potentially including the President of the United States and his associates.

Mueller’s investigation is already successful. He has laid bare connections between key members of Trump’s campaign and Russian operatives, including the recent revelation that former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort allegedly shared internal polling data with Konstantin Kilimnik, who Mueller has alleged is a former Russian intelligence officer. Along the way, Mueller has charged 34 people and three companies with committing serious crimes.

But all the while, partisans and legal analysts on TV and Twitter have inflated expectations for the investigation. For instance, after former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, one analyst, whom I respect, tweeted that Mueller is “preparing to lay down a royal flush.” To some members of the public, that could be interpreted to mean we can be confident Mueller will prove that Trump conspired with Moscow — something we cannot yet know. Even when Mueller obtained significant guilty pleas, people focused on what could be next — instead of the perhaps truer threats to the Trump presidency, like the campaign-finance crimes discussed at length by Cohen in court filings and his Feb. 27 testimony. This feeds into the seemingly insatiable public desire not for what has happened but for what could happen.

While there can be value in explaining potential outcomes, speculation about what Mueller could do has so far exceeded even his substantial accomplishments — and some developments suggest Mueller’s investigation may not prove a grand conspiracy.

For example, Mueller’s sentencing memorandum for Manafort, released on Feb. 23, contained no new revelations, and relatively little material was redacted. Yet Mueller is obligated to make the judge aware of all of Manafort’s “history and characteristics” that could be relevant at sentencing; if Mueller was sitting on a mountain of additional evidence against Manafort, he needed to tell the judge. Similarly, Mueller did not charge informal Trump adviser Roger Stone with conspiracy, which indicates he did not have sufficient evidence to do so when Stone was arrested in January.

There are other, broader reasons it appears unlikely that Mueller will charge a grand conspiracy. One is that it is not easy to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly for white collar crimes that require prosecutors to prove a defendant’s intent. Another is that federal sentencing law also gives prosecutors incentives to charge narrow crimes that are easier to prove.

Mueller’s report in fact could change very little. If Senate Republicans stand firm behind Trump, he will remain in office and the public will be left to speculate about the result of the many ongoing investigations of Trump’s campaign, his businesses and his Inaugural committee for years to come, as federal prosecutors investigate. Current Attorney General William Barr may be required by law not to release certain portions of the report or may try to hide the bulk of it from the public, though the latter seems just about politically impossible now.

We do not know what Mueller will do. But especially given these indicators and constraints, any outsize expectations seem misguided. And despite being fueled by Trump’s critics, they will make it easier for Trump to declare a win even if there is compelling evidence he committed crimes.

Trump has obstructed justice before our very eyes, from the firing of then FBI Director James Comey to the public pressure he put on now former Attorney General Jeff Sessions to resign after recusing himself, among many other examples. The public’s obsession with crimes that may never be charged has taken the focus away from that serious offense (which, for what it’s worth, is arguably a form of “collusion”).

As the Mueller investigation ends and, ideally, becomes public, it is an opportunity to refocus on what has actually happened: Trump campaign officials have committed crimes, the President has obstructed justice in plain sight, and Trump has been implicated in breaking campaign-finance law. At last, we can address reality instead of what may be fantasy.

Contact us at editors@time.com.

This appears in the March 11, 2019 issue of TIME.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary on events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  1 month ago

You’ll never guess who has the nerve to be upset with the fact that the Mueller investigation is clearly ending and there has been no evidence of any collusion yet produced.

Hillary Clinton, the person whose team literally paid for the dossier to push the Russia smear against Donald Trump with the specific purpose of trying to delegitimize him.

Clinton doesn’t want the Democrats to stop looking if Mueller comes up empty.

She told former Daily Beast chief Tina Brown in an interview this past week that she wanted the Democratic Congress to keep digging.

“There is enough grounds in what has already been made public for the government, for Congress in particular, to be doing more with it,” Clinton said. “And I’m pleased that under Speaker Pelosi, the Democrats are beginning to hold hearings and try to connect some of these dots.”

She doubled down on her dismay at the Democrats’ annual Selma Unity Breakfast Sunday morning, telling a rapt audience that, “We are living through a full-fledged crisis in our democracy,” and that we are living through a time when “racist and white supremacist views are lifted up in the media and the White House.”

She’s continued to push the fiction that she lost because of the Russians, as well as a manifold of other reasons, none of which had to do with the real reason she lost, that she was a lousy candidate and Americans were perceptive enough to realize that.

Having paid for the fiction, she’s trying to get all the mileage out of it that she can.

Trump associates Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, and Roger Stone, all of whom have been indicted, were charged with crimes that took place well before the campaign, or had nothing to do with any actual communication between the Trump campaign and Russian officials about influencing the election’s outcome — and none of the charges involve President Donald Trump, or implicate the President in any wrongdoing.

Clinton seems more than a little disappointed by that development. Her last best hope is to direct Democrats, who now control the House, to keep the narrative afloat well past its point of expiration.

And Democrats are trying to do all they can before 2020 to find anything they can to take Trump out, opening multiple investigations into him and his administration.

They truly have no shame.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Guest post by Joe Hoft The country focused on a dishonest attorney from New York City this week but they should be focused on the the real criminals – the men and women of the Mueller team who put him in this situation. Mueller and his corrupt and dishonest attorney cohort Andrew Weissmann have invented […]

Axios

Published  1 month ago

House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) said Thursday that the panel will seek to interview several of the people that Michael Cohen mentioned during his six-hour testimony, including President Trump's children Don Jr. and Ivanka, as well as Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg.

Why it matters: Cohen testified that he believes Trump Jr. and Weisselberg signed one of the $35,000 checks reimbursing him for a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels, which he provided to the committee as part of his testimony. Cohen also claimed that he briefed Trump Jr. and Ivanka about Trump Tower Moscow approximately 10 times, though Trump Jr. testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2017 that he was only "peripherally aware" of the project.

The big picture: Cummings told reporters the committee would "take a look at" all of the names that Cohen brought up during his testimony, and that they have "a good chance of hearing from us — at least an interview," per Politico.

Other names that Cohen mentioned include Trump's longtime assistant Rhona Graff, now-indicted adviser Roger Stone, former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, personal Trump attorneys Jay Sekulow and Rudy Giuliani, and several others at the Trump Organization.

Go deeper:

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Here are eight reasons why Michael Cohen's congressional testimony did President Trump a whole lot more good than harm.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Lynne Patton, who works under Ben Carson at HUD, revealed the real reason President Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, turned on his boss. Apparently, Special Counsel Robert Mueller threatened to toss Cohen's wife in prison -

The Hive

Published  1 month ago

Don’t take Michael Cohen’s word for it—Fordham University, one of the president’s alma maters, has confirmed that it did, in fact, receive a threatening letter warning it not to release Donald Trump’s grades in the lead-up to the 2016 election, supporting the embarrassing allegation his former fixer made in his explosive testimony on Wednesday. Bob Howe, a spokesperson for the university, said in a statement to the Associated Press that the school received a call from someone on Trump’s team, as well as a follow-up letter from a Trump attorney threatening to “take action against the university if we did, in fact, release Mr. Trump’s records.”

“We told the caller that Fordham is bound by federal law, and that we could not/would not reveal/share any records (as we would not reveal any student records) with anyone except Mr. Trump himself, or any recipient he designated, in writing,” Howe said, according to the Fordham Ram, Fordham’s student journal. (The superintendent’s secretary from the New York Military Academy told the A.P. that officials “have no record of communication with Trump’s legal team”; the University of Pennsylvania and the College Board declined to comment.)

It’s an especially ironic demand coming from Trump, who frequently brags about his intelligence. Not only has he proclaimed himself a “stable genius” with “the best words,” those he dislikes are deemed “not smart,” “stupid,” or “wacky.” He took special pains to question the intelligence of Barack Obama, calling on the then-president to “[open] up and [give] his college records and applications”—part of his campaign to cast Obama as a “terrible student.”

As Cohen testified Wednesday, Trump fought to keep his own grades secret, directing his former fixer to threaten his alma maters not to release his transcripts—something they said they couldn’t legally do anyway. “I’m talking about a man who declares himself brilliant, but directed me to threaten his high school, his colleges, and the College Board to never release his grades or SAT scores,” Cohen told the House Oversight Committee.

Cohen’s claims that Trump has been involved in several criminal schemes obviously garnered the most attention. The information the ex-attorney provided on the president’s participation in his campaign-finance violations, his possible knowledge of Roger Stone’s shady dealings with WikiLeaks, and his potential encouragement of Donald Trump Jr.’s foolhardy efforts to score dirt on Hillary Clinton from a Kremlin-linked source could all add to his already significant legal and political problems. But Cohen’s testimony also hit Trump where it hurts most: his ego. Trump’s alleged genius is a cornerstone of his vanity. And though Cohen’s tamer revelations aren’t likely to change hearts and minds when it comes to the president, they at least seemed to rattle Trump, who blasted his former fixer as “shameful” in remarks to the press on Thursday. “He lied about so many different things,” he said.

More Great Stories from Vanity Fair

— Ivanka Trump: Americans want to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, just like me

— Reading between Mueller’s lines: is the story of Russian collusion hiding in plain sight?

— Look at these Oscar party photos!

Looking for more? Sign up for our daily Hive newsletter and never miss a story.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Disgraced and disbarred attorney Michael Cohen made a bold claim about President Donald Trump and WikiLeaks this week, but Kellyanne Conway is revealing the truth.

During a hearing before the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Cohen, who is going to prison in two months after admitting to lying to federal prosecutors and Congress, testified about his relationship with President Donald Trump.

Get Your FREE ‘Build The Wall’ Coin While Supplies Last

At one moment, Cohen claimed that Trump had “advanced” knowledge of when WikiLeaks had planned to release the hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee.

Cohen testified that Roger Stone called Trump in the Oval Office in July 2016 and said that he had spoken with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and was informed that they were going to release the DNC emails soon.

There are two official records proving that Cohen is lying about that.

Conway, a senior adviser to the president who served as Trump’s chairwoman for his 2016 campaign, appeared on Fox News on Wednesday and said Cohen was completely lying.

“I was a campaign manager and I never participated in a phone call like that,” Conway said.

“That is very curious, isn’t it? The campaign was on an entirely different floor. Donald Trump, the candidate, was flying around the country most days,” she added.

POLL: Do You Think Nancy Pelosi Is Mentally Unfit For Office?

“It is always curious that the campaign manager for the successful part of the campaign is not privy to any of these conversations, yet people who were not part of the campaign are out there puffing around saying I was doing this, I was doing that,” she added.

Conway continued, “I want to make another point I made to the president privately, that is this there were two kinds of people around him particularly the last part of the campaign, and those pretending to be around him last part of the campaign.”

The second piece of evidence proving Cohen is lying comes from public media reports.

Cohen claimed that Stone called Trump in late July 2016 to give him a heads up on a WikiLeaks email dump, but Assange released a statement one month before then and announced when he was releasing the information.

VOTE NOW: Who Do You Believe, Trump or Cohen?

In other words, WikiLeaks announced in June 2016 that it would be releasing batches of DNC emails in about a month.

The evidence comes from an article published in The Guardian on Sunday, June 12, 2016.

The article, posted a month before the time frame Cohen suggested, started off by stating “Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has said his organization is preparing to publish more emails Hillary Clinton sent and received while US secretary of state.”

So, just about everyone knew that WikiLeaks was going to release the emails in late July because it was announced to the world.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Fox News’ Greg Gutfeld exploded on Juan Williams during Wednesday’s airing of “The Five.” Juan Williams, the liberal voice on the panel, twice accused Gutfeld of “Being in the bunker” with President Trump. Gutfeld took the “bunker” comment as an antisemitic jab, comparing him to people who surrounded Hitler, and stayed in the bunker with […]

Talking Points Memo

Published  1 month ago

Sun Sentinel/Tribune News Service

A D.C. federal judge rejected a motion Wednesday from GOP operative Roger Stone claiming that special counsel Robert Mueller’s team tipped off CNN before his Jan. 25 morning arrest.

Stone had petitioned Judge Amy Berman Jackson to hold a hearing demanding that prosecutors “show cause” for why they were not in contempt of court for allegedly leaking a copy of the indictment to the press. A CNN news crew captured Stone’s arrest on video, after having a team stake out the spin artist’s Florida home.

But exhibits Stone provided “supplied no reason to believe that any contempt of court had occurred,” Berman Jackson wrote in the order, adding that evidence and filings he introduced into the record “demonstrate that there is no basis” to issue a contempt order.

Berman Jackson addressed the allegations around CNN directly in the filing, as well. The theory has taken root in conservative media over the past month, with former hot tub salesman and onetime acting attorney general Matthew Whitaker giving some credence to it in Feb. 8 testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

“Defendant’s recitation of the events reflects nothing more than the fact that the reporter had the indictment in hand after the defendant was arrested, and there is no evidence that the reporter had it earlier,” the judge wrote.

Stone faces charges of obstruction, witness tampering, and lying to Congress. Berman Jackson strengthened a gag order on Stone last week after he posted a picture of her on Instagram with what appeared to be crosshairs next to her head.

In Wednesday’s order, Berman Jackson also noted that Stone’s argument had shifted from the initial allegation that prosecutors leaked a copy of the indictment to CNN.

As the dispute wound on, Stone’s attorneys began to argue instead that special counsel prosecutors released the indictment before an unsealing order came down in the case.

“The defendant misapprehends the clear purpose and the intent of the sealing order,” she wrote. “The OSC’s publication of the indictment after the defendant’s arrest was not unauthorized.”

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Today the president finally made it to Vietnam (his bone spurs must have healed) but Trump’s second meeting with Kim Jong-un was far from the central focus on the day.

8,756 miles away, the president’s ex-lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen gave his second day of testimony but his first day of public testimony. To say it was a circus is greatly disrespectful to circuses. Circuses bring joy. No one got joy from today’s circus.

Before the insanity started there was a warm-up act that involved one of the most icky freedom caucus clowns, Representative Mark Meadows—who immediately demanded a postponement using congressional rule 9F, which states that witness testimony needs to be received 24 hours in advance. Democrats quickly moved for a vote that they won and Meadow’s motion was tabled. Then, apparently seeing that that tactic wasn’t working, a panicked-looking Jim Jordan interrupted Representative Meadow and went full insane conspiracy theorist by accusing CNN of being in cahoots with Michael Cohen.

“You know who had this material before all the members of the committee?” Jordan seethed. “CNN had it before we did. CNN had [it] before we did.”

And that was when the hearing finally started. A deflated-looking Michael Cohen glumly hung his head but read an extremely compelling opening statement that included the usual assertion that the president was a cheat, conman and a racist; and then unusual assertion that “he was a presidential candidate who knew that Roger Stone was talking with Julian Assange about a WikiLeaks drop of Democratic National Committee emails”.

This caused Jim Jordan to have what can only generously be described as an epileptic Tucker Carlson-style rage seizure; this time he called Cohen both a “fraudster” and a “convicted felon”. It’s almost as if Jim forgot that Michael Cohen was the president’s lawyer and fixer for 10 years.

There were many moments of epic failure for House Republicans during the whole charade. One of the more pathetic was when Congressman Mark Meadows brought Eric Trump’s wedding planner Lynne Patton to stand behind him so that the American people could see that Donald Trump was not a racist because his second son’s wedding planner is black. This is a few steps more pathetic than the “I can’t be racist because I have a black friend” defence. It’s also the most relevant Eric Trump has ever been.

Another extremely questionable moment came when Representative Gosar (who is most famous for being a dentist and having his six siblings campaign for his opponent) presented an enormous sign that said “Liar Liar pants on fire”. At one point Gosar backed up what his sign was proclaiming by adding: ”You’re a pathological liar. You don’t know truth from falsehood.”

Cohen responded, “Are you referring to me or the president?”

Then there was Rep Carol Miller from the state of West Virginia, who launched into an endless tirade about what a waste of time this hearing was, thus wasting everybody’s time.

But the more Republican members of Congress harassed and berated Michael Cohen, the more Michael Cohen seemed like a broken man desperate for redemption. One could clearly see the dark circles under his eyes, the shame in his affect, the sorrow in his voice.

It’s hard to feel sympathy for the man who harassed journalists and paid off porn stars, but it’s possible that the GOP Congressional morons may have achieved it. There was something uniquely ridiculous about watching Rep Meadows and Rep Jordan scream at the president’s lawyer combined with numerous, lesser-known representatives wasting their five minutes complaining that the hearing shouldn’t have happened in the first place.

Perhaps the Cohen hearing was the perfect metaphor for the maggot-eaten rotting corpse that the Republican party under Trump has become, filled with grandstanding and incompetence but still trying desperately to spin a completely unspinnable narrative, to whistle like the boy alone in the dark, to keep themselves from the realisation that Trumpism is doomed and with it the future of the party they hold so dear.

We’ll tell you what’s true. You can form your own view.

At The Independent, no one tells us what to write. That’s why, in an era of political lies and Brexit bias, more readers are turning to an independent source. Subscribe from just 15p a day for extra exclusives, events and ebooks – all with no ads.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

Giovanni Gambino, an heir to the Gambino crime family predicted Trump’s former lawyer-turned-rat will get “whacked” in prison because ‘inmates hate rats.’

Michael Cohen is scheduled to report to prison on May 6th and Giovanni Gambino says Cohen will face a hit behind bars from furious inmates.

‘A message for Michael Cohen: He better keep his mouth shut,’ Giovanni Gambino told DailyMail.com on Wednesday morning, blasting Trump’s former fixer shortly before he publicly testified.

Giovanni, the 43-year-old son of late Sicilian mob boss Francesco ‘Ciccio’ Gambino and cousin to infamous crime boss Carlo Gambino, speculated that Cohen’s withering testimony could have harsh consequences.

‘Inmates love Trump, and hate rats. If he wants to get out alive, he better keep his mouth shut about Trump,’ Giovanni said.

Michael Cohen, a convicted liar who was just disbarred, testified in a public Congressional hearing on Wednesday.

Mr. Cohen also testified that Donald Trump knew Roger Stone had spoken to Julian Assange ahead of the Wikileaks drop of the DNC emails.

“I was in Mr. Trump’s office when his secretary announced that Roger Stone was on the phone,” Cohen said.

“Mr. Trump put Mr. Stone on the speakerphone. Mr. Stone told Mr. Trump that he had just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange and that Mr. Assange told Mr. Stone that, within a couple of days, there would be a massive dump of emails that would damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Mr. Trump responded by stating to the effect of ‘wouldn’t that be great.’”

Of course this is a lie because Roger Stone never spoke to Julian Assange and he had no advance knowledge that WikiLeaks was going to disseminate Hillary Clinton’s campaign emails.

President Trump fired off a tweet ahead of the hearing, accusing Michael Cohen of lying in order to reduce his prison time.

“Michael Cohen was one of many lawyers who represented me (unfortunately). He had other clients also. He was just disbarred by the State Supreme Court for lying & fraud. He did bad things unrelated to Trump. He is lying in order to reduce his prison time. Using Crooked’s lawyer!” Trump said in a tweet.

‘Unfortunately he might face the same fate as Whitey Bulger,’ Giovanni added, referring to the Mueller-linked Boston crime boss who turned into an FBI informant.

Whitey Bulger was recently brutally murdered in prison in what many believe was a mafia hit because Bulger’s eyes were gouged out.

On Wednesday, Michael Cohen began his testimony by saying, “Over the past two years, I have been smeared as ‘a rat’ by the president of the United States. The truth is much different…”

‘President Trump is right by calling Cohen a Rat,’ Giovanni told the Daily Mail. ‘Cohen unnecessarily lied to the FBI and stupidly incriminated himself.’

Michael Cohen was sentenced to 36 months in prison for lying to Congress and other charges related to his taxi medallion company in December and will report to prison on May 6th.

The Lutchman Review

Published  1 month ago

Time’s ticking for Michael Cohen. All of his skeletons are coming out of the closet and he has to do something quick if he wants to see the light of day again.

Cohen has decided to give the deep state what they want and LIE on our president to try to snake his way out of trouble, it’s sick.

Rudy Guliani has just exposed him for the fraud that he is & knocked him right off his high horse. Check it out.

From The Hill: Rudy Giuliani said Wednesday that one would have to be a “fool” to believe what the president’s ex-personal attorney, Michael Cohen, will allege in testimony to House lawmakers.

“It’s pathetic. This is a lawyer who tapped (sic) his own client when he claimed he was being loyal. If you believe him you are a fool,” Giulian, an attorney for President Trump, told The Washington Post.

“Let’s see if these Democrats want to ask about his many crimes that have nothing to do with anyone but his coterie of business associates with questionable connections,” he added.

Giuliani suggested Cohen “may be” tied to Russian organized crime and raised Cohen’s father-in-law’s past criminal conviction. The former New York City mayor has made similar comments before, prompting allegations of witness tampering.

Cohen is set to testify Wednesday to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform.

The longtime Trump Organization employee will allege that the president has a history of making racist remarks and of engaging directly in a scheme to pay off adult-film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 campaign. Daniels alleges she had an affair with the president.

Cohen will also allege that the president knew ahead of time that Roger Stone, the politically connected Republican operative who worked as an informal adviser to Trump’s presidential campaign, coordinated with WikiLeaks to dump a tranche of Democratic National Committee emails during the 2016 election.

Trump, who is in Vietnam meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, sought to distance himself from Cohen in a Wednesday morning tweet.

Trump and his allies have attacked his credibility, and the president has previously decried him as a “rat” and a “weak person.”

BuzzFeed News

Published  1 month ago

WASHINGTON – Roger Stone pushed back against Michael Cohen's claims that Stone told Trump in July 2016 that he had spoken to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange about an email dump that would hurt Hillary Clinton's campaign, saying in a text message to BuzzFeed News: "Mr. Cohen's statement is not true."

Stone's text, which he made clear was a "statement," was just the one sentence, and he did not explain what exactly about Cohen's testimony he maintained was false. Stone, who is facing criminal charges for lying to Congress, is under a gag order not to publicly comment on his case, special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, or any "participants" in his case or the investigation.

A spokesperson for the special counsel's office declined to comment on whether they believe Stone's statement complies with the judge's order.

Cohen is testifying Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee. Cohen told members in his opening statement Wednesday that Trump knew in advance that WikiLeaks planned to release emails in July 2016 that would harm Clinton's presidential bid. On July 22, 2016, WikiLeaks released tens of thousands of emails from the Democratic National Committee — emails that Mueller's office has charged Russian nationals with hacking and providing to WikiLeaks. Over the next few months leading up to the election, WikiLeaks would also release emails stolen from the chair of Clinton's campaign, John Podesta.

Cohen told Congress that in July 2016, shortly before the Democratic National Convention, which began on July 25, he was in Trump's office when Stone called.

"Mr. Trump put Mr. Stone on the speakerphone," Cohen said in his statement. "Mr. Stone told Mr. Trump that he had just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange and that Mr. Assange told Mr. Stone that, within a couple of days, there would be a massive dump of emails that would damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign."

Cohen said that Trump replied "to the effect of, 'wouldn't that be great.'"

Stone is charged with lying to Congress about his contacts with WikiLeaks. The indictment doesn't allege that Stone personally communicated with Assange or anyone else associated with WikiLeaks, but it accuses him of lying about directing associates to contact the group, and about telling Trump campaign officials about WikiLeaks and "intended future releases."

Wikileaks and Stone have denied direct communications between Stone and Assange. In a Feb. 15 tweet responding to reports that federal prosecutors had communications between Stone and Wikileaks, the group published a screenshot of a direct message exchange between Stone and the group in October 2016, with Stone criticizing Wikileaks for "attacking" him, and Wikileaks accusing Stone of making "false claims of association."

Rantt

Published  1 month ago

Michael Cohen delivered historic testimony alleging years of criminal activity by Donald Trump and signaled there is much more to come.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

President Donald Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, said Tuesday that the American people can decide "exactly who is telling the truth" when he testifies Wednesday to the House Oversight and Reform committee -- but in a remarkable social media post on the eve of the hearing, a top Republican suggested that lurid details of Cohen's private life may instead take center stage.

The Independent

Published  1 month ago

Donald Trump threatened his high school and college with legal action in order to prevent them releasing his exam scores, according to explosive testimony Michael Cohen is due to deliver before

dailycaller

Published  1 month ago

President Donald Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen admitted Wednesday he is unable to corroborate allegations that the president discussed elements of WikiLeaks’ email hacks with Roger Stone.

“How can we corroborate what you’re saying?” Rep. Deborah Wasserman Schultz of Florida asked Cohen, referring to the former Trump confidant’s allegations that the president was aware of Stone’s contact with WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange.

She is among a slew of Democrats and Republicans grilling Cohen during a congressional hearing.

“I don’t know, but I suspect with the special counsel’s office and other government agencies have the information that you are seeking,” Cohen said in reply.

He claims to have overheard Stone tell Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign that he had spoken to Assange about the release of emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee. (RELATED: Michael Cohen Pours Cold Water On Collusion In Congressional Testimony, But Makes Bombshell Wikileaks Claim)

Best Cohen question BY FAR is asked by DWS

“How can we corroborate what you’re saying?”

“I don’t know.”

Hilarious. pic.twitter.com/6aK7i1Xwsm

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) February 27, 2019

Cohen, who will begin a three-year prison sentence in May, is also providing stories from his decades of working for Trump which he claims shows the former real estate mogul to be “a racist … a conman … a cheat.”

The president ripped Cohen’s appearance ahead of time, telling his Twitter followers Wednesday his former lawyer “did bad things unrelated to Trump. He is lying in order to reduce his prison time. Using Crooked’s lawyer!”

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Mediaite

Published  1 month ago

Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano says Michael Cohen‘s congressional testimony should be of concern for President Donald Trump.

Napolitano joined Fox News’ Neil Cavuto on Wednesday to respond to Cohen’s House Oversight Committee hearing. Despite Cohen’s conviction for lying, Napolitano noted “the government doesn’t always get the to pick its witnesses,” and said Cohen was in Trump’s inner circle for 10 years.

“He paints a potentially grave picture for the president. If the conversation he says he overheard with Roger Stone is true, then the president lied under oath, because the president swore to the accuracy of his answers to the written questions from Bob Mueller, one of which was: ‘Did you speak to Roger Stone about Julian Assange?’ Answer: No. If what Michael Cohen says is true, that the president knew about the meeting with Russian in Trump Tower in June 2016, then he lied under oath.”

As Napolitano noted the checks Cohen received from Trump and his family for hush money schemes, he pointed out that Trump claimed to have no debts when he gave his financial statements to the treasury. He also said the checks extend “the conspiracy to defraud the FEC of accurate campaign information into the president’s presidency.”

“If Cohen is being truthful and if the government can corroborate what he said today, there’s at least four potential felonies of which he has accused the President of the United States,” Napolitano said. “Those are big ifs.”

Watch above, via Fox News.

>> Follow Ken Meyer (@KenMeyer91) on Twitter

Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com

The Gateway Pundit

Published  1 month ago

President Trump took aim at his former lawyer-turned-rat Michael Cohen all the way from Vietnam.

President Trump is currently in Vietnam for an historical summit with North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un to continue negotiating the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

The Democrats and Deep State perfectly timed the Michael Cohen dog-and-pony show to take place while President Trump is on foreign soil.

Michael Cohen, a convicted liar who was just disbarred, testified in a public Congressional hearing on Wednesday.

Mr. Cohen also testified that Donald Trump knew Roger Stone had spoken to Julian Assange ahead of the Wikileaks drop of the DNC emails.

“I was in Mr. Trump’s office when his secretary announced that Roger Stone was on the phone,” Cohen said.

“Mr. Trump put Mr. Stone on the speakerphone. Mr. Stone told Mr. Trump that he had just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange and that Mr. Assange told Mr. Stone that, within a couple of days, there would be a massive dump of emails that would damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Mr. Trump responded by stating to the effect of ‘wouldn’t that be great.'”

Of course this is a lie because Roger Stone never spoke to Julian Assange and he had no advance knowledge that WikiLeaks was going to disseminate Hillary Clinton’s campaign emails.

Robert Mueller even made this clear in his indictment of Roger Stone — if anyone had evidence that Roger Stone spoke to Julian Assange, it would be Robert Mueller and the special counsel would have clearly stated it in their indictment of Roger Stone.

Cohen also told the Oversight Committee on Wednesday that he has no direct evidence Trump or his campaign colluded with Russia.

“I do not. I want to be clear. But, I have my suspicions,” Cohen said.

Media was set ablaze after Politico published Michael Cohen’s opening statement late Tuesday night — and the President responded.

President Trump fired off a tweet ahead of the hearing, accusing Michael Cohen of lying in order to reduce his prison time. ‘Using Crooked Hillary’s lawyer [Lanny Davis]! Trump added.

TRUMP: Michael Cohen was one of many lawyers who represented me (unfortunately). He had other clients also. He was just disbarred by the State Supreme Court for lying & fraud. He did bad things unrelated to Trump. He is lying in order to reduce his prison time. Using Crooked’s lawyer!

Michael Cohen was one of many lawyers who represented me (unfortunately). He had other clients also. He was just disbarred by the State Supreme Court for lying & fraud. He did bad things unrelated to Trump. He is lying in order to reduce his prison time. Using Crooked’s lawyer!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 27, 2019

Daily Intelligencer

Published  1 month ago

Cohen has provided the final link in the chain of conspiracy between Trump and Russia.

I Love My Freedom

Published  1 month ago

Former personal attorney to Donald Trump, Michael Cohen, is apparently set to give damaging testimony against his former boss. Get Your FREE 'Build The Wall' Coin While Supplies Last New York Post has the scoop: Michael Cohen, President

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

CNN has been accused of failing to disclose Democratic Party ties of several attendees who were able to ask 2020 presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders questions during the network’s town hall on Monday.

realclearpolitics

Published  1 month ago

Journalist Sharyl Attkisson, the host of "Full Measure," interviews former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell about her allegation that the "entire Russia collusion narrative was made up" by anti-Trump political partisans in the FBI and Department of Justice:

SHARYL ATTKISSON, FULL MEASURE: Nearly two years ago, Special Counsel Mueller was named to investigate whether President Trump broke the law by somehow conspiring with Russian President Vladimir Putin to win the presidency. We still don’t know the outcome of that. But we’ve learned a lot about what some in our intelligence community have been up to. And some argue that’s proving to be an equally important— and chilling— story.

From Trump associate Roger Stone to former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, and ex-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, the Trump-Russia probe has indicted or convicted 34 people so far. And although Special Counsel Robert Mueller has yet to publicly pinpoint illegal Russia collusion on Trump’s part he’s still looking. Meantime, former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell is making an explosive allegation. She’s among those who believe there’s now compelling evidence pointing to a parallel scandal.

In the simplest of terms if possible, what do you think is the story that's been uncovered in the past two years?

SIDNEY POWELL: That the entire Russia collusion narrative was made up. That the FBI and the intelligence community and the Department of Justice began an investigation against four American citizens simply because they worked for the opposition political candidate, that being Donald Trump.

Powell, who calls herself politically independent, served as an assistant prosecutor under nine U.S. Attorneys, both Democrats and Republicans. Where many see “Russia collusion” she sees systemic corruption inside the Justice Department and intelligence community. A topic she writes about in “License to Lie.” Crucial evidence, Powell claims, lies within these little-reported court documents— where our intel agencies get lambasted— not by partisans, but by the lead judge in the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

SIDNEY POWELL: —A 99-page opinion, in which she is taking the FBI to task for having given unlimited, unsupervised access to raw intelligence, that means the database of everything the NSA, the National Security Agency, collects on everybody. Word searches, keystrokes, what do you look at in Google, telephone information, calls, texts, you name it. Everything, every nightmare anybody has of information being collected by big brother, the FBI gave three private contractors unlimited, unsupervised access to that as far back as 2015.

In an opinion dated October 2016, Judge Rosemary Collyer writes that an Inspector General found the FBI and National Security Agency—NSA—had committed “widespread” violations of key protections for Americans. And because they waited to notify the court until days before the election— many months after government watchdogs discovered the abuses— Collyer said the NSA was guilty of “institutional ‘lack of candor’ ” and “This is a very serious Fourth Amendment issue.”

SHARYL ATTKISSON: The Judge's language in this opinion is pretty harsh. She says that there could be Constitutional violations—

SIDNEY POWELL: Oh there were—

SHARYL ATTKISSON: She may say there were Constitutional violations.

SIDNEY POWELL: Yes, at one point she talks about egregious Fourth Amendment violations.

SHARYL ATTKISSON: And who was head of the FBI during this time period?

SIDNEY POWELL: That was Mr. Comey.

TheHill

Published  1 month ago

Roger Stone can no longer criticize Judge Amy Berman Jackson, but I sure can. She should be removed from the Stone case without delay for her threats to jail him over mere speech and the extreme prejudice she has expressed against the defendant.

Of course Roger Stone makes ridiculous and often inane pronouncements. He’s Roger Stone. But that’s what the First Amendment is for — holding public officials (or anyone else, for that matter) accountable for their actions and calling them out boldly.

Of course using a picture of the judge with the logo from corruption central with “crosshairs” near her head was wrong and over the top. Stone quickly pulled it down and apologized. But the sentiment he was expressing, picture aside, that special counsel Robert Mueller has used a technicality to avoid random judge selection and get the same Obama appointee that denied bail to Paul Manafort in a highly unusual move, was core-protected political speech. It’s criticism of the powerful by the powerless.

Judge Jackson’s argument that Stone could prejudice the jury pool, given what’s gone on in this case, is absurd. It’s a lame excuse to insulate the judge from legitimate criticism. The special counsel arrested Roger Stone with guns drawn, amphibious units and bullet-proof vests, as though they were attacking a terrorist compound, not a Florida retirement home with a dog and a deaf wife. And the cameras from CNN were there, in advance, to capture the whole event. It was broadcast around the world. Now, that’s what I would call prejudicial.

Perhaps there are some cases in which a defendant might actually taint the jury pool but, given the massive media coverage of this case and the general weight of media against Stone, it’s not a serious argument that Stone will be the one affecting the jury pool by defending himself against an avalanche of criticism.

There are two reasons that Judge Jackson should be removed from the Stone case.

First, the defendant is correct that Mueller did use a technicality to draw this judge — claiming that the Stone and the Manafort cases were parts of the same case. It’s obvious that they are not, and that there are absolutely no overlapping facts in the case of Manafort’s unreported lobbying and the issues surrounding Stone’s testimony to Congress.

The second reason is that, in slapping a gag order on Stone, the judge said point-blank and to the world that she did not find him or his apology “credible.” She had no real basis for that conclusion about his state of mind, and her declaring it in open court does more to prejudice the jury pool than 100 photos of the judge posted online. She called him a liar in a case about lying. She convicted him right then and there.

This whole case and set of cases about process crimes generated by the Mueller investigation itself has troubled me from the beginning. To see judges behave like this only adds to my concern that politics seems to be at the root of who gets jailed and who gets a pass. One of Hillary’s IT staffers “lied his ass off,” according to the FBI, and then was granted immunity. Stone was not so lucky, as he rather boldly predicted many times on TV.

For the second time, Judge Jackson has made clear that she views it as her prerogative to jail people for what they say about her and her court. I didn’t know we did that in America — Russia and China, definitely. If, through this case, I am learning about this power U.S. judges believe they have to immunize themselves from criticism under the guise of protecting the jury pool, then that’s a good thing because this power has hidden in the shadows until now.

The Supreme Court just ruled unanimously that the constitutional ban on unreasonable asset forfeiture applies not just to federal officials but to the states as well. It was a ruling that curbed the arbitrary, selfish exercise of power by officials to seize property far beyond the crime in a case. I hope the court will rule that the First Amendment that says “Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech” applies equally to federal judges and that we don’t gag and jail people for tasteless social media posts that bear legitimate criticism of the legal system.

Judge Jackson should step aside from this case, and Stone’s constitutional right to criticize Mueller and Jackson as he sees fit should be restored. That’s the America I know.

Mark Penn is a managing partner of the Stagwell Group, a private equity firm specializing in marketing services companies, as well as chairman of the Harris Poll and author of “Microtrends Squared.” He served as pollster and adviser to President Clinton from 1995 to 2000, including during Clinton’s impeachment. You can follow him on Twitter @Mark_Penn.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Michael Cohen is represented by Lanny Davis, a close associate of Bill and Hillary Clinton who wrote a book on removing Trump from office.

100PercentFedUp.com

Published  1 month ago

Things got heated tonight between Fox New’s “The Five” co-hosts, Greg Gutfeld and Juan Williams. Immediately following the House Oversight Committee’s hearing with Donald Trump’s former lawyer, convicted liar, and fraud, Michael Cohen, the hosts attempted to discuss the payment of “hush money” to Stormy Daniels lawyer. When co-host Dana Perino began to argue that the checks were not a violation of campaign finance laws, liberal co-host Juan Williams interrupted her, questioning her reasoning. Williams interrupted, saying, “Here’s the thing…” Greg Gutfeld then reminded Williams that there were other people on the panel who had not yet had a chance to share their thoughts on the subject.

Williams asked, “Gosh, are you guys ever gonna let me finish?”

Gutfeld responded, “No, because you’re always finishing. There’s somebody sitting here who hasn’t said a damn word!”

Juan Williams snarkily told Gutfeld, “You are so deep in the bunker!”

Trending: OSCARS 2019: A Hot Mess Of Leftist Politics and Activism On Display [Video]

Gutfeld exploded on Williams, “Oh, shut up, Juan! I’m in nobody’s bunker! Enough with your bunker…” Gutfeld continued, “I’m trying to be polite to someone on the panel here, which you won’t do—which you won’t do!”

In the next segment, The Five co-host Jesse Watters reminded Juan Williams that Michael Cohen didn’t have any documentation, corroboration or witnesses to prove Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Juan Williams attempted to use Roger Stone telling President Trump that Wikileaks was going to drop Hillary’s emails, as an example of Trump’s guilt. A frustrated Williams accused Watters of “being blind,” saying, “You, like Greg, are deep in the bunker.”

Gutfeld blasted the liberal host, “You know, if you say that again, I’m gonna throw you off the set!”

Williams laid back in his chair and pretended to be offended.

Gutfeld explained to Williams, “Because you know what ‘the bunker’ means? What you’re intimating, is that who’s in the bunker? Adolph Hitler. Correct?”

Williams denied that he intended to tie Gutfeld to Hitler, saying, “No I wasn’t. You’re so far off!”

Gutfeld continued with his rant, “What you’re saying is that you choose the worst intent of people’s words. Like when I say that I believe something, that ‘I’m in the bunker.'”

“What if I said that about you?” Gutfeld asked Williams.

Is anyone else sick of listening to Juan Williams generalizations about President Trump and his supporters? Was Gutfeld wrong to lay into him, or did he deserve it? We’d love to hear what you think about their heated exchange in the comment section below.

America First with Sebastian Gorka

Published  1 month ago

The two year-long special counsel investigation into claims of “collusion” (which is not, in fact, a criminal term) between the Trump Campaign during the 2016 Presidential Election and Russian intelligence continues to drag on. After two years, the investigation has yielded no proof that there was, in fact, a conspiracy between the Trump Campaign and Russian intelligence to steal the election in 2016 away from Hillary Clinton–despite the fact that Mueller has unprecedented investigatory powers to discover the truth.

What has been “discovered” are things that most people who work in politics already knew: the one-time, temporary Trump campaign manager, Paul Manafort, had a shady history and likely engaged in financial crimes throughout his decades working as an international political consultant prior to working on the Trump Campaign. Another “discovery” that Roger Stone, Manafort’s one-time business partner and a consultant for President Trump at the start of his campaign, was a gonzo media figure who enjoyed stirring controversy. Still another headline was the fact that young, ambitious, foreign policy “aide” in the early days of the Trump Campaign, George Papadopulous, got himself caught up in a Monty Python-like scheme by the combined intelligence services of Britain and Australia to make Donald Trump look unpalatable to the American voters (since they favored Hillary Clinton).

The best summary of what happened with the Russian investigation is from Dan Bongino and can be seen here:

The young and naïve Papadopoulos was foolish enough to take the bait and get himself thrown in prison for a measly 14 days!

The running absurdity that was the Russia collusion delusion was allowed to continue on, as though there was some big piece of evidence about to be revealed. For his part, President Donald J. Trump allowed the investigation to begin, insisting that he was innocent the entire time. How many guilty men would sign a document allowing for the creation of the Robert Mueller special investigation? Think about it.

Certainly, the “mainstream” media has been a great help to the Mueller investigation. They’ve served as the unofficial mouthpiece for the investigation, consistently leaking unfair and biased details about the investigation, all in an effort to effectively flush out those they want to destroy. Since the investigation–or, rather, the witch hunt as the President calls it–numerous Trump aides have had their reputation destroyed and the finances crippled.

For what? To defend Hillary Clinton’s honor (or lack thereof)?

The entire Mueller investigation is an embarrassment for the intelligence community; it is a living embodiment of the decay that had set in over the course of the Obama Administration since this investigation was nothing more than an Obama Administration attempt to destroy his successor before Trump could even take office.

The recent Paul Manafort indictment memo, written by the Mueller investigation, shows how weak their case is. Mueller, a seasoned prosecutor, chose to release the memo on a late Friday afternoon, when few in Washington (or the country) pay attention to the news. He likely did this for a simple reason: despite the memo being 800 pages long, only 25 pages are worth reading. And, of those 25 pages, they prove only that Manafort was a White-Collar criminal. All of his crimes were perpetrated long before he ever joined the Trump Campaign and most of them would have sent anyone else to a minimum security prison. But, given that Paul Manafort was nominally associated with President Trump, he had to be destroyed.

The longer the Mueller investigation has gone on, the more obvious it has become that there is nothing more to the charges being raised against the President. This is not only a witch-hunt, but this is a grotesque abuse of power based on accusation. One can expect more leaked disclosures from the Mueller team, all of whom fully understand that they’ve been doggedly pursuing the President because of personal and political animus, not because he broke the law–and certainly not because he was a Russian agent of influence. Further, this investigation proves but one thing: how radical and corrupt the Democratic was as well as their allies in the Fake News Industrial Complex and the “Deep State” bureaucracy.

Splinter

Published  1 month ago

As we wait to find out how many crimes Roger Stone did in service of Donald Trump, the sex pervert, conspiracy theorist, and former Trump advisor has managed to make more news. Last week, Stone posted an image on his Instagram showing the judge presiding over his case next to a symbol that looked like a crosshairs. The judge, Amy Berman Jackson, then issued a gag order on Stone, forbidding him from posting more dank (violent) memes.

Stone said under oath that the image was given to him by a volunteer, but couldn’t seem to remember who that volunteer might be.

“People come and go. They’re all part of the same group,” Stone said in court of his volunteers. “It’s a revolving situation.”

Now, Stone has provided a list of names of those volunteering for him, and it doesn’t look great. All of them are affiliated with the far-right Proud Boys organization.

The names provided were Enrique Tarrio, Tyler Whyte, Jacob Engels, and Rey Perez, all of whom BuzzFeed found to be active on social media and in the Proud Boys organization. Tarrio is the Proud Boys chairman. Whyte is a leader of a Proud Boys chapter in Florida. Engels has also been associated with the Proud Boys, though he claims to be a “journalist” following the group rather than a member. Perez’s Facebook says he’s a member of the Proud Boys.

Jackson’s ruling should apply to these volunteers as well, according to BuzzFeed:

Jackson’s order isn’t a blanket prohibition on anyone posting comments about Stone’s case, but it says that Stone can’t indirectly comment “by having statements made publicly on his behalf.” To the extent his known associates — people he told the judge were doing work for him — continue to go on the attack, it could raise questions about compliance with Jackson’s order, even if Stone himself isn’t talking.

And yet, they continue to post about the case. Perez tweeted this after the ruling came down:

A Twitter account connected to Tarrio also has also retweeted posts about Stone and his supposed innocence since the order.

It shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone to see Stone and the Proud Boys in the same headline. Stone has previously posted photos with Proud Boys chapters on his Instagram and he recorded a video in December addressing the group alongside Tarrio.

“Keep the faith. Don’t let them wear you down—the globalists, the two-party duopoly, Robert Mueller, the deep state, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Washington Post. They want to wear us down. Never give up the fight. We will prevail,” Stone said in the video.

Big League Politics

Published  1 month ago

Conservative journalist Jacob Engels has been suspended by Twitter after calling radical Islam in Europe.

In the post Engels suspects caused his suspension, he responds to a video showing a Christian street preacher being arrested in Britain. He tags Rep. Omar Ilhan, alluding that the display in the video is what Omar, a documented anti-Semite, supports.

Engels also mentions other issues in Europe, such as Muslim grooming gangs and terrorist attacks. The mere mention of Muslim grooming gangs is enough to be suspended on Twitter, as anti-radical Islam activist Tommy Robinson was last year.

Big League Politics contributor Laura Loomer was also suspended from Twitter after exposing anti-Semitism from Rep. Omar.

Speaking to Big League Politics, Engels blasts Twitter for their actions. He specifically references the fact that he is gay as a driving reason for his opposition to radical Islam, which as an ideology believes he should be killed.

“The fact that Twitter banned my account for showcasing the targeting of an elderly Black Christian being harassed and arrested in Europe is disgusting. As a gay journalist, I have many concerns with the radicalization of Europe and how it’s become infested with Islamists who do not respect life. Familial rape gangs? They have no issue with that. Anti-Semitic rants from Ilhan Omar in the homeland… an elected member of Congress.. Twitter does nothing. But a gay man discussing current events… it is criminal! Twitter should be made aware that I will sue them and organize on the streets to draw attention to this travesty. It will be peaceful and it will be monumental.”

Big League Politics also reached out to Laura Loomer, who is an expert on being banned from social media platforms, to get her take.

“Once again Silicon Valley Sharia is snowing it’s colors. A gay conservative has been suspended from twitter for criticizing and posting facts about Islamic Jihad and a radical Muslim congresswoman who is tied to terrorist orgs, preaches Jew hatred, and associates with homophobic imams like Siraj Wahhaj. How it is a violation of twitter’s terms of service to point out egregious hypocrisy and truths in society? One thing is becoming more and more clear. Any criticism of Islam is not welcome on Twitter. But, if you want to call for the president to be assassinated, write #KillAllJews, or even say you hate Christians, that is allowed on twitter. But god forbid you posts facts as a gay conservative journalist!”

Engels is a longtime conservative activist, who regularly contributes to our good friends at the Gateway Pundit.

In recent weeks, he has come under fire due to his association with Robert Mueller-target Roger Stone, being called Stone’s mini-me in the Daily Beast.

Engels has also worked closely with this Big League Politics reporter in our historic coverage of the 2018 Florida governor’s race, in which our coverage likely turned the race around for Governor Ron DeSantis, who was expected to lose early on.

Big League Politics will keep track of this story, and will update it if a reason is given for his suspension.

Laura Loomer | Illuminate Media

Published  1 month ago

Two weeks ago, Loomer was also suspended from PayPal.

Loomer has also been banned by GoFundMe and PayPal

On February 19, 2019, Laura Loomer couldn’t access her Chase bank account online because Chase Bank has suspended her online access.

Loomer received a notification from the Chase App that said “Access Suspended.”

Over the last year, Chase Bank has joined arms with left wing organizations that have a history of targeting Conservatives, including Now This and Southern Poverty Law Center. Two weeks ago, Chase closed black conservative Enrique Tarrio’s bank account after his website began selling “Roger Stone did nothing wrong” t-shirts. Earlier this week, US veteran Joe Biggs‘s account was also shut down by Chase, and Martina Markota, a Conservative commentator, was notified that Chase bank would be shutting down her business account.

When Loomer had her access suspended, she was told she needed to call the bank and go into a Chase branch and show two forms of identification.

Not only did Loomer call Chase multiple times, but she went into a branch and showed two forms of ID. Despite following Chase's instructions, she was told her online access could not be reinstated.

In response to big tech censorship and bias against Conservatives, Loomer launched a campaign and protest with Adrienna DiCioccio, in which they encouraged conservatives to stay off social media for 48 hours in protest of social media companies banning Conservatives in a discriminatory manner. Loomer and DiCioccio held a protest in front of Twitter's HQ office in NYC on February 20, 2019, following Loomer's notorious protest in November 2018 in which she handcuffed herself to the Twitter HQ after being permanently banned on Twitter.

On November 21, 2018, Loomer was permanently banned on Twitter for called Muslim Congresswoman Ilhan Omar "anti_Jewish", something that is now a fact and has been agreed upon by both Republicans and Democrats.

JP Morgan Chase has contributed over $1 Million to the Southern Poverty Law Center, a radical left wing organization that many would classify as a hate group that spends its time working to sabotage Conservatives and put them on "hate lists".

Following Biggs's ban and Loomer's suspension from Chase's online banking services, news of the financial blacklisting went viral, causing many conservatives to reconsider banking with Chase.

One America News, a Conservative News network, reported on both Biggs's and Loomer's financial blacklisting. Within an hour of the report being aired, Loomer received a phone call from Keisha Smith, who identified herself as a member of the Executive office at JP Morgan Chase. Biggs's confirmed to Illoominate Media that he also received a call from Smith. On both calls, Smith told Loomer and Biggs that Chase would reinstate their accounts, but she wouldn't provide a reason as to why Biggs was told his accounts would be closed, or why Loomer was suspended form her online banking. Loomer and Biggs both told Smith that they would be switching banks.

Are banking services coordinating to retaliate against for Loomer and other Conservatives who are outspoken supporters of President Trump?

You be the judge.

Laura Loomer is a conservative investigative journalist and activist. Originally from Arizona, Laura began her career working as an undercover journalist for Project Veritas from 2015-2017. She covers politics, anti-Semitism, immigration, terrorism, the Islamification of the West, and voter fraud. Loomer’s investigations have been broadcasted on every major national mainstream media outlet in the United States, as well as many international publications. Support Laura Loomer’s Independent Journalism here:

Rantt

Published  1 month ago

President Trump’s authoritarian tendencies become the bedrock of his presidency.

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said there was “ample evidence of collusion” between the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump and Russia.

Schiff said, “There is ample evidence of collusion of the campaign, and it’s very much in the public record, and it’s everything from what we have seen recently about Paul Manafort meeting with someone linked to Russian intelligence and sharing polling data, and not top-line data, not this is why we think Trump is going to win data, but raw data, complicated data. We have seen evidence of Roger Stone in communication with Wikileaks.”

“We have seen the president’s son having a secret meeting at Trump Tower that was presented to him as part of the Russian government’s effort to help the Trump campaign,” he continued. “His acceptance of that help is interest in getting that. All of this is evidence of collusion, and there is much, much more. Whether that will amount to a criminal conspiracy that could be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, we’ll have to wait for Bob Mueller to tell us, but not to see what is plainly in front of us means you basically don’t want to see the evidence of collusion because it is quite abundant.”

Breitbart

Published  1 month ago

Special counsel Robert Mueller is disputing allegations that investigators gave CNN advanced warning of political operative Roger Stone’s arrest at his South Florida residence last month.

“The Special Counsel’s Office is aware of no information indicating that reporters were given any advance knowledge of a possible indictment from the Special Counsel’s Office,” prosecutors wrote in court filings in its response to Stone’s request to force the special counsel’s office to prove it didn’t tip off the news network.

An Attorney for Stone said CNN presented a draft copy of Trump ally’s indictment, stamped without a PACER, after their client’s arrest, suggesting the document had been released prematurely. “A person with privileged access to a ‘draft’ of Roger Stone’s Indictment, identical to that which had been filed under seal … had — in violation of the Court’s Order — publicly distributed the Indictment prior to its release from the sealing ordered by the Court,” a court filing written by Stone’s attorney reads.

The filing states a CNN camera crew began camping outside Stone’s Fort Lauderdale, Flordia residence at 4:58 a.m. EST. The FBI arrested Stone at 6:06 a.m. EST, after which a CNN journalist contacted the political operative’s lawyer and texted over a “draft copy of the still sealed indictment” at 6:22 a.m. EST.

“The metadata on the ‘draft’ indictment provided by a reporter while Stone was being arrested, established that it came from an ‘AAW’ author or computer,” his attorney argued in the motion. “That a member of the Special Counsel’s office has the initials ‘AAW,’ supports a reasonable inference that that office is responsible for the unlawful public disclosure of a grand jury document sealed by order of the court.”

President Donald Trump has also accused the special counsel of tipping off the network, tweeting: “Greatest Witch Hunt in the History of our Country! NO COLLUSION! Border Coyotes, Drug Dealers and Human Traffickers are treated better. Who alerted CNN to be there?”

CNN has repeatedly denied being tipped off about the indictment, claiming that it was their reporters’ “instinct” to send a camera crew to Stone’s home before dawn on the morning of his arrest. “[FBI agents] walked me out in the middle of the street to make sure the CNN camera could get great footage of the whole thing. The street was sealed off, so how CNN had a camera right outside the door; that’s very hard to understand, because nobody else was allowed on the street,” Stone said of his arrest in an interview with Breitbart News Daily host Alex Marlow.

In late January, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) sent a letter to the Justice Department requesting for an investigation into whether details of Stone’s indictment were leaked to the media ahead of his arrest.

“It is hard to believe that this reporter and camera crew showed up at the home of Mr. Stone, on the right day at the right time, on a hunch,” wrote the Arizona Republican. “This leads me to believe that CNN may have received advance notice of the date and time of the arrest.”

Stone was charged with making false statements to Congress, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering about communications regarding WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential election.

Fox News

Published  1 month ago

News of “Empire” actor Jussie Smollett being accused of orchestrating a fake hate crime has dominated the news cycle the past 48 hours, with everyone from President Trump to some 2020 Democratic candidates to your local barista chiming in – but anyone who relies on MSNBC primetime for their news might not know it even happened.

The hosts of MSNBC’s primetime lineup have oddly avoided the ongoing scandal surrounding Smollett, staying stone silent both Wednesday and Thursday nights about a story that has commanded the attention of the nation.

MSNBC HOST STEPHANIE RUHLE'S RELATIONSHIP WITH UNDER ARMOUR CEO WAS ‘UNUSUAL AND PROBLEMATIC,’ REPORT SAYS

“All In With Chris Hayes,” “The Rachel Maddow Show,” “The Last Word With Lawrence O’Donnell” and “The 11th Hour With Brian Williams” did not utter Smollett’s name the last two nights as news unfolded that Smollett was being charged with orchestrating an elaborate hoax involving two "bogus" crimes -- one involving an alleged attack, and one involving a threatening letter -- allegedly all in order to get a pay raise.

MSNBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

"To downplay or ignore the Jussie Smollett hate crime hoax charges is a politically biased journalistic choice. The Smollett case represents the collapse of a cherished MSNBC false narrative, that Trump supporters supposedly are racist, homophobic and violent," Cornell Law School professor and media critic William A. Jacobson told Fox News.

Much of the far-left network's recent primetime coverage was dedicated to remarks made by former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, the legal trouble surrounding Roger Stone, the Mueller investigation and a variety of President Trump-related stories.

MSNBC has covered the story during the day, even bringing on a guest to float a theory that Trump-supporting cops could be lying about the case. But the absence of the Smollett story during primetime raises eyebrows, especially since rival liberal network CNN has been all in.

DePauw University professor and media analyst Jeffrey McCall told Fox News that “the Smollett matter is not widely significant compared to international affairs, the economy and political failures in Congress” in the greater scheme of the news world but “the media latched on to the Smollett situation and told the nation that this story was huge because of the broader sociocultural issues involved,” so MSNBC’s decision to ignore it during primetime is odd.

“Given that the Smollett matter has been so much in the news over the last several weeks, it seems curious that MSNBC would fail to provide suitable coverage in primetime when the Chicago police provide the latest development. And it's not like there was a ton of other breaking and high-impact stories happening yesterday that would have squeezed Smollett developments off the agenda,” McCall said.”

‘THE VIEW’ BAFFLED BY JUSSIE SMOLLETT PAY RAISE MOTIVE: ‘HE'S GONNA HAVE NO SALARY NOW

Late on Wednesday, Smollett was charged for filing a false report. He turned himself in to the Chicago Police on Thursday and was released on a $100,000 bond. While the story received coverage during daytime programming, primetime delivers the largest audience for the cable news network.

Even stranger, MSNBC’s verified Twitter account has been providing updates on the Smollett case while it goes ignored by the network’s biggest stars. Daily Caller media editor Amber Athey pointed out that MSNBC’s primetime hosts didn't appear to cover the story when it first broke either – and she doesn’t agree with the decision.

“Fox News and CNN also repeatedly led with Smollett's charges and arrest during their primetime shows because they recognize that this is a story that captured the nation,” she said. “MSNBC is free to choose what they want to cover, but their decision to completely ignore one of the biggest stories in the country involving the intersection of race and politics suggests their operating with a severe bias.”

Smollett initially told police he was attacked by two masked men as he was walking home from a Subway sandwich shop at around 2 a.m on Jan. 29. The actor, who is black and gay, said the masked men beat him, made derogatory comments and yelled "This is MAGA country" — an apparent reference to President Donald Trump's campaign slogan, "Make America Great Again" — before fleeing.

But that isn't how police say it all went down, and the 36-year-old has changed from being the seemingly sympathetic victim of a hate crime to being accused of fabricating the entire thing.

Media Research Center vice president Dan Gainor told Fox News that the media have been a huge part of the Smollett story so it’s peculiar that MSNBC would ignore it during primetime.

“Lefty MSNBC would rather have the sound of silence that the sound of inconvenient truth,” Gainor said.

Fox News’ Sasha Savitsky contributed to this report.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

On Saturday’s broadcast of CNN’s “Smerconish,” George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley argued that it appears the Department of Justice special counsel probe headed up by former FBI Director Robert Mueller was unable to find evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

Turley walked through all the signs that suggested such collusion was unlikely and said even if some associated with the campaign did so, including Roger Stone, such activity is not illegal.

“It does,” he replied. “You have to call them as you see them. There is no evidence thus far of collusion between the Trump campaign and President Trump, and the Russians in hacking these computer systems. And moreover, it is quite unlikely if you were a KGB spymaster, would you really collude with Donald Trump and put yourself one tweet away from destruction on perhaps the most secret operation in recent history? The answer is, no. They wouldn’t do that.”

“Would you hold a hypersensitive meeting at Trump Tower with half the media downstairs?” he continued. “And not actually produce the evidence promised? Instead, talk about adoption? No. The most obvious explanation is probably the right one. There was not collusion in hacking the system. Now what appears to be the case is that [Roger] Stone wanted to get access to this information. That’s not illegal. Journalists, academics, political operative all try to get their hands on material like this, whether it’s whistleblowing, whether it came from one source or another. There’s nothing illegal in that.”

“And so, I think that so far, we’re one collusion short of making that case,” he added.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

A violent leftist attacked a Turning Point USA activist who was out recruiting for their chapter at UC Berkeley on Tuesday afternoon in Upper Sproul Plaza. The assault was captured on video and posted to Twitter by Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. LEFTIST VIOLENCE ON CAMPUS While recruiting for our @TPUSA group at UC Berkeley […]

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Michael Cohen, President Trump's former attorney, testifies before the House Oversight and Reform Committee on Wednesday.

WSJ

Published  2 months ago

The collusionists need a “new phase” as signs grow that the special counsel won’t help realize their reveries of a Donald Trump takedown. They had said Mr. Mueller would provide all the answers. Now that it seems they won’t like his answers, Democrats and media insist that any report will likely prove “anticlimactic” and “inconclusive.” “This is merely the end of Chapter 1,” said Renato Mariotti, a CNN legal “analyst.”

Opinion Live Event

Join us on March 4 as WSJ Opinion’s Paul Gigot leads a “State of TV News” panel discussion including Fox Business’s Maria Bartiromo, CBS’s Christy Tanner and “Network” actor Tony Goldwyn. Included in your admission to the event is a ticket to see “Network” on Broadway at a subsequent date.

Mr. Schiff turned this week to a dependable scribe—the Washington Post’s David Ignatius—to lay out the next chapter of the penny dreadful. Mr. Ignatius was the original conduit for the leak about former national security adviser Mike Flynn’s conversations with a Russian ambassador, and the far-fetched claims that Mr. Flynn had violated the Logan Act of 1799. Mr. Schiff has now dictated to Mr. Ignatius a whole new collusion theory. Forget Carter Page, Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos—whoever. The real Trump-Russia canoodling rests in “Trump’s finances.” The future president was “doing business with Russia” and “seeking Kremlin help.”

So, no apologies. No acknowledgment that Mr. Schiff & Co. for years have pushed fake stories that accused innocent men and women of being Russian agents. No relieved hope that the country might finally put this behind us. Just a smooth transition—using Russia as a hook—into Mr. Trump’s finances. Mueller who?

What’s mind-boggling is that reporters would continue to take Mr. Schiff seriously, given his extraordinary record of incorrect and misleading pronouncements. This is the man who, on March 22, 2017, helped launch full-blown hysteria when he said on “Meet the Press” that his committee already had the goods on Trump-Russia collusion.

“I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now,” Mr. Schiff declared then. Almost two years later, he’s provided no such evidence and stopped making the claim—undoubtedly because, as the Senate Intelligence Committee has said publicly, no such evidence has been found.

At an open House Intelligence Committee hearing on March 20, 2017, Mr. Schiff stated as fact numerous crazy accusations from the infamous Steele dossier—giving them early currency and credence. He claimed that former Trump campaign aide Carter Page secretly met with a Vladimir Putin crony and was offered the brokerage of a 19% share in a Russian company. That Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort tapped Mr. Page as a go-between. That the Russians offered the Trump campaign damaging documents on Hillary Clinton in return for a blind eye to Moscow’s Ukraine policy. Mr. Schiff has never acknowledged that all these allegations have been debunked or remain unproved.

Newsletter Sign-up

There was Mr. Schiff’s role in plumping the discredited January BuzzFeed story claiming Mr. Mueller had evidence the president directed his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen to lie to Congress. The special counsel’s office issued a rare statement denying the report. There was Mr. Schiff’s theory that the mysterious phone calls Donald Trump Jr. placed before his 2016 meeting with Russians at Trump Tower were to Candidate Trump. Senate Intel shot that down. And don’t forget Mr. Schiff’s February 2018 memo claiming the Steele dossier “did not inform” the FBI probe, because the bureau didn’t obtain it until long after the probe’s start. Testimony from Justice Department officials shot that one down, too.

With a track record like this, who wouldn’t believe Mr. Schiff’s new claim, in the Ignatius interview, that the key to collusion rests in Trump finances—in particular something to do with Deutsche Bank ? But hold on. Where did we first hear that Deutsche Bank theory? That’s right. See pages 64 and 117 of the wild House testimony of Glenn Simpson—head of Fusion GPS, the organization behind the Steele dossier. It’s right there, stuffed in between Mr. Simpson’s musings that Ivanka Trump might be involved with a “Russian Central Asian organized crime nexus,” that there is something nefarious happening on the “island of St. Martin in the Caribbean,” and that Roger Stone is part of a “Turkey-Russia” plot.

Mr. Schiff is taking his cue for Phase 2 of his investigation from the same Democrat-hired opposition-research group that launched the failed Phase 1.

At the start of all the Russia craziness, Mr. Schiff had a choice: maintain the bipartisan integrity of his committee by working with Republicans to find honest answers, or take on the role of resident conspiracy theorist. He chose his path. The rest of us should know better than to follow him.

Write to kim@wsj.com.

Appeared in the February 22, 2019, print edition.

The Gaily Grind

Published  2 months ago

The federal judge presiding over Roger Stone’s criminal case on Thursday banned him from speaking publicly about his case or the special counsel investigation on Thursday, after hauling him back to court to answer for a social media post personally attacking her.

“Publicity cannot subside if it’s the defendant that’s fanning the flames,” District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said Thursday.

Before Berman Jackson’s ruling, Stone took the stand to beg for forgiveness.

“I am hurtfully sorry for my own stupidity. I am kicking myself, not as much as my wife is kicking me,” Stone told the court. He called the Instagram post “a momentary lapse of judgement” before saying that the photo was selected by someone who works for him, which he estimated was about “five or six people.”

“I heard political commentators talking about the likelihood that I’ll be raped in prison. It’s been a stressful situation. I’m having a hard time putting food on the table and making rent,” he said, reports NBC News.

Roger Stone: "I let myself down, my family down, my attorneys down. It was a momentary lapse of judgement. I heard political commentators talking about the likelihood that I’ll be raped in prison. It’s been a stressful situation."

— Allan Smith (@akarl_smith) February 21, 2019

The judge said the former Trump adviser “couldn’t keep his story straight on the stand” when she allowed him the opportunity to explain his decision to post the inflammatory photo on Instagram of her with what appeared to be small crosshairs next to her head over the weekend.

Got a notification for another Roger Stone Instagram post…it’s the judge presiding over his case. And in the upper left hand corner it looks like the symbol for crosshairs. pic.twitter.com/m6IW3QznTF

“Through legal trickery Deep State hitman Robert Mueller has guaranteed that my upcoming show trial is before Judge Amy Berman Jackson , an Obama appointed Judge who dismissed the Benghazi charges again [sic] Hillary Clinton and incarcerated Paul Manafort prior to his conviction for any crime. #fixisin Help me fight for my life at @StoneDefenseFund.com,” the now-deleted post read. Included in the picture was a banner at the bottom with Berman Jackson’s name displayed under her face.

POLITICO

Published  2 months ago

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s office is formally denying Roger Stone’s claims that journalists got early access to his indictment last month, allowing CNN to film the GOP operative’s arrest.

In a court filing Friday, Mueller prosecutors said Stone’s sealed indictment was ordered to be automatically unsealed upon Stone’s arrest on charges of lying to congressional investigators and intimidating a witness. In accordance with that order, Mueller’s office notified reporters of the indictment and posted it on the office’s website shortly after the FBI raided Stone’s South Florida home and took him into custody just after 6:00 a.m. on Jan. 25, prosecutors said.

“The government’s public release of the indictment shortly after the defendant’s arrest was consistent with the order sealing the indictment,” Mueller attorneys and lawyers from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington argued in their submission Friday.

“The order does not state, as many unsealing orders do, that the indictment shall remain sealed until further order of the Court. Rather, the order conditioned the unsealing of the indictment on one event: the defendant’s arrest,” prosecutors wrote.

Stone’s lawyers have objected to the release of the charges, arguing that the indictment should have remained under seal until someone in the court clerk’s office unsealed it and that prosecutors breached grand jury secrecy by releasing it before that time.

The defense team also suggested that prosecutors gave reporters a heads up about Stone’s arrest, potentially contributing to the presence of a CNN reporter and cameraman outside Stone’s home when the heavily armed FBI team showed up.

However, Mueller’s team told U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson it does not believe any journalists were informed in advance about the indictment.

“The Special Counsel’s Office is aware of no information indicating that reporters were given any advance knowledge of a possible indictment from the Special Counsel’s Office,” prosecutors said in a footnote to their Friday filing.

Prosecutors also noted that CNN has publicly denied having advance knowledge about Stone’s arrest and has said it decided to stake out Stone’s house because of various public clues that his arrest was imminent.

Stone’s lawyers had also argued that metadata attached to the initial indictment on the special counsel’s website provided evidence that someone with the initials “AAW” had leaked the document. Those happen to be the initials of Mueller deputy Andrew Weissmann.

However, prosecutors said Friday the metadata don’t provide any insight into the release of the indictment.

“Insofar as the defendant contends that the presence of metadata in the document is relevant, metadata merely shows when the document was created, not when the document was released,” the prosecutors wrote.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Chicago Police on Thursday held a press conference on the Jussie Smollett hate hoax and the actor’s arrest. Jussie Smollett turned himself in around 5 AM on Thursday. Here is his mugshot. Chicago Police admitted Smollett sent himself the racist, homophobic letter to the “Empire” set. Chicago Police say Smollett sent himself a racist and […]

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe is wrapping up soon, and a source familiar with the investigation tells Fox News it is "near the end game" -- although there has been no formal notification to President Trump's legal team that Mueller's work is completed.

Exiting Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who oversaw the Mueller probe for 18 months until the recent confirmation of AG William Barr, had said privately he intended to remain in his role until the Mueller report was delivered to Congress. On Tuesday, the White House announced that Deputy Secretary of Transportation Jeff Rosen would replace Rosenstein.

Sources close to the investigative process have told Fox News that the high-level shakeup at Justice -- with Barr assembling his new team, and Rosenstein planning to leave by mid-March -- is a sign that the stars are aligning for the probe's conclusion.

The DOJ has not confirmed it is planning an announcement on the inquiry, and neither Mueller's team nor the DOJ responded to Fox News' request for comment.

ROSENSTEIN, FMR FBI DIRECTOR MCCABE NEED TO TESTIFY ABOUT APPARENT PLOT TO REMOVE TRUMP, GOP SAYS

Also unclear is whether the final Mueller report will be made public. Barr testified during his confirmation hearings that, as he understands the regulations governing the special counsel, the report will be confidential – and any report that goes to Congress or the public will be authored by the attorney general.

Some Democrats sounded the alarm after Barr's testimony, with Connecticut Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal charging that Barr indicated he'd exploit legal "loopholes" to hide Mueller's final report from the public and to resist subpoenas against the White House.

"I will commit to providing as much information as I can, consistent with the regulations," Barr had told Blumenthal when asked if he would ensure that Mueller's full report was publicly released.

Mueller's team is still leading several prosecutions, including against longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone on charges of witness tampering and lying to Congress, and against former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who awaits sentencing on charges he lied to FBI agents during the Russia probe. Flynn is cooperating as part of a separate Foreign Agents Registration Act case regarding lobbying work in Turkey as part of his plea deal.

The flurry of activity comes shortly after Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley -- who until recently was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee -- said he expected Mueller's final Russia report "within a month." Grassley later walked back those comments, saying they were based on unconfirmed news reports and rumors.

The top Republicans on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, meanwhile, are calling for former FBI Acting Director Andrew McCabe and Rosenstein to testify before their respective panels, following McCabe's explosive claims in an interview last week that senior Justice Department officials had considered removing President Trump using the 25th Amendment.

According to McCabe, Rosenstein offered to wear a wire to record the president, seemingly confirming reports last year. Rosenstein strongly denied that allegation, calling McCabe's statements "factually incorrect."

The 25th Amendment governs the succession protocol if the president dies, resigns or becomes temporarily or permanently incapacitated. While the amendment has been invoked six times since its ratification in 1967, the specific section of the amendment purportedly discussed by top DOJ officials -- which involves the majority of all Cabinet officers and the vice president agreeing that the president is "unable" to perform his job -- has never been invoked.

Fox News' Catherine Herridge and Jake Gibson contributed to this report.

Spectator USA

Published  2 months ago

To the grand, art nouveau Café Louvre in Prague, once one of Franz Kafka’s favorite haunts in the Czech capital. Cockburn is here to meet another – very different – Czech figure of historical importance: Karl Koecher, the only KGB agent known to have infiltrated the CIA. He is relevant again because of a strange story claiming that Donald Trump’s National Security Adviser, John Bolton, visited a New York sex club called Plato’s Retreat. Koecher went there too, when he was a Soviet spy. Is it possible that the Kremlin has kompromat – compromising material – on Bolton, dating from the 1970s and 1980s?

This question can be asked because of claims made when Bolton was nominated to be George W Bush’s UN ambassador in 2005. Larry Flynt, publisher of a porn magazine, Hustler, is reported to have made the claims in a letter to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which was holding Bolton’s confirmation hearings. A Hustler press release at the time said: ‘Mr Flynt has obtained information from numerous sources that Mr Bolton participated in paid visits to Plato’s Retreat, the popular swingers club that operated in New York City in the late 1970s and early 1980s.’ Flynt called on the committee to ‘conduct an inquiry’. Press accounts at the time suggest that no one took Flynt’s allegations seriously. (Bolton was given a recess appointment but resigned once the Senate switched control from Republicans to Democrats.)

Such information today seems merely incongruous though, if true, might go some way to explaining Bolton’s mustache. But the reason that Cockburn is sitting in the high-ceilinged dining room of Café Louvre is a description of Koecher’s spying activities made in an authoritative history of the FBI’s counterintelligence operations, The Secrets of the FBI, by Ronald Kessler. The book says that Koecher, along with his wife, used the ‘orgy scene’ to learn US government secrets and even, the book implies, to gather blackmail material. At the time, Koecher had already joined the CIA, on behalf of the KGB:

‘Koecher had an unusual way of obtaining classified information: attending sex parties…Karl and [his wife] Hana regularly attended…orgies in Washington and New York. They frequented Plato’s Retreat and the Hellfire, two sex emporiums in New York open to anyone with the price of admission. If both spies enjoyed swinging, they also found the orgies a good way to meet others who worked for the CIA or other sensitive Washington agencies. Because security rules at agencies such as the CIA banned such activities, participants placed themselves in a compromising position in more ways than one. The Koechers took full advantage and picked up valuable information from other partygoers who were officials of the Defense Department, the White House, and the CIA.’

Koecher is now in his eighties, slim and a little frail. His wife Hana is in her seventies, with short grey hair, but you can still see in her an echo of the attractive women in photographs from their time in the US. A waiter in a black waistcoat arrives. Café Louvre was closed by the Communists as a ‘bourgeois institution’ and made into offices. It reopened only after the Velvet Revolution. Koecher describes how he escaped an ‘abysmal’ grey existence behind the Iron Curtain for what one account called a ‘swinging, gold-plated’ life of spying and sex clubs in the United States. It is a remarkable story.

He was arrested at the age of 16 because a friend had hidden some guns to use against the regime. Koecher got out of that jam but the authorities had marked him as a counter-revolutionary. ‘I was getting into more and more trouble. Whatever career I tried to follow, they would go and ruin it. They tried to pin on me some rape but eventually the police apologized and said: We got it from another section. I realized sooner or later they would get me…I had to get the hell out of there. I was desperate.’

His way out was to offer to spy for Czech intelligence. He spoke several languages fluently, including English. ‘I thought I would convince the intelligence service what a good asset I was and then the first thing I’d do [in the West] would be to go to the nearest police station and ask for asylum.’ But once in the US, he did not switch sides. He posed as a genuine defector to get a job at the CIA. He did this, he tells me, because he believed his handlers in Prague were ‘an entirely new generation’ of smart, young graduates who understood that there had to be reform. ‘I was a dissident but I realized there is no future in that: if you want to change the regime the best way to do it is from the inside.’

That autobiography will no doubt seem self serving to Koecher’s critics in today’s democratic Czech Republic, some of whom call him a traitor for working first with the Communists in his own country and then with the KGB. But he says that when the Prague Spring was crushed under the treads of Russian tanks, in 1968, he went to the FBI to offer to become a double agent. To his amazement, they turned him down, he says, and he ran into the arms of the KGB. He believed then and now that the spirit of the reformist movement snuffed out in Prague by the Kremlin existed ‘in some circles’ of Soviet intelligence in the Seventies and Eighties. ‘If Czechoslovakia was to be freed, it had to be done from Moscow, nowhere else…I was an idealist.’

Cockburn orders the pork goulash and dumplings; Koecher and his wife the chicken and mashed potatoes – good, hearty Czech fare. We turn to the question of the New York sex clubs and in particular, Plato’s Retreat, ‘open to free thinking adult couples,’ as an ad from the late 1970s put it, a ‘relaxed, no pressure environment complete with heated swimming pool and that great disco beat’. The club had a jingle:

At Plato’s Retreat, you can make your dreams come true

Fulfil your wildest fantasies, we’ve got them all for you.

The pleasure and the fun, will keep you feeling young.

It’s for yooouuu…it’s for yoooooouuuuuuuu!

The jingle comes from a video that shows a pile of men and women on wall to wall mattresses. It looks unsanitary. Koecher dismisses claims that this was a place where he would have done intelligence gathering. ‘All intelligence services use honey traps but those are long-lasting relationships. You just don’t screw somebody and then during pillow talk learn what government secrets they know. There’s no way.’ And, he goes on, Plato’s Retreat was just a ‘tourist attraction,’ a place to take visitors from Europe who wanted to see ‘what’s going on in there’.

This account is at odds with the story told by Ronald Kessler in his book Secrets of the FBI. On the phone, he tells Cockburn that he spent five days with the Koechers in Prague in the late Eighties and believes he got at the truth – which is, he says, that visiting sex clubs helped the Koechers in their secret work as Soviet spies. The important point about the swingers’ clubs, Kessler says, is that employees of the CIA – or the NSA, or the State Department – weren’t supposed to be there in the first place. Koecher had told him it could be useful ‘even knowing someone attends parties like that…’

If John Bolton had gone to Plato’s Retreat, Kessler says: ‘The only issue in my mind was if he was in government at the time and had a security clearance.’ Bolton was, however, a lawyer in private practice during the period when Flynt claimed that he visited the club. There is, perhaps, potential for blackmail over embarrassing personal behavior – especially if someone is later nominated for public office. But Larry Flynt made his Plato’s Retreat allegation during Bolton’s failed attempt to become UN ambassador, in 2005.

What if the Soviets had compromised Bolton before 2005? And then blackmailed him with the secret of his cooperation afterwards? Koecher scotches that notion, saying he does not remember encountering Bolton at all in the swingers’ clubs. The source who passed the ‘Bolton file’ to Cockburn – and to Congressional investigators – conceived of another possibility: that there was a KGB operation to film kompromat inside Plato’s Retreat and other US sex clubs. Such tapes might be devastating but Koecher says he didn’t do this and ‘can’t imagine’ other KGB operatives doing it either. ‘The KGB: those were moral, decent, very reasonable people, and certainly honorable people. No way.’

What’s left, perhaps, is the odd coincidence that several of those who would later become members of Trump’s inner circle are alleged to have enjoyed ‘swinging’. This group includes Roger Stone, Paul Manafort and – if Larry Flynt’s old claims are true – John Bolton. It should be remembered that, while Stone has openly acknowledged ‘swinging’, Manafort and Bolton have never confirmed these claims. Someone who’s known Bolton for decades said it would be ‘out of character’ for him to have gone to sex clubs. ‘He surrounded himself with awkward people.’ A spokesperson for the National Security Council declined to comment.

Koecher himself had to leave the ‘swinging, gold-plated’ life when he was arrested for spying. The US attorney leading the prosecution of the case was – in another odd coincidence – one Rudolph Giuliani. Koecher was held in jail for a few months but then swapped for a prominent Soviet dissident, Anatoly Sharansky. He has one regret, he says. ‘I’m sorry that I lied to my friends. I’m very sorry.’

Koecher’s tortuous explanations of how he found himself on the wrong side of history suggest a keen instinct for self-preservation. He is cautious, even calculating, and these are times to be careful if you’re a former Soviet spy living in Prague. Has he given up all his secrets? Ronald Kessler sends Cockburn an excerpt from the book that Koecher was originally interviewed for, Spy vs Spy, which is now out of print. Koecher muses on what he has seen, the information he possesses about the people running the country in the late 1980s. Could this apply to some of those running the country today? ‘I could, if I really started talking, compromise people in very high positions in the White House and Pentagon. I’m not saying I will not. I may well decide when the moment is right or when sufficiently provoked. I don’t think it’s worth doing it right now.’

Daily Torch

Published  2 months ago

By Robert Romano “I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency and won the election for the presidency and who might have done so with the aid of the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the world stage. And that [...]

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper on Wednesday raised the possibility that special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on his Russia investigation could be “anti-climactic.”

Appearing on CNN Wednesday morning, Clapper discussed recent remarks made by fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe regarding the possibility that President Donald Trump is a Russian “asset.” The longtime Deep Stater said that while he has speculated that the president might be a “witting asset” of Russian president Vladimir Putin, he ranks the possibility quite low.

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper hopes that "the Mueller investigation will clear the air," but also cautions the results might be "anti-climatic, and not draw a conclusion" https://t.co/fCl8eRvh3D pic.twitter.com/DYYuEOqKt2

“You consider Putin’s background as a trained, experienced KGB agent and how he would approach somebody that he is trying to co-opt, or influence or gain leverage over, and in this case, you know, appeal to ego,” Clapper told New Day co-host Alisyn Camerota. “In that sense, in that context, is what I think of when I mean potential unwitting asset.”

Clapper said the Mueller probe will answer many questions about possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 presidential election; however, some may view its findings far from conclusive.

“I think the hope is that the Mueller investigation will clear the air on this issue once and for all. I’m really not sure it will, and the investigation, when completed, could turn out to be quite anti-climactic and not draw a conclusion about that,” he said.

Clapper, a frequent critic of President Trump, told CNN last month that the arrest of longtime political operative Roger Stone shows “coordination” and “synchronization” between Trump officials and the Kremlin, an assessment disputed by legal experts and court filings.

“The indictment does not allege that Stone had any direct communications with Assange, nor does it allege that Stone or anyone else at the Trump campaign had any direct communications with Assange or any foreknowledge of actions that WikiLeaks took,” wrote Byron York of the Washington Examiner. “At various times, Stone claimed to have foreknowledge — a hint that something big was up — but the indictment suggests that he did not, in fact, know what WikiLeaks was going to do,” he added.

Just Security

Published  2 months ago

Much of the discussion surrounding the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia in the months leading up to the 2016 election has been mystifying for the American public. As the country prepares for the Mueller probe to reach its final stage and for congressional investigations to ramp up, it’s important to develop a more accurate and effective vocabulary for assessing the information that these bodies produce.

A problem emerged over the past two years partly as a result of the unique combination of a counterintelligence and criminal investigation presented by the Mueller probe. This hybrid investigation has led to two linguistic extremes, neither of which accurately conveys the problematic national security issues raised by the Trump campaign’s actions. The lack of precision in the language used to report on the campaign’s activities has obscured their importance and even the magnitude of the threat they posed.

At one end of the spectrum is an overreliance on the word “collusion.” The word is a slippery one essentially without any legal or settled meaning outside of very specific contexts, like antitrust law. The general definition of collusion, according to Merriam-Webster dictionary, is a “secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal deceitful purpose.” But because this definition is not necessarily well-known or agreed upon, it allows some people to claim they have seen no direct evidence of Trump campaign “collusion” with Russia, and others to claim they have. Journalists still ask members of Congress, the White House, and witnesses in the Russia investigation about “collusion” or allow officials and others to invoke the term “collusion” without specifying what they mean.

On the other end of the spectrum is the more precise legal definition of “collusion,” which is “conspiracy.” But because conspiracy is a criminal law term, it may be too narrow: The legal definition of conspiracy requires specific behaviors and states of mind that may not be present in various forms of coordinated activity against the interests of the United States. Further, focusing only on the criminal aspect does not capture the policy and national security concerns at the heart of the Special Counsel’s counterintelligence investigation, concerns that remain whether or not crimes were committed.

We suggest a different way of asking and framing “the question of collusion” to obtain more analytic precision, and to get to the heart of Trump campaign associates’ possible relationships with Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.

To wit, we recommend the following five kinds of questions instead. These are stylized as questions a journalist might pose to an interviewee, such as a member of a congressional committee. We believe that these formulations better describe the problematic behavior, actions, and activities at the heart of Mueller’s investigation, and avoid both the ambiguity of the word “collusion” and the legalese associated with the word “conspiracy.” We also hope these five lines of inquiry may help commentators in analyzing and writing about these issues.

1. Are you aware of any direct or circumstantial evidence that Trump campaign associates coordinated with, cooperated with, encouraged, or gave support to Russia’s 2016 election interference activities?

Are you aware of any direct or circumstantial evidence of Trump campaign associates’ coordinating with, cooperating with, encouraging, or giving support to Wikileaks’ election-related activities?

Relatedly, do you agree with the U.S. Intelligence Community’s report that Wikileaks was used by the Russian government as an arm of the Kremlin’s 2016 election interference activities?

3. Are you aware of any direct or circumstantial evidence that Trump campaign associates attempted to coordinate with, cooperate with, encourage, or give support to Russia’s 2016 election interference activities?

4. Are you aware of any direct or circumstantial evidence that Trump campaign associates were willing to coordinate with, cooperate with, encourage, or give support to Russia’s 2016 election interference activities, or were receptive to doing so?

5. What is your definition of “Trump campaign associates”?

Do you consider people like Roger Stone and Michael Cohen part of the Trump campaign? Do you consider people like Roger Stone and Michael Cohen to be Trump campaign associates?

Photo credit: Journalists watch U.S. President Donald Trump shaking hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the press center of Presidential Palace on July 16, 2018 in Helsinki, Finland (Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images)

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

Robert Mueller's Russia investigation may be completed as early as next week according to Attorney General William Barr who was confirmed just last week. Mueller's investigation has been going on for almost two years and he

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

CNN again publicly fantasized about that “dandy” Roger Stone getting raped in prison.

This time, it was David Gergen, one of the far-left network’s ancient analysts, who has not said anything interesting or insightful in decades. His job is to pretend to be a Republican and then bash Republicans in the way his media masters demand.

Stone, a longtime Trump supporter, is now in some legal jeopardy over an Instagram post that apparently violated a judge’s gag order. One possible outcome is the revocation of his bail, which would find Stone cooling his heels in prison until his trial date. Stone was indicted last month by special counsel Robert Mueller for a process crime.

Upon hearing the news of a possible bail revocation Tuesday afternoon, Gergen’s mind immediately turned to sodomy, the forced sodomy of that “dandy” Roger Stone.

“Roger Stone must also worry that if he goes there — you know, he’s seen as something of a dandy — will he be physically safe? Will he be subject to rape?” Gergen said. “I mean, there must be a lot of things are going through his mind.”

This is the second time a CNN leftist has planted the seed of Stone’s prison rape in the public’s mind.

Late last month, CNN anchor and anti-Trump activist Jake Tapper, in an obvious reference to prison rape, said Stone “might like” prison.

“No one’s going to cry if Roger Stone goes to jail or when he goes to jail,” former Obama adviser Jen Psaki said of Stone.

“He might like it,” quipped Tapper.

Psaki laughed and added, “He might. Who knows?”

And this is not the first time Tapper has viewed the horror of rape through a partisan prism. Last year, while hosting an anti-gun town hall, Tapper offered only silent approval as his audience booed a rape victim.

And it is not only CNN doing it. John Podhoretz, a Never Trumper and frequent MSNBC guest, also spread the idea of Stone enjoying a good, old-fashioned prison rape.

“The thing is,” Podhoretz gleefully wrote in a now-deleted tweet, “given his proclivities, Stone would enjoy prison.”

Worse than openly fantasizing or joking about a 66-year-old man getting raped in prison, though, there is the wish-casting. The seething hatred that emanates from Tapper, Gergen, Podhoretz, and their left-wing confederates throughout the political and media establishment is no secret, nor is it hidden.

And now, here they are, not only openly delighting in the idea of “dandy” Roger Stone getting raped; I would go even further to argue the intent here is to plant a seed, to float the idea into the ether. The suggestion is obvious, is it not? Stone’s got it coming, which means raping him would be a virtuous act, would be a just act that would earn the admiration of America’s political media elites…

Tell me again how the media are not the enemy of the people.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

The Justice Department could announce the completion of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on his investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 presidential election as early as next week, according to report Wednesday.

CNN reports that newly-confirmed attorney general Willian Barr is expected to turn over a summary of the report to Congress soon after its completion. The outlet cautioned that President Donald Trump’s overseas trip to meet with North Korea dictator Kim Jong-un could impact the “precise timing of the announcement.”

Preparations undertaken by Barr and Justice Department officials is the clearest sign yet that the nearly two-year-old investigation is drawing to a close. CNN writes: “The scope and contours of what Barr will send to Congress remain unclear. Also unclear is how long it will take Justice officials to prepare what will be submitted to lawmakers.”

Barr has cited Justice Department regulations that say Mueller’s report should be confidential. They require only that the report explain decisions to pursue or decline prosecutions.

The Justice Department, nor the special counsel’s office would comment to CNN regarding its report.

In a press conference last month, then-Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker said he believed Mueller’s investigation was “close to being completed.”

“Right now the investigation is I think close to being completed,” the Justice Department official told reporters. “I hope we can get the report from Director Mueller as soon as possible.”

Appearing on CNN’s New Day Wednesday morning, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said that Mueller’s report could be “anti-climactic.”

“I think the hope is that the Mueller investigation will clear the air on this issue once and for all. I’m really not sure it will, and the investigation, when completed, could turn out to be quite anti-climactic and not draw a conclusion about that,” he said.

Mueller, a former FBI director, was named by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in May 2017 to look into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Mueller’s team has indicted a total of 34 people — yet thus far, no charges of outright collusion between the Trump campaign and Moscow have been filed. Last month, Roger Stone, a veteran Republican operative and longtime Trump adviser, was arrested at his south Florida home by FBI agents on charges of making false statements to Congress and witness tampering. Six Trump associates have pleaded guilty to various charges so far including his former campaign manager Paul Manafort, former lawyer Michael Cohen and former national security advisor Michael Flynn.

House Democrats are stepping up their efforts to investigate President Trump and his associates, hiring new lawyers and staff as they take on oversight responsibility and prepare for a showdown over access to Mueller’s report. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) confirmed last week that he hired two veteran lawyers and Trump critics — Barry Berke and Norman Eisen — as his panel gears up to investigate the Justice Department and review Mueller’s final conclusions. Nadler and other Democrats have pressured Barr to release as much of the report as possible.

Meanwhile, it appears Senate investigators may be winding down their own probe without finding evidence of collusion. NBC News, citing Democrats and Republicans, reported last week that the panel has yet to uncover “direct evidence” of “conspiracy” between Trump officials and Russia. “If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don’t have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia,” Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) told CBS News.

The Agence France-Presse and Associated Press contributed to this report.

Raw Story

Published  2 months ago

Trump’s longtime confidant Roger Stone on Monday attacked the federal judge presiding over his criminal case in the special counsel’s Russia probe.

In an Instagram post, Stone lashed out at U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson.

“Through legal trickery Deep State hitman Robert Mueller has guaranteed that my upcoming show trial is before Judge Amy Berman Jackson , an Obama appointed Judge who dismissed the Benghazi charges again Hillary Clinton [sic] and incarcerated Paul Manafort prior to his conviction for any crime,” he wrote. Stone then asked for donations.

The Guardian’s Jon Swaine noted that the picture Stone posted on Instagram placed crosshairs next to Jackson’s head.

Last week, Jackson prohibited Stone from commenting on the case near the Washington, D.C., courthouse. But he remains otherwise free to discuss his situation. However, Jackson has warned that she could amend the limited gag order in the future if necessary.

“This is completely out of bounds. The cross hairs will likely lead prosecutors to ask for revocation of his pre-trial release. At best, this is a cheap stunt designed to get the judge to recuse, at worst, an outright threat,” former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance said.

Stone later deleted the photo, and re-posted it on Instagram after cropping the crosshairs out of the image. He then deleted that photo as well.

(Note: This article was updated after Roger Stone deleted his original Instagram post.)

American Greatness

Published  2 months ago

Autopsy of a Dead Coup

02/18 12:16 am

Post by @theamgreatness.

Full Measure

Published  2 months ago

Russia Probe

02/17 12:01 pm

Nearly two years ago, Special Counsel Mueller was named to investigate whether President Trump broke the law by somehow conspiring with Russian President Vladimir Putin to win the presidency. We still don’t know the outcome of that. But we’ve learned a lot about what some in our intelligence community have been up to. And some argue that’s proving to be an equally important— and chilling— story. From Trump associate Roger Stone..

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Corrupt Obama judge Amy Berman Jackson may jail Roger Stone over an Instagram post he published this week.

On Tuesday, Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordered Roger Stone to appear in court this week to explain his since-deleted Instagram post where he slammed the judge assigned to his case.

The Judge said Roger Stone needs to show cause at a hearing as to why his Instagram post did not violate a limited gag order on the case, reported Reuters.

Roger Stone shared an image of Judge Amy Berman Jackson with a neo-pagan symbol in the background — and the media immediately erupted and claimed Roger Stone was “sending a message” to the judge by placing “crosshairs” behind her head. (screenshot below)

“Through legal trickery Deep State hitman Robert Mueller has guaranteed that my upcoming show trial is before Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointed Judge who dismissed the Benghazi charges again Hillary Clinton and incarcerated Paul Manafort prior to his conviction for any crime,” Stone wrote in the caption.

Roger Stone later “humbly” apologized for sharing the image on his Instagram page.

“A photo of Judge Jackson posted on my Instagram has been misinterpreted. This was a random photo taken from the Internet. Any inference that this was meant to somehow disrespect the Court is categorically false. What some say are crosshairs are in fact the logo of the organization that originally posted it something called corruption central. They use the logo in many photos.” Stone said in a statement to ABC News.

DC Tribune

Published  2 months ago

There’s no shortage of speculation as to who the next target of Mueller’s special counsel probe it will be that gets indicted, especially given the number of people who seemingly know that their time is coming — Don Junior has been expecting his own arrest since late last year, and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi, who was instrumental in passing back and forth information between Roger Stone and WikiLeaks, knows that he’ll be on the block soon as well.

But speculation aside, it’s definitely just about time for the next arrest. How do we know?

In order for law enforcement to effect an arrest on a suspected or known criminal who isn’t actually in the process of committing a crime in the moment they’re arrested, the final step is to obtain a warrant for that person’s arrest — in federal cases with a grand jury, that’s the indictment.

The Thursday before Roger Stone’s arrest — he was taken on a Friday — the special counsel filed the indictment allowing the FBI to do so in what’s called a “sealed order” in federal court. The “sealed” part is because there are no names, just case numbers, and for high-profile cases, those numbers mean nothing to anyone without direct knowledge of the proceedings. That’s done so as to avoid tipping prosecutors’ hands and allowing defendants to flee, destroy evidence, or otherwise screw things up for the prosecution.

But the pattern has been the same for years and years: File the sealed indictment(s), prepare for the execution of the warrant, and effect the arrest.

Well, guess whose office just filed four new sealed indictments:

Of note is the fact that, in sets of two, the case numbers are sequential. We may not know who these indictments are pointing at, but that’s a pretty good indicator that they’re multiple charges against one or two individuals.

And while we’re sitting here smiling and puzzling over just who the poor saps are in Mueller’s sights now, we might as well take a moment to reflect on another major occurrence in the same past few days since those indictments were filed: Don Junior’s testimony transcripts from his time before Congress — you know, the ones in which literally everyone knows he committed perjury — were just officially handed over to Robert Mueller’s office by the House of Representatives, just before these filings.

Some indicators are just as good as others, too: Donald Trump has more than a hundred times, including dozens pertaining directly to the Russia investigation, since these indictments were filed. Looks like somebody’s pretty nervous about who might be next.

Featured image via screen capture

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Posting on his popular Facebook page, Stone Cold Truth, longtime Trump advisor and NYT bestselling author Roger Stone has promised to call lead Russian Collusion Delusion proponent Adam Schiff to the stand in his upcoming trial.

Stone has railed against members of Congress for using their congressional immunity to leak and lie in relation to the Mueller probe or parallel Senate and House investigations. Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA) and fellow California Dem Rep. Eric Swalwell have been two of the biggest leakers and liars on the House Select Committee on Intelligence. They have both used their positions repeatedly to snipe at Stone with unfounded statements or leaked out-of-context half-truths to mainstream media reporters in an effort to turn the American public against Mr. Stone and President Donald Trump.

Schiff was recently exposed for having a secret meeting with Fusion GPS Founder Glenn Simpson, who authored the now debunked “dossier” on Trump, which reads more like Resistance fan fiction than a serious investigative report with actual evidence.

Getting people like Adam Schiff, and hopefully others like Eric Swalwell on the stand would require them to be truthful about their targeted misinformation campaign against the President of the United States and high-profile allies who helped him defeat their handpicked puppet Hillary Clinton.

While they are able to hide behind congressional immunity to grandstand on cable news and in committee hearings, there will be no room for such games in an actual court of law. If you want to see hypocrites and Russia hoaxers like Schiff held accountable for their crimes against American democracy, donate to Roger Stone’s legal defense fund and lets place them under oath!

bostonherald

Published  2 months ago

That Justice Department officials were having discussions about ousting a sitting president should concern every American. It is simply astonishing that these actors allegedly held conversations around the notion of seizing power from the elected head of the executive branch.

Obviously, heads should roll, but really such a plot should result in criminal prosecutions with all the high-profile force that was used to arrest Roger Stone.

The new revelations come to us care of former FBI Acting Director Andrew McCabe, who has written a book and is shilling it on “60 Minutes.” The interview will air in full on Sunday, but the tidbits that have been released in advance are already damning.

According to CBS’ Scott Pelley, the reporter who interviewed McCabe, after President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, McCabe jumped into action with other members of the Justice Department. McCabe was alarmed that Trump “might have won the White House with the aid of the government of Russia.” The next day, he brought the investigators together for a meeting.

“There were meetings at the Justice Department at which it was discussed whether the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet could be brought together to remove the president of the United States under the 25th Amendment,” Pelley said.

“I was speaking to the man who had just run for the presidency and just won the election for the presidency,” McCabe told CBS. “And who might have done so with the aid of the government of Russia, our most formidable adversary on the world stage, and that was something that troubled me greatly.”

The arrogance is astounding.

According to Pelley, McCabe noted that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein offered to wear a wire in order to record conversations with President Trump and the idea was discussed on several occasions. It was “so serious that he took it to the lawyers at the FBI to discuss it,” Pelley explained on “CBS This Morning.”

It was at this time that Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as special counsel to investigate whether Trump’s presidential campaign colluded with Russians interfering in the 2016 election.

This is one tight circle of Washington, D.C., Justice Department brass and G-men. And they’ve succeeded in hampering a sitting president using their power because they were “troubled” by him.

These men must face consequences for their actions.

Thankfully a purge has begun.

As we know, Director Comey was fired, as was Deputy Director McCabe, and Peter Strzok, an FBI senior counterintelligence agent, a onetime member of Mueller’s team. Add to that Lisa Page, who was also on the Mueller team, and Bruce Ohr, who was stripped of his title as associate deputy attorney general.

Page had been texting anti-Trump messages back and forth with Strzok, and Ohr had been in contact with the authors of the Steele dossier shortly after the election. In fact, Ohr is married to Nellie Ohr, who worked for Fusion GPS, the firm that hired ex-British intelligence agent Christopher Steele to compile the infamous dossier.

And this is just a partial list.

Americans need to know the entire story. If, as it appears, there was an effort to sabotage a presidency and create elaborate distractions and cover-ups using the powers entrusted to them, members of the U.S. government have involved themselves in a criminal conspiracy that dwarfs Watergate.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

A federal judge on Friday issued a partial gag order in the criminal case of former Trump political adviser Roger Stone as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the federal court for the District of Columbia on Friday ordered that Stone “refrain from making statements to the media or in public settings that pose a substantial likelihood of material prejudice to this case,” according to the court filing.

ROGER STONE PLEADS NOT GUILTY TO MUELLER CHARGES IN FEDERAL COURT

Jackson further ordered that any participants in the case, including witnesses and counsel, “refrain” from making any statements to the media or public when they are near the courthouse that could “influence any juror, potential juror, judge, witness or court officer or interfere with the administration of justice.”

"There will be no additional restrictions imposed on the defendant's public statements or appearances at this time, although this order may be amended in the future...if necessary," Jackson said in a court order. "This order should not be interpreted as modifying or superseding the condition of the defendant's release that absolutely prohibits him from communicating with any witness in the case, either directly or indirectly. Nor does this order permit the defendant to intimidate or threaten any witness, or to engage or attempt to engage in any conduct in violation of [U.S. Code.]"

She added: "Finally, while it is not up to the Court to advise the defendant as to whether a succession of public statements would be in his best interest at this time, it notes that one factor that will be considered in the evaluation of any future request for relief based on pretrial publicity will be the extent to which the publicity was engendered by the defendant himself."

Stone, who last month pleaded not guilty to obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and making false statements to Congress after being indicted last month as part of Mueller’s probe, was also ordered not to travel anywhere other than Washington, the Eastern District of New York, and the Southern District of Florida while the case is pending. Stone is not permitted to have a passport in his possession or apply for any new passport. Stone was also ordered to return to court “whenever required.”

Stone, 66, was taken into custody last month after being indicted by a federal grand jury a day earlier as part of Mueller’s investigation into alleged Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates in the 2016 presidential election. More than a dozen FBI agents arrived in tactical gear outside of Stone’s home.

Following his arrest, Stone made several media appearances and comments about the case on his social media accounts.

The 24-page indictment released last month alleges that Stone worked to obstruct the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election by making false statements to the committee, denying he had records sought by the committee and persuading a witness to provide false testimony.

The indictment does not charge Stone with conspiring with WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy website that published the emails, or with Russian officers Mueller says hacked them. Instead, it accuses him of witness tampering, obstruction, and false statements about his interactions related to WikiLeaks.

Stone served as an adviser to Trump for years before Trump ran for president. He left Trump’s campaign in August 2015, but maintained regular contact with and publicly supported the Trump campaign throughout the 2016 presidential election.

FBI'S SHOW OF FORCE IN ROGER STONE ARREST SPURS CRITICISM OF MUELLER TACTICS

Jackson, who presided over the case of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, also imposed a gag order in that criminal case as part of Mueller's probe.

Mueller’s investigation, which was initially ordered to look into the 2016 election, has gone on for more than a year and a half. It has expanded to probe financial crimes of Trump associates before the election, conversations Trump’s national security adviser had with the Russians during the transition and whether Trump obstructed justice with his comments and actions related to the probe.

Twenty-six Russian nationals and three Russian companies have been charged with interfering in the 2016 presidential election. But none of the Trump associates have been charged with crimes related to collusion.

Other convictions include former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, who both pleaded guilty to making false statements in 2017. Former campaign adviser Rick Gates in 2018 pleaded guilty and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort was convicted and later pleaded guilty in a separate financial crimes case dating back before the 2016 election.

Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to making false statements in a case brought by Mueller in November. Alex van der Zwaan, a London-based lawyer, pleaded guilty to making false statements this year, and Richard Pinedo, a California man, pleaded guilty to identity fraud in 2018.

Chicks On The Right — Young Conservatives

Published  2 months ago

The Russia investigation is getting more ridiculous by the day, and today’s Special Counsel filing is no exception to the lame innuendo, spy lingo, and guilt-by-association allegations they’ve used to imply coordination between President Trump and Russia during the 2016 election.

In the filing, former Trump campaign manager Roger Stone is alleged to have communicated with “Organization 1,” aka Wikileaks, which implies that Stone somehow coordinated with Wikileaks to release of the Democratic National Committee’s hacked emails.

Seizing the opportunity to create fake news, CNN jumped on the filing, claiming that Stone’s “communications with Wikileaks” were in Mueller’s “possession”:

“Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1,” which is WikiLeaks.

In response, “Organization 1” brutally owned CNN with this priceless Tweet:

The communications are the @WikiLeaks account telling Roger Stone to stop going around falsely claiming that he was in contact with Assange. They were provided to Congress and the public over a year ago. There can be little excuse for concealing the true context. pic.twitter.com/gAzOMtgzZg

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 16, 2019

It doesn’t get any better than this.

If this is the kind of evidence that Mueller is raiding people’s homes to obtain, why isn’t he done yet? President Trump needs to step in and shut it down.

Washington Press

Published  2 months ago

Special Counsel Robert Mueller just revealed that his indictments against Roger Stone and Russian military intelligence (GRU) officers came from the same search warrant against Trump’s longtime political operative in a court filing today. (embedded below)

In addition, Mueller’s team announced for the very first time in today’s filing that it has copies of direct communications between Roger Stone and Wikileaks.

NEW: Prosecutors said for the first time that they have evidence of Roger Stone communicating with Wikileaks, according to a new court filing from special counsel prosecutors.

— Josh Campbell (@joshscampbell) February 15, 2019

The Special Counsel’s Office indicted Stone on seven total counts of lying to Congress and obstruction charges, and today’s revelation arrived in a filing asking for the same judge to be assigned to the former Trump campaign manager’s case as is assigned to the Russian hackers.

Mueller’s team made two main arguments which necessitate having the same judge oversee the two cases over Stone’s objections, firmly tying his criminal indictment to Wikileaks dissemination of hacked emails from Democrats. They wrote:

A. This Case and Netyksho [the Russian hacker’s case] Arise from Common Search Warrants.

B. This Case and Netyksho Involve Activities That Are Part of the Same Alleged Criminal Event or Transaction.

Russian hackers ripped off confidential documents from Democratic National Committee and the House fundraising operation, the D.C.C.C. Russian operatives then allegedly distributed those hacked emails and later stolen Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s emails through the Wikileaks transparency organization, but many speculated that they had help.

Donald Trump mentioned Wikileaks over 160 times in the last month of the 2016 presidential election, which made them his number one campaign topic.

Mueller’s probe and the FBI investigated the thefts after Trump’s shocking electoral college win, which led to search warrants against Roger Stone, and that they say, is what led to Wikileaks and later the Russians. They wrote:

Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1. [which is Wikileaks]

Evidence obtained from those search warrants resulted in the allegations that the Netyksho defendants hacked and stole documents for release through intermediaries, including [Wikileaks], and that Stone lied to a congressional committee investigating, among other things, the activities of [Wikileaks] regarding those stolen documents.

Federal prosecutors made the second point in their filing by explaining that Roger Stone’s lying and witness tampering activities were an active cover-up into the indictment of Russian GRU hackers, which also permits them to apply for a single judge overseeing both cases.

The White House, Trump, and Stone have spent years lying about their involvement with Russians during the 2016 election, particularly, with the slimy Florida-based operative saying he had no idea about the timing of the explosive email releases that sunk Clinton’s campaign after the first publicly known FBI complaints were filed during the campaign.

Today’s news from the Special Counsel’s Office means that Roger Stone’s involvement with Russian hackers is central to the start of the FBI’s investigation into Trump’s efforts to collude with Putin’s political operatives.

It also makes perfect sense of why Mueller is charging Stone, for material lies central to covering up Trump’s electoral help from Russia, because he is the person that led authorities to the GRU in the first place.

Here is a copy of the complete filing from the Special Counsel’s Office:

Add your name to support the effort to prevent Trump from pardoning himself and his corrupt cronies!

courthousenews

Published  2 months ago

WASHINGTON (CN) – Contending that the leak of his indictment allowed reporters to film his predawn arrest last month, Roger Stone lobbed contempt charges Wednesday against the Special Counsel’s Office.

Filed in Washington this morning by Buschel & Gibbons attorney Robert Buschel, the 6-page motion for an order to show cause says that a news crew set up a camera on Jan. 25 outside Stone’s home in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, more than an hour before federal agents arrived.

CNN is not named in the filing but obtained exclusive footage of Stone’s arrest.

Well before Stone had a chance to do so himself, the motion says a reporter called one of Stone’s attorneys just five minutes after the arrest, later forwarding the lawyer a copy of Stone’s indictment.

“The copy of the unsigned indictment provided by the reporter appears to have come from the Special Counsel’s Office,” the motion says. “The reporter offered that the copy had been received from the Special Counsel’s Office.”

Buschel claims the document was leaked in violation of the court’s sealing order in the case, and “compromised the secrecy of grand jury proceedings.”

A former FBI director, Mueller has for nearly two years been leading an investigation of Russia interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and whether the Trump campaign coordinated with that effort.

None of the charges against Stone accuse him of conspiring with that effort.

The longtime GOP strategist has pleaded not guilty to allegations that he lied to Congress about his contacts with WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential campaign, obstruction and witness tampering.

In his motion Wednesday, Stone claims that PDF metadata from the indictment forwarded to his lawyer shows that someone with the initials “AAW” was the last to modify the document before the reporter obtained it.

Stone does not name a suspect directly but appears to suggest involvement by Andrew Weissmann, who is prosecuting the Paul Manafort case.

“That a member of the Special Counsel’s office has the initials ‘AWW,’ supports a reasonable inference that that office is responsible for the unlawful public disclosure of a grand jury document sealed by order of the Court,” the filing says.

The special counsel’s office declined to comment on the filing, and has not yet filed a response with the court.

Stone notes that his indictment did not hit the public docket until 8:55 on Jan. 25, nearly four hours after the news crew set up cameras outside his house.

Also on Wednesday right-wing author Jerome Corsi filed an amicus brief that says Stone should be bound by a gag order.

Corsi has not yet been charged in the case but acknowledges that he is the unnamed “Person 1” in Stone’s indictment, alleged to have been an intermediary between Stone and WikiLeaks before the website published stolen Democratic emails ahead of the 2016 election.

Anticipating that he will be subpoenaed to testify, Corsi contends that Stone “has already begun a public relations campaign meant specifically to influence the outcome of his upcoming trial.”

“Defendant Stone is attempting to smear, defame, and discredit, tamper and threaten Dr. Corsi so that when Dr. Corsi is called as a witness, the jurors will have a false impression of Dr. Corsi as a liar, perjurer, and alcoholic,” the brief says.

Corsi is suspected among other things of having lied to prosecutors on Sept. 6, 2018, about whether Stone asked him in 2016 to contact WikiLeaks about the release of emails that could be damaging to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Wednesday’s brief is the latest salvo in the escalating feud between Corsi and Stone. Last week Corsi sued Stone in Washington, D.C., for defamation.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Amy Berman Jackson, the corrupt Obama-appointed judge assigned to Stone’s case, hit Roger Stone with a limited gag order on Friday.

Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordered Stone, his lawyers and Robert Mueller to stop publicly speaking about Roger Stone’s case after the Trump advisor was indicted for lying to Congress and obstructing the Russia investigation.

Politico reported that Amy Berman Jackson sided with Mueller’s lawyers on Friday and said Roger Stone and his attorneys “must refrain from making statements to the media or in public settings that pose a substantial likelihood of material prejudice to this case.”

Amy Berman Jackson also ordered potential witnesses to hold back from commenting to reporters when they walk in and out of the D.C. courthouse where Roger Stone will go to trial in the fall.

Last Friday, Roger Stone decided to take a stand and fight back against the corrupt Obama-appointed judge threatening to silence him with a gag order that would prevent him from talking to the media about the charges brought against him by dirty cop Mueller.

Roger Stone’s lawyer, Robert Buschel fought back against the corrupt Obama-appointed judge last Friday, and argued Stone has First Amendment rights to defend himself publicly.

“There should be no imposition of prior restraint on Mr. Stone’s First Amendment free speech rights,” the 8-page filing says.

Mueller’s team filed its own brief last week and agreed with Amy Berman Jackson’s proposed gag order.

“The government submits that the order would be supported by a finding that there is a substantial likelihood that extrajudicial comments by trial participants will undermine a fair trial,” the filing states.

It’s no surprise that a corrupt judge like Amy Berman Jackson would deny Roger Stone his First Amendment rights to publicly defend himself.

In contrast, a judge never hit Andrew McCabe with a gag order — He is out on a PR blitz defending himself after a grand jury was impaneled last summer to investigate his crimes.

Editor’s note: This article was updated to clarify that Roger Stone’s gag order is limited. Mr. Stone is barred from making public statements while he’s around the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C. Mr. Stone’s lawyers, however, were given a broader restriction and cannot make public statements about the case anywhere.

This Roger Stone gag order is really weak.

(audience: "How weak is it?!")

He can stay on InfoWars as long as he hangs up the phone on the courthouse sidewalk… pic.twitter.com/RnuLYREWfS

— David Martosko (@dmartosko) February 15, 2019

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Guest post by Joe Hoft Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointed corrupt liberal judge with an angry disposition towards Americans who think differently than Obama, continues to put her own distorted interpretation of US law ahead of the US Constitution. Her actions with Paul Manafort alone are ample cause for her to be removed […]

Judicial Watch

Published  2 months ago

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it sent an official complaint to the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General (IG) calling for investigations into leaks of information about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. The complaint asks for an investigation of any leaks to CNN about the controversial raid on the home of Roger...

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Longtime political operative Roger Stone on Wednesday filed a motion requesting a federal judge force special counsel Robert Mueller to prove he did not tip off CNN about his January 25 arrest.

Stone’s legal team argues CNN showed it a draft copy of the indictment, stamped without a PACER, after their client’s arrest, suggesting the document had been released prematurely. “A person with privileged access to a ‘draft’ of Roger Stone’s Indictment, identical to that which had been filed under seal … had — in violation of the Court’s Order — publicly distributed the Indictment prior to its release from the sealing ordered by the Court,” the filing reads.

Since his arrest, Stone has contended CNN was given notice of his arrest ahead of time. The filing states a CNN camera crew began camping outside Stone’s Fort Lauderdale, Flordia residence at 4:58 a.m. EST. The FBI arrested Stone at 6:06 a.m. EST, after which a CNN journalist contacted the political operative’s lawyer and texted over a “draft copy of the still sealed indictment” at 6:22 a.m. EST.

CNN denied being tipped off about the indictment, claiming that it was their reporters’ “instinct” to send a crew to Stone’s home before dawn on the morning of his arrest. “[FBI agents] walked me out in the middle of the street to make sure the CNN camera could get great footage of the whole thing. The street was sealed off, so how CNN had a camera right outside the door; that’s very hard to understand, because nobody else was allowed on the street,” Stone said of his arrest in an interview with Breitbart News Daily host Alex Marlow.

On January 28, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) sent a letter to the Department of Justice asking for an investigation into whether details of Stone’s indictment were leaked to the media ahead of his arrest.

“It is hard to believe that this reporter and camera crew showed up at the home of Mr. Stone, on the right day at the right time, on a hunch,” the Republican congressman wrote. “This leads me to believe that CNN may have received advance notice of the date and time of the arrest.”

Stone has also lamented what many are arguing was an excessive use of force by the FBI during his arrest. “I’m 66 years old, I do not own a gun, I do not have a valid passport, I have no prior criminal record, I’m charged with nonviolent process crimes,” he told reporters. “To storm my house with greater force than was used to take down bin Laden or El Chapo or Pablo Escobar, it’s unconscionable.”

Stone was charged with lying to Congress, obstruction and witness tampering related to discussions he had during the 2016 election about WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy group that released material stolen from Democrat groups including Hillary Clinton’s campaign. U.S. intelligence agencies have said that Russia was the source of the hacked material, and last year Mueller charged 12 Russian intelligence officers in the hacking.

Prosecutors have tied that case to Stone’s, saying they share a common search warrant and involve activities that are “part of the same alleged criminal event or transaction.” However, they have not accused Stone of being directly involved in any Russian election conspiracy.

Stone, who remains free on $250,000 bond, has denied having any direct contact with WikiLeaks. The Trump ally has said he only sought to encourage voter interest in the group’s public disclosures. He also has denied discussing the issue with President Trump.

Stone pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Sara A. Carter

Published  2 months ago

CNN obtained Roger Stone’s indictment from someone allegedly in the Special Counsel’s office hours before it had been unsealed by the court, thus allowing the news outlet to stage a camera crew outside his home and lie in wait until armed FBI agents arrested him, according to a motion filed by Stone’s lawyers Wednesday morning. […]

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

On Tuesday, Rep. Devin Nunes told Sean Hannity that many people who lied to the federal government will soon be criminally referred to the Justice Department once William Barr is confirmed as attorney general.

Get Your “Build The Wall” Coin For 50% Off And We’ll Send Nancy Pelosi A Foam Brick!

Read the conversation below between Nunes and Hannity:

REP. DEVIN NUNES: We’re going to work with the [House] Judiciary Committee and the [House] Oversight Committee, Sean, to ensure that this investigation into FISA abuse and other matters continues. The good thing is we got through about 15 interviews last year, the task for did, you covered it extensively on your show. We are going to continue to call people in for interviews. Just last week, the new chairman of the committee said that he is going to reopen the Russia investigation. We offered about a dozen subpoenas of people that we wanted to subpoena. We don’t expect for them to subpoena the people that we want, but at every attempt that we can, at every opportunity that we get, we will make attempts to subpoena these people to come in and speak. We will also ask for people to voluntarily come in and speak. Look, we need the new attorney general to get in there and then we will be making criminal referrals on many people who lied to Congress and did other bad things.

SEAN HANNITY: Does that mean we can be expecting pre-dawn raids with amphibious vehicles, frogmen, SWAT teams of 27, all of this to arrest one guy on a process crime? Is that what’s going to happen to Democrats? In other words, aren’t there a list of well-known people that served in the Obama administration that lied under oath?

REP. NUNES: I’m not asking anyone to be Roger Stone’d, which I think is now a verb, now. But, I am expecting people to be held accountable. If you’re going to bust people for lying to Congress, then we need to bust everyone for lying to Congress. Look, we’re just the House side. My guess is on the Senate side there are many people that some of the same people probably lied over there, so they should also be doing the same.

Thank goodness we have a fighter in Congress who is going after people other than people from the Trump campaign.

Maybe the new attorney general will actually take action.

Will these people who lied to Congress be treated like Roger Stone?

Probably not. But the fact that Nunes is taking action is a step in the right direction.

Read what conservative Kambree Kawahine Koa had to say on Twitter:

Devin Nunes: Criminal referrals for FISA abuse may be coming.

Buckle up.

— Kambree Kawahine Koa (@KamVTV) February 12, 2019

Buckle up is right.

We can expect a major push back from the Left if Nunes decides to take action and refer these people to the Justice Department.

Watch the full video of Nunes’ interview with Hannity below:

If we had more people like Nunes in Congress, our country would be in a much better place.

Should Nunes take action? How will Democrats respond if Nunes criminally refers these people to the Justice Department? Comment below!

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Jeff Bezos' girlfriend has privately acknowledged that she shared some photos and texts from the Amazon founder with several female friends, adding to the mystery of who leaked salacious material to the National Enquirer.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

A court filing from Roger Stone’s attorneys documents how CNN was in possession of a sealed indictment long before the court ordered it to be released.

For weeks, we have been hearing CNN claim again and again that their presence at Stone’s home ahead of the FBI’s pre-dawn raid was a combination of “luck” and good reporting. They have since built on that fairy-tale, describing their propagandist filming of Stone’s arrest the result of watching “unusual grand jury activity” in the days leading up to January 25th.

However, we at The Gateway Pundit reported exclusively how the metadata on a draft copy of the indictment obtained by a CNN reporter and sent to Roger’s attorney after his arrest showed a save date of two days prior to the January 25th unsealing of the court documents following the Stone’s arrest. This proved that CNN illegally obtained a copy of the grand jury indictment, and now Mr. Stone’s attorneys are demanding the Mueller’s office explain themselves.

According to the filing, Stone is laying out exactly how CNN came into possession of the illegally leaked document, which lead to their “stake out” in front of Stone’s South Florida home an hour before the FBI arrived on scene. Last week, home surveillance video of the raid was released by Infowars, and showed FBI agents coordinating with CNN to position their film crew to televise Mr. Stone’s arrest.

READ THE COURT FILING:

Stone Motion To Show Cause … by on Scribd

This was meant to taint the jury pool and frame the longtime Trump advisor as some sort of violent criminal mastermind that required a heavily armed 29-member FBI strike force raid on his home, despite Stone being charged with non-violent process crimes on immaterial matters. Roger’s hearing impaired wife Nydia was even dragged from her bed barefooted onto the front lawn in the Gestapo-style raid and arrest.

An illegal leaking of the documents by the Office of the Special Counsel, which the evidence suggests, is a crime that should earn the person who leaked it imprisonment or a fine, preferably both. Further action should be considered in all honesty, since the leak came from someone within the Office of the Special Counsel, which is arguing for a gag order to be placed on Mr. Stone, so he doesn’t “taint the jury pool.”

Obviously that is a laughable request given the fact that the Office of the Special Counsel, acting under the direction of Robert Mueller, have now been busted illegally leaking sealed court documents to CNN in an effort to taint the jury pool against Mr. Stone, who was dragged from his home wearing a “Roger Stone Did Nothing Wrong” t-shirt.

CNN’s entire coven of Fake News peddlers should also issue corrections and apologies to the American public for lying about how they “just happened to be there” to film Stone’s arrest. It was not due to their monitoring of publicly available court documents or grand jury activity, it was due to an illegal leak that they have helped to conceal with their cockamamie cover story.

You can help Roger fight back against Robert Mueller and his goon-squad of politically motivated prosecutors by donating to stonedefensefund.com

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

It’s Called a Coup D’Etat

Fired Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe told CBS News Thursday that top officials at the Department of Justice and FBI discussed recruiting cabinet members to push President Trump out of office.

McCabe, James Comey, Rod Rosenstein and the top officials at the DOJ were actively strategizing how to remove the duly elected President of the United States.

In third world banana republics they call this a coup d’etat.

Treason is punishable by death in the United States.

In response to this news the Mueller team re-released debunked smear on Roger Stone.

They wanted to change the story

Mueller deep state hacks re-released documents on Friday they claim shows that Roger Stone was communicating with Wikileaks.

Julian Assange and Wikileaks DENIED ANY COLLUSION with Roger Stone, Donald Trump Jr., Jerome Corsi, Michael Flynn, or any other Trump official during the 2016 election.

Wikileaks denied providing information about its then pending 2016 U.S. election-related publications to any outside party before the documents were released.

FULL DOC: WikiLeaks' legal letter of media myths and falsehoods, in the news today, has, unsurprisingly, leaked: https://t.co/frsaHhkZs4

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 7, 2019

And late last night Roger Stone responded saying the Friday report was a recycled report on innocuous Twitter direct messages that were already fully disclosed to House investigators.

The Mueller deep state just wanted to change the subject.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

President Trump is expressing gratitude to MSNBC for a new report that may shed light on the findings from the Senate Intelligence Committee.

NBC News reported Tuesday morning that according to both unnamed Republicans and Democrats, the Senate Intelligence Committee has concluded that there is no direct evidence of conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election after conducting 200 interviews over the course of two years.

As NBC News’ Ken Dilanian reported on-air, Committee Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C., told another news outlet last week that the panel had reached a conclusion, but now there is reporting from the Democratic side that confirmed Burr’s remarks.

“They are nearing the end of this investigation we are told but that once they interview their final witness, it will take another six or seven months to prepare a report. So the American public may not see the fruits for some time,” Dilanian told MSNBC’s Hallie Jackson.

JEROME CORSI REPORTEDLY CLAIMS ROGER STONE TRIED TO TRIGGER HEART ATTACKS TO PREVENT TESTIMONY

Dilanian later stressed that the Senate Intel investigation is completely independent from the probe conducted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and how he may draw different conclusions.

“That said, Trump will claim vindication through this, and he’ll be partially right,” Dilanian added.

The president took to Twitter to praise MSNBC’s reporting and share a clip of its on-air reporting.

“Thank you to MSNBC!” he tweeted.

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

Yes, Democrats want to start a new investigation into already-under-investigation Trump-Russia allegations. And yes, they want to investigate Trump associates like Michael Cohen, Roger Stone, and others. But by far the biggest thing Democrats want, now that they have the majority in the House, is to get their hands on the president's tax returns.

The Daily Beast

Published  2 months ago

Trump’s former adviser also accused Don Lemon of wearing fake glasses to look intelligent.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

We have news for you, breaking news, that for whatever reason is being downplayed or ignored by other media outlets, but we think you want to know about it. Five simple words describe it, there was no Russian collusion.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

As TGP previously reported– On Friday January 25, 2019, Deep State FBI operatives stormed conservative activist and Trump associate Roger Stone’s house. During the raid Roger Stone’s wife Nydia was forced out of the house on to the lawn barefoot and in her nightgown. CNN hid this footage from their American audience. On Monday morning […]

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox News Channel Host Sean Hannity Tuesday evening that “many” people who lied to investigators will be criminally referred to the Justice Department after attorney general nominee William Barr is confirmed.

A partial transcript is as follows:

REP. DEVIN NUNES: We’re going to work with the [House] Judiciary Committee and the [House] Oversight Committee, Sean, to ensure that this investigation into FISA abuse and other matters continues. The good thing is we got through about 15 interviews last year, the task for did, you covered it extensively on your show. We are going to continue to call people in for interviews. Just last week, the new chairman of the committee said that he is going to reopen the Russia investigation. We offered about a dozen subpoenas of people that we wanted to subpoena. We don’t expect for them to subpoena the people that we want, but at every attempt that we can, at every opportunity that we get, we will make attempts to subpoena these people to come in and speak. We will also ask for people to voluntarily come in and speak. Look, we need the new attorney general to get in there and then we will be making criminal referrals on many people who lied to Congress and did other bad things.

SEAN HANNITY: Does that mean we can be expecting pre-dawn raids with amphibious vehicles, frogmen, SWAT teams of 27, all of this to arrest one guy on a process crime? Is that what’s going to happen to Democrats? In other words, aren’t there a list of well-known people that served in the Obama administration that lied under oath?

REP. NUNES: I’m not asking anyone to be Roger Stone’d, which I think is now a verb, now. But, I am expecting people to be held accountable. If you’re going to bust people for lying to Congress, then we need to bust everyone for lying to Congress. Look, we’re just the House side. My guess is on the Senate side there are many people that some of the same people probably lied over there, so they should also be doing the same.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

The anonymous source who leaked intimate texts between Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos and his mistress, Lauren Sanchez, ahead of the National Enquirer’s report on the couple’s extramarital affair was the mistress' pro-Trump brother, multiple sources told The Daily Beast on Sunday.

The report comes hours after the brother, Michael Sanchez, appeared on Fox News’ “Media Buzz” where he criticized Bezos for trying to forestall the forthcoming expose.

Last week, Bezos claimed he was being blackmailed by The Enquirer to publish lurid photos of him --including a "below-the-belt selfie -- unless he dropped his investigation into the tabloid. Bezos' longtime security adviser Gavin de Becker de Becker told The Daily Beast earlier this month that Bezos had opened a private investigation into the source of the leaked messages which suggested that Michael Sanchez could be invovled.

“Michael Sanchez has been among the people we’ve been speaking with and looking at,” de Becker said.

Sanchez has denied being the source of the leak but has said previously that he’s urged Bezos and his sister to hold their ground against AMI. A registered Democrat, and Trump supporter, Sanchez said his connections, like controversial political operative Roger Stone, “are being used as a weapon against me, but the dots don’t connect.”

AMI has refused to outright confirm Michael Sanchez as the source, but company lawyer Elkan Abramowitz told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Sunday: “The story was given to the National Enquirer by a reliable source that had given information to the National Enquirer for seven years prior to this story. It was a source that was well known to both Mr. Bezos. And Ms. Sanchez.”

When asked directly if Michael Sanchez Was the sourced, Abramowitz replied: “I can’t discuss who the source was. It’s confidential within AMI.” Neither AMI or Abramowitz immediately responded to Fox News' request for comment.

Fox News' Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this report.

The Daily Beast

Published  2 months ago

Multiples sources tell The Daily Beast that Michael Sanchez, a Trumpworld associate and brother to Bezos’ lover, gave the couple’s texts to The National Enquirer.

Diamond & Silk

Published  2 months ago

During last night’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight” program, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson shared never seen before footage of the raid on Trump ally Roger Stone’s home

The footage was seemingly recorded from Stone’s own home surveillance system and showed very heavily armed FBI officials surround the home with weapons drawn.

Stone, who was arrested for lying to Congress, had no prior criminal record.

“Until now the only public footage of the raid came from CNN, which somehow knew to arrive one hour before the FBI got there,” Carlson said before airing the footage, BizPac Review reports.

CNN’s exclusive footage of the raid immediately raised suspicions that they were tipped off by the Mueller investigation or someone familiar with the details of the investigation.

Here’s more, from Carlson, via BizPac Review:

Carlson narrated as the security footage aired showing a car with a CNN cameraman already on the scene before FBI agents even arrived at Stone’s home last month in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. President Trump’s longtime adviser was arrested and charged on seven counts

, including making false statements to Congress, witness tampering and obstruction.

“The new footage from Stone’s home shows CNN arriving about an hour before the agents did. The footage depicts what you’d expect if the FBI raided the home of a Mexican drug lord, maybe even SEAL Team 6 going into [Osama] bin Laden’s compound,” Carlson said.

“For context, Roger Stone is a senior citizen accused of false statements to Congress. Take a look at what happened. It’s just before 5 a.m., and an SUV with a CNN cameraman arrives first to this quiet street in Fort Lauderdale, Florida,” he said.

The video footage showed 29 FBI agents, armed in tactical gear, arriving at Stone’s home and banging on the front door until the barefoot 66-year-old came out with his hands above his head.

Carlson explained that CNN was present on the scene for approximately one hour before FBI officials showed up. At which time, the officials surrounded the home.

“Almost exactly one hour later, trucks with heavily-armed men arrived in front of Roger Stone’s house. Immediately CNN’s cameraman jumps out of the car, camera on shoulder and captures the footage,” Carlson said, narrating the home video. “The feds assemble on Stone’s driveway, they’re wearing ballistic armor and carrying assault weapons with 30-round magazines, red dot sites and tactical flashlights mounted to the barrel shroud. One has his gun hanging by the strap while he’s carrying a battering ram in the left hand.”

“All of the men have a sidearm holstered on their waists. A second camera mounted on Stone’s front door shows another angle of the raid. A heavily armed FBI agent approaches the door with the gun drawn while others stake out positions behind,” the Fox News host continued. “It looks like a high-stakes raid, but the cameraman is 40 feet away filming it all. One agent swings the firearm around as he scans and surveys Stone’s front porch. Behind the home, a third camera captures agents approaching the back of the house from the side yard. Behind the property, a boat arrives with at least two agents on board.”

“Within minutes, Stone exits his home to greet the agents who have the rifles pointed at him. Stone raises his hands, spins around apparently trying to show he is unarmed. Another FBI agent approaches Stone from behind and cuffs him,” he said. “It’s just after 6:00 in the morning. It’s still dark out. Twenty minutes later, the same camera shows agents leading Roger Stone back into his house. He is barefoot. Stone is wearing a T-shirt that says, ‘Roger Stone did nothing wrong.’”

Carlson concluded: “The FBI and their water carriers in corporate media tells us, ‘Totally commonplace.’ ‘By the book.’ “Happens all the time.’”

“It doesn’t,” the conservative countered.

Some people online immediately questioned why such a force was needed for the raid and why it occurred in the first place. Some others wondered if the FBI or the Mueller investigation had reason to believe that Stone would be armed or noncompliant.

Stone was arrested and eventually let out on bail.

POLITICUSUSA

Published  2 months ago

On HBO’s Real Time, Atlantic investigative writer Natasha Bertrand revealed that Donald Trump Jr. will probably be indicted any day now and that he has already been telling his friends that an indictment is coming soon.

Bertrand was asked by Real Time host Bill Maher who would be the first member of Donald Trump’s family to be indicted — Don Jr. or Jared Kushner. She replied that in her opinion it isn’t even close, because of problems with Don Jr’s testimony before Congress.

“I think the Don Jr. is in more immediate jeopardy,” Bertrand said. “He has been telling his friends and associates that he expects to be indicted, and he’s been saying that for the last few weeks.”

“His accounts under oath about the Trump Tower meeting in 2016, and his accounts about the Trump Tower in Moscow and how involved he was in that could put him in some legal jeopardy there,” she continued.

What Bertrand knows is that Donald Trump Jr lied to Congress, and both Adam Schiff and Bob Mueller have the evidence to prove it.

As we saw with the arrest of Roger Stone, federal prosecutors — including Mueller — are able to act very quickly. Now that Mueller has copies of the official and formal testimony of Don Jr under oath he could move to indict the president’s oldest son at any time.

Natasha Bertrand is known for her insightful investigative reporting. She is based in New York and has confidential sources among the New York federal prosecutors. In the past her predictions have been right, and there is no reason to believe differently now.

In late January we reported that Donald Trump and his allies have been lying for two years to cover up Donald Trump Jr.’s crimes related to Russia.

Last Wednesday PoliticusUSA publisher Jason Easley wrote that:

“The House Intelligence Committee has voted to turn over the transcripts of witness testimony to Robert Mueller for a perjury investigation, which means that the clock is ticking on Donald Trump Jr. being indicted.”

“Trump blew a gasket and launched a personal attack against Adam Schiff because even he is worried that his son is going to be indicted. Rep. Schiff has been signaling for weeks that he has a great deal of suspicion that Donald Trump Jr. lied to Congress.”

So get your popcorn ready folks. The long-awaited show of Donald Trump Jr. being indicted and arrested is coming soon.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

Tucker Carlson aired and narrated the FBI’s raid on Roger Stone’s home during his show Friday night.

Stone, a longtime confidant of President Donald Trump, was charged last month on seven counts, including five for making false statements to Congress, one for witness tampering and one for obstruction of a government proceeding.

“The new footage from Stone’s home shows CNN arriving about an hour before the agents did. The footage depicts what you’d expect if the FBI raided the home of a Mexican drug lord,” Carlson began. “For context, Roger Stone is a senior citizen accused of false statements to Congress. Take a look at what happened. It’s just before 5 a.m., and an SUV with a CNN cameraman arrives first to this quiet street in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.” (RELATED: Stone: Trump Did Not Direct Me To Contact Wikileaks)

“Almost exactly one hour later, trucks with heavily-armed men arrived in front of Roger Stone’s house. Immediately CNN’s cameraman jumps out of the car, camera on shoulder and captures the footage,” he added. “The feds assemble on Stone’s driveway, they’re wearing ballistic armor and carrying assault weapons with 30-round magazines, red dot sites and tactical flashlights mounted to the barrel shroud. One has his gun hanging by the strap while he’s carrying a battering ram in the left hand.”

Carlson continued:

All of the men have a side arm holstered on their waists. A second camera mounted on Stone’s front door shows another angle of the raid. A heavily armed FBI agent approaches the door with the gun drawn while others stake out positions behind. It looks like a high-stakes raid, but the cameraman is 40 feet away filming it all. One agent swings the firearm around as he scans and surveys Stone’s front porch. Behind the home a third camera captures agents approaching the back of the house from the side yard. Behind the property, a boat arrives with at least two agents on board.

“Within minutes, Stone exits his home to greet the agents who have the rifles pointed at him. Stone raises his hands, spins around apparently trying to show he is unarmed. Another FBI agent approaches Stone from behind and cuffs him,” he concluded. “It’s just after 6:00 in the morning. It’s still dark out. Twenty minutes later, the same camera shows agents leading Roger Stone back into his house. He is barefoot. Stone is wearing a T-shirt that says, ‘Roger Stone did nothing wrong.’”

President Trump told The Daily Caller he is considering reviewing the FBI’s policies in response to their show of force during this arrest, in a recent exclusive interview.

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

Remember the ridiculous FBI raid on Roger Stone a couple weeks ago that CNN just happened to ‘conveniently’ be at? Well according to recently released security footage, it appears that CNN was present at Roger Stone’s home 40 minutes before the FBI even showed up.

VOTE NOW: Should Nancy Pelosi Be Removed From Office?

Check out what Roger Stone himself had to say about the incident on Instagram:

Odd – this still from security video shows CNN arrived 40 minutes before the raid on my home and set up their camera 10 minutes before the FBI arrived. Their claim that they staked out my home every Thursday is disapproved by previous security camera recordings. If I was considered dangerous enough to require a take down by 29 FBI agents brandishing assault weapons why wasn’t CNN told to leave when the FBI closed the street ?

But it gets even worse. According to the same video surveillance video, it appears that authorities were giving directions to the CNN reporters who were at the scene. Check out the video surveillance below:

https://media.infowars.com/videos/df7bab5a-2b09-4cdf-83eb-ada6dc02a1b1.mp4

Even Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker weighed in on the matter during his testimony saying, “It was deeply concerning to me as to how CNN found out about that [raid].” After he made this statement, a CNN correspondent had something to say:

Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker suggested during his testimony earlier today before the House Judiciary Committee that CNN may have been tipped off to the FBI’s raid, prompting CNN justice correspondent Evan Perez to accuse Whitaker of “trying to give oxygen to a conspiracy”.

Trying to give oxygen to a conspiracy? The facts speak for themselves. CNN was present at Roger Stone’s house way before the FBI even showed up. To make matters worse, video surveillance footage even shows authorities giving CNN directions on where to film. You can draw your own conclusions but the evidence certainly seems to show that CNN was tipped off by the FBI. Isn’t it interesting how the same people who are investigating Trump for ‘collusion’ seem to be colluding with CNN? Unbelievable!

Rantt

Published  2 months ago

Democrats probe Trump's corruption, Nancy Pelosi claps back at the State of the Union, Jeff Bezos makes a consequential accusation, and more in week 107.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

A picture from Democrat Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook surfaced earlier this month showing two men, one in a KKK hood and robe and one in ‘blackface’ on Northam’s yearbook page. The photo was first published by Big League Politics and later confirmed by other outlets such as WaPo and The Virginian Pilot. One half […]

True Pundit

Published  2 months ago

You thought the CNN footage of Roger Stone’s FBI raid and arrest was alarming?

You ain’t seen nothing yet.

Stone captured video himself that show many things, including the Feds working with CNN prior to the 5 am raid.

That was before FBI agents ripped Stone’s phones out of the wall and messed with his security cameras and walked away with DVRs that recorded the raid.

But they forgot one DVR, Stone said.

Its contents are alarming, as it shows the FBI banging on Stone’s door without identifying it was the FBI. The CNN footage did not include that.

“This is what these thugs do,” said Mike Moore, True Pundit’s chief muckraker.

“They do this so suspects might act out and do something irrational so the FBI can shoot, tackle, assault or simply humiliate them akin to the Nazis in Germany.

Now the world gets a front row seat to what my family had to endure at gunpoint twice by these same terrorists.”

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker suggested during his Friday testimony before the House Judiciary Committee that CNN may have been tipped off to the FBI’s raid on Roger Stone’s home in Florida. CNN’s camera crew allegedly arrived at Stone’s residence a whole hour before the raid and CNN’s Sara Murray provided Stone’s attorney with a […]

infowars

Published  2 months ago

Footage of the FBI raid on Roger Stone’s home was apparently leaked to Sinclair Broadcast Group by the House or Senate Intelligence Committees after Roger handed over his personal surveillance footage to said committee.

Roger joins Alex to break down this smear campaign against Roger and Infowars.

Don’t miss:

Security footage depicting the FBI colluding with CNN before the raid of Roger Stone’s home.

Spread this video:

Never before seen footage of the FBI raid on Roger Stone’s home has been given exclusively to Infowars.

Footage from Roger Stone’s security camera system shows CNN arriving before the FBI raid, the FBI directing CNN camera crew several times before Roger Stone is brought out of the house during his predawn raid.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Guest post by Joe Hoft There are numerous reasons the Deep State has provided to support the phony Trump-Russia collusion investigation and Mueller witch hunt.  Here is a list of 19 reasons for the investigation to date – none of which are sufficient enough to implement the investigation in the first place. Here’s our list […]

gellerreport

Published  2 months ago

Traitors and totalitarians. We know that the social media giants have been at war with those who oppose jihad for quite some time, and are actively committed to banning and blocking counter-jihad accounts and imposing sharia blasphemy restrictions. But this is a step even farther. After stouting defending the privacy rights of the San Bernardino jihad mass murderers, Apple turned on a dime and handed over access to all of Roger Stone’s data. This shows what they think is a worse crime: not jihad mass murder, but dissenting from the left’s agenda and supporting President Trump. Apple is evil.

“Apple Gives Deep State Access To Roger Stone’s iCloud Account, After Refusing To Violate Privacy of San Bernardino Terrorists,” by Jacob Engels, Gateway Pundit, February 6, 2019 (thanks to Todd):

Three years after Apple refused to give the federal government access to the devices used by the San Bernadino terrorists who killed and injured dozens in a mass shooting event, the company has given the office of the Special Counsel complete access to Trump advisor Roger Stone’s iCloud account, reports Apple Insider.

According to the Washington Post, Apple objected to giving the federal government backdoor access to the shooters iPhones, claiming it would “set a dangerous precedent.”

“From the beginning, we objected to the FBI’s demand that Apple build a backdoor into the iPhone because we believed it was wrong and would set a dangerous precedent. As a result of the government’s dismissal, neither of these occurred. This case should never have been brought.”

Fast forward to present, and we see that Apple no longer seems to have the same privacy concerns it once did in 2015. Without any fight, they simply turned over Roger Stone’s iCloud passwords and God knows what else, because Orange Man Bad. The fact that Apple views a political persecution less of a hill to die on than protecting the rights of terrorists who killed and maimed dozens of Americans is quite telling.

More from the Washington Post on Apple’s refusal to turn over access to the San Bernandino [sic] shooters devices…

“If allowed to stand, the order in Apple’s case would have forced company engineers to create software to disable a phone security feature so that the FBI could try its hand at unlocking the device by cracking a numeric password. Apple quickly resisted, arguing that forcing it to create such software would violate the company’s constitutional rights and weaken privacy for users around the world.”

Which makes us wonder… what exactly was Apple threatened with by Robert Mueller and the Office of the Special Counsel for them to abandon their firm stance against turning over user data and access to federal investigators? Surely they didn’t reason that two mass shooters were more deserving of their tough stand against government overreach and backdoor programs? There must be some explanation as to how they could give the federal government the power to access our privately held devices and accounts at will right?…

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

Candace Owens is not playing around with Chelsea Clinton or her "racist parents." It all started after the "miserable" former first daughter responded to a tweet... Get Your "Build The Wall" Coin For 50% Off And

SARAH PALIN

Published  2 months ago

During last night’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight” program, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson shared never seen before footage of the raid on Trump ally Roger Stone’s home

The footage was seemingly recorded from Stone’s own home surveillance system and showed very heavily armed FBI officials surround the home with weapons drawn.

Stone, who was arrested for lying to Congress, had no prior criminal record.

“Until now the only public footage of the raid came from CNN, which somehow knew to arrive one hour before the FBI got there,” Carlson said before airing the footage, BizPac Review reports.

CNN’s exclusive footage of the raid immediately raised suspicions that they were tipped off by the Mueller investigation or someone familiar with the details of the investigation.

Here’s more, from Carlson, via BizPac Review:

Carlson narrated as the security footage aired showing a car with a CNN cameraman already on the scene before FBI agents even arrived at Stone’s home last month in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. President Trump’s longtime adviser was arrested and charged on seven counts, including making false statements to Congress, witness tampering and obstruction.

“The new footage from Stone’s home shows CNN arriving about an hour before the agents did. The footage depicts what you’d expect if the FBI raided the home of a Mexican drug lord, maybe even SEAL Team 6 going into [Osama] bin Laden’s compound,” Carlson said.

“For context, Roger Stone is a senior citizen accused of false statements to Congress. Take a look at what happened. It’s just before 5 a.m., and an SUV with a CNN cameraman arrives first to this quiet street in Fort Lauderdale, Florida,” he said.

The video footage showed 29 FBI agents, armed in tactical gear, arriving at Stone’s home and banging on the front door until the barefoot 66-year-old came out with his hands above his head.

Carlson explained that CNN was present on the scene for approximately one hour before FBI officials showed up. At which time, the officials surrounded the home.

“Almost exactly one hour later, trucks with heavily-armed men arrived in front of Roger Stone’s house. Immediately CNN’s cameraman jumps out of the car, camera on shoulder and captures the footage,” Carlson said, narrating the home video. “The feds assemble on Stone’s driveway, they’re wearing ballistic armor and carrying assault weapons with 30-round magazines, red dot sites and tactical flashlights mounted to the barrel shroud. One has his gun hanging by the strap while he’s carrying a battering ram in the left hand.”

“All of the men have a sidearm holstered on their waists. A second camera mounted on Stone’s front door shows another angle of the raid. A heavily armed FBI agent approaches the door with the gun drawn while others stake out positions behind,” the Fox News host continued. “It looks like a high-stakes raid, but the cameraman is 40 feet away filming it all. One agent swings the firearm around as he scans and surveys Stone’s front porch. Behind the home, a third camera captures agents approaching the back of the house from the side yard. Behind the property, a boat arrives with at least two agents on board.”

“Within minutes, Stone exits his home to greet the agents who have the rifles pointed at him. Stone raises his hands, spins around apparently trying to show he is unarmed. Another FBI agent approaches Stone from behind and cuffs him,” he said. “It’s just after 6:00 in the morning. It’s still dark out. Twenty minutes later, the same camera shows agents leading Roger Stone back into his house. He is barefoot. Stone is wearing a T-shirt that says, ‘Roger Stone did nothing wrong.’”

Carlson concluded: “The FBI and their water carriers in corporate media tells us, ‘Totally commonplace.’ ‘By the book.’ “Happens all the time.’”

“It doesn’t,” the conservative countered.

Some people online immediately questioned why such a force was needed for the raid and why it occurred in the first place. Some others wondered if the FBI or the Mueller investigation had reason to believe that Stone would be armed or noncompliant.

Stone was arrested and eventually let out on bail.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

My brother is a decorated Navy SEAL wrongfully accused of a war crime -- killing a dying ISIS fighter on the battlefield.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Friday night aired video of the FBI’s arrest of President Trump’s longtime adviser Roger Stone, questioning the agency’s show of force -- and why a CNN camera crew was at the scene an hour before authorities arrived just before dawn on Jan. 25.

“Until now the only public footage of the raid came from CNN, which somehow knew to arrive one hour before the FBI got there,” Carlson said, before showing a clip of Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker being asked about CNN’s presence at the raid during a congressional hearing.

"It was deeply concerning to me as to how CNN found out about that," Whitaker said.

WHO'S BEEN CHARGED BY MUELLER IN THE RUSSIA PROBE SO FAR?

Security footage shows an SUV with a CNN cameraman parked across the street from Stone's Fort Lauderdale, Fla., home. The cameraman got out and began filming when FBI personnel arrived an hour later.

Carlson also took issue with the way the raid was conducted.

A team of 29 heavily armed FBI agents in tactical gear arrived at the residence and pounded on the front door, the footage shows. Stone, 66, is seen barefoot and wearing a black T-shirt emblazoned with the phrase “Roger Stone did nothing wrong.” He comes out with his hands raised above his head and is put in handcuffs.

“The footage depicts what you’d expect if the FBI raided the home of a Mexican drug lord, maybe even SEAL Team 6 going into [Osama] bin Laden’s compound,” Carlson said.

The show of force has prompted criticism of the tactics of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office. Stone pleaded not guilty later that day to making false statements to Congress about contacts with WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Like many conservatives, Carlson has raised suspicions that Stone's arrest was politically motivated.

“The FBI and their water carriers in corporate media tells us, 'Totally commonplace.' 'By the book.' "Happens all the time,'" Carlson said as he ended his segment.

Blunt Force Truth

Published  2 months ago

Three years after Apple refused to give the federal government access to the devices used by the San Bernadino terrorists who killed and injured dozens in a mass shooting event, the company has given the office of the Special Counsel complete access to Trump advisor Roger Stone’s iCloud account, reports Apple Insider.

According to the Washington Post, Apple objected to giving the federal government backdoor access to the shooters iPhones, claiming it would “set a dangerous precedent.”

“From the beginning, we objected to the FBI’s demand that Apple build a backdoor into the iPhone because we believed it was wrong and would set a dangerous precedent. As a result of the government’s dismissal, neither of these occurred. This case should never have been brought.”

Want more BFT? Leave us a voicemail on our page or follow us on Twitter @BFT_Podcast and Facebook @BluntForceTruthPodcast. We want to hear from you! There’s no better place to get the #BluntForceTruth.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Three years after Apple refused to give the federal government access to the devices used by the San Bernadino terrorists who killed and injured dozens in a mass shooting event, the company has given the office of the Special Counsel complete access to Trump advisor Roger Stone’s iCloud account, reports Apple Insider.

According to the Washington Post, Apple objected to giving the federal government backdoor access to the shooters iPhones, claiming it would “set a dangerous precedent.”

“From the beginning, we objected to the FBI’s demand that Apple build a backdoor into the iPhone because we believed it was wrong and would set a dangerous precedent. As a result of the government’s dismissal, neither of these occurred. This case should never have been brought.”

Fast forward to present, and we see that Apple no longer seems to have the same privacy concerns it once did in 2015. Without any fight, they simply turned over Roger Stone’s iCloud passwords and God knows what else, because Orange Man Bad. The fact that Apple views a political persecution less of a hill to die on than protecting the rights of terrorists who killed and maimed dozens of Americans is quite telling.

More from the Washington Post on Apple’s refusal to turn over access to the San Bernandino shooters devices…

“If allowed to stand, the order in Apple’s case would have forced company engineers to create software to disable a phone security feature so that the FBI could try its hand at unlocking the device by cracking a numeric password. Apple quickly resisted, arguing that forcing it to create such software would violate the company’s constitutional rights and weaken privacy for users around the world.”

Which makes us wonder… what exactly was Apple threatened with by Robert Mueller and the Office of the Special Counsel for them to abandon their firm stance against turning over user data and access to federal investigators? Surely they didn’t reason that two mass shooters were more deserving of their tough stand against government overreach and backdoor programs? There must be some explanation as to how they could give the federal government the power to access our privately held devices and accounts at will right?

You may not like Roger Stone and you may not agree with him. However, he has been charged with non-violent process crimes that have nothing to do with Russian collusion. Robert Mueller’s team has yet to provide one scintilla of evidence that points to real Russian collusion, instead using his unchecked power and un-elected authority to exact political revenge on the people who stopped his pal Hillary Clinton from becoming President.

This should concern Americans on all ends of the political spectrum. Right now it is Roger Stone… but anyone who dared imagine anything other than President Hillary Rodham Clinton is sitting in the cross-hairs of rogue prosecutor and his all too willing Gestapo goon squad.

Stone has mounted a vigorous defense and plans to defend his honor by any legal means necessary.

cbsnews

Published  2 months ago

After two years, the committee's chairman sees no collusion, but says some questions will linger for decades

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

A federal judge grilled Special Counsel Robert Mueller team earlier this week on its claims that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort intentionally lied to investigators, according to a newly released, partially redacted court transcript released Thursday.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

One day after President Trump decried what he called "the politics of revenge" and "partisan investigations" in his State of the Union address, Democratic House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff announced a new wide-ranging probe into the president's foreign business dealings and Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

True Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz is calling for fairness in punishment to those who lie to Congress, singling out former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, former Attorney General Eric Holder, and several others.

Introducing a resolution this week, Gaetz pointed out a longtime ally to President Donald Trump, Roger Stone — who pleaded not guilty after he was arrested for five counts of lying to Congress — while others go unpunished, according to the Washington Examiner.

I thought Robert Mueller was supposed to be investigating #RussianCollusion, now he has become a glorified hall monitor enforcing the provisions of lying to #Congress. The problem is he is enforcing them unequally. So, I am introducing the Justice for all Act. @TuckerCarlson pic.twitter.com/HQUCYsGuIr

“Unfortunately, it often seems that we have a two-tiered justice system at work; certain people have the book thrown at them, while others face no consequences at all for their behavior,” Gaetz said, according to the Washington Examiner. “This is unfair and wrong, and I hope to correct this with my resolution.”

Gaetz’s “Justice for All” resolution, H.Res.97, calls for those lying to Congress to be “prosecuted equitably.”

“That stops today,” Gaetz wrote on Twitter, discussing his bill.- READ MORE

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Sinclair Broadcasting Group has released exclusive footage from Roger Stone’s home surveillance cameras showing how the FBI breached his home and took him barefooted out into his front yard shortly before dawn on Friday, January 25th. For the first time, the world is seeing segments of Roger Stone’s arrest from the perspective of his home […]

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Three years after Apple refused to give the federal government access to the devices used by the San Bernadino terrorists who killed and injured dozens in a mass shooting event, the company has given the office of the Special Counsel complete access to Trump advisor Roger Stone’s iCloud account, reports Apple Insider.

According to the Washington Post, Apple objected to giving the federal government backdoor access to the shooters iPhones, claiming it would “set a dangerous precedent.”

“From the beginning, we objected to the FBI’s demand that Apple build a backdoor into the iPhone because we believed it was wrong and would set a dangerous precedent. As a result of the government’s dismissal, neither of these occurred. This case should never have been brought.”

Fast forward to present, and we see that Apple no longer seems to have the same privacy concerns it once did in 2015. Without any fight, they simply turned over Roger Stone’s iCloud passwords and God knows what else, because Orange Man Bad. The fact that Apple views a political persecution less of a hill to die on than protecting the rights of terrorists who killed and maimed dozens of Americans is quite telling.

More from the Washington Post on Apple’s refusal to turn over access to the San Bernandino shooters devices…

“If allowed to stand, the order in Apple’s case would have forced company engineers to create software to disable a phone security feature so that the FBI could try its hand at unlocking the device by cracking a numeric password. Apple quickly resisted, arguing that forcing it to create such software would violate the company’s constitutional rights and weaken privacy for users around the world.”

Which makes us wonder… what exactly was Apple threatened with by Robert Mueller and the Office of the Special Counsel for them to abandon their firm stance against turning over user data and access to federal investigators? Surely they didn’t reason that two mass shooters were more deserving of their tough stand against government overreach and backdoor programs? There must be some explanation as to how they could give the federal government the power to access our privately held devices and accounts at will right?

You may not like Roger Stone and you may not agree with him. However, he has been charged with non-violent process crimes that have nothing to do with Russian collusion. Robert Mueller’s team has yet to provide one scintilla of evidence that points to real Russian collusion, instead using his unchecked power and un-elected authority to exact political revenge on the people who stopped his pal Hillary Clinton from becoming President.

This should concern Americans on all ends of the political spectrum. Right now it is Roger Stone… but anyone who dared imagine anything other than President Hillary Rodham Clinton is sitting in the cross-hairs of rogue prosecutor and his all too willing Gestapo goon squad.

Stone has mounted a vigorous defense and plans to defend his honor by any legal means necessary.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Roger Stone Roger Stone decided to take a stand and fight back against the corrupt Obama-appointed judge threatening to silence him with a gag order that would prevent him from talking to the media about the charges brought against him by dirty cop Mueller.  Us District Judge Amy Berman Jackson has been threatening a gag […]

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

The president laid out an agenda that wasn't Republican or Democratic — it was one for the American people

Sara A. Carter

Published  2 months ago

Republicans with the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence submitted a motion Tuesday to immediately publish dozens of witness transcripts in the Russia Trump investigation.

IJR - Independent Journal Review

Published  2 months ago

Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz is calling for fairness in punishment to those who lie to Congress, singling out former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, former Attorney General Eric Holder, and several others.

Introducing a resolution this week, Gaetz pointed out a longtime ally to President Donald Trump, Roger Stone — who pleaded not guilty after he was arrested for five counts of lying to Congress — while others go unpunished, according to the Washington Examiner.

Watch the video below:

I thought Robert Mueller was supposed to be investigating #RussianCollusion, now he has become a glorified hall monitor enforcing the provisions of lying to #Congress. The problem is he is enforcing them unequally. So, I am introducing the Justice for all Act. @TuckerCarlson pic.twitter.com/HQUCYsGuIr

— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) February 1, 2019

“Unfortunately, it often seems that we have a two-tiered justice system at work; certain people have the book thrown at them, while others face no consequences at all for their behavior,” Gaetz said, according to the Washington Examiner. “This is unfair and wrong, and I hope to correct this with my resolution.”

Gaetz’s “Justice for All” resolution, H.Res.97, calls for those lying to Congress to be “prosecuted equitably.”

“That stops today,” Gaetz wrote on Twitter, discussing his bill.

Lying to Congress is a serious offense. Unfortunately, it appears certain people have the book thrown at them while others face no consequences at all.

That stops today. My "Justice For All" bill requires equal punishment for those who lie to Congress. #Hillary #Comey #Clapper

— Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) February 4, 2019

According to the resolution, Comey claimed he never authorized anyone to leak information to the media, “despite reports from the Office of the Inspector General indicating his response was likely untrue.”

Clinton said “there was nothing marked classified on my e-mails, either sent or received,” but it was “proven untrue” by FBI and the Office of the Inspector General reports, according to the resolution.

Additionally, the resolution states that Holder “provided false information” about the “Fast and Furious” program, along with two other instances of providing false information.

Gaetz’s resolution also targets former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and former Director of the Exempt Organizations Unit of the Internal Revenue Service Lois Lerner.

TheHill

Published  2 months ago

A prosecutor working with Robert Mueller's office of the special counsel has exited the team and returned to the Justice Department as news reports indicate that the investigation could be nearing its conclusion.

Scott Meisler left the special counsel probe in December, a spokesman told CNN, but remains active on cases related to the Mueller probe to which he was assigned before his December departure.

"Scott Meisler concluded his detail with the Special Counsel's Office in December 2018 and returned to the Criminal Division but continues to represent the office on specific pending matters that were assigned to him during his detail," the special counsel's office said.

A spokesman for the special counsel's office didn't immediately confirm CNN's reporting when contacted Wednesday.

Reports of Meisler's departure come days after acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker told reporters that the probe was "close to being completed."

“I hope that we can get the report from Director Mueller as soon as possible,” he said at the end of January.

The special counsel's investigation has reentered headlines in recent weeks with the arrest and indictment of Roger Stone, a former adviser and longtime confidant of President Trump, on charges of witness tampering and obstruction.

Stone has entered a plea of not guilty, and vowed to fight the special counsel's efforts to prosecute him or the president.

“The idea that a 29-member SWAT team in full tactical gear with assault weapons would surround my house, 17 vehicles in my front yard, including two armored vehicles, a helicopter overhead … and that I would open the door looking down the barrel of assault weapons, that I would be frog-marched out front barefooted, handcuffed when they simply could have contacted me,” Stone said of his arrest last month.

POLITICO

Published  2 months ago

The House Intelligence Committee voted on Wednesday to send dozens of witness interview transcripts from its Russia investigation to special counsel Robert Mueller, who could use them to prosecute potential instances of perjury.

It’s the first act of the intelligence panel under the leadership of Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who has vowed to revive the committee’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Mueller has already prosecuted some Trump associates for lying to Congress.

The panel’s Democrats have long suggested that Donald Trump Jr. and other witnesses might have lied to the committee as part of its investigation, and they’ve publicly encouraged Mueller to examine whether perjury charges are warranted against him or others.

Federal investigators have already used some of the committee’s transcripts to prosecute at least two longtime Trump associates for perjury.

Last month, Mueller charged Roger Stone, a former top Trump adviser, with lying to the House Intelligence Committee. Those charges were announced a month after Mueller asked the committee for Stone’s interview transcripts, a request that was granted. Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, pleaded guilty to making false statements to both the House and Senate intelligence panels about the failed Trump Tower Moscow project.

In advance of the vote, the GOP side of the committee released a statement calling for full transparency with the interview transcripts.

“Republicans are happy the Democrats are joining us in reiterating what the Republican-led committee already voted to do in September 2018—make all the transcripts available to the executive branch, including the Special Counsel’s office, as part of the process of publishing them for the American people to see,” the members said.

They also called on the committee to “immediately publish all the unclassified transcripts that we previously sent to the executive branch” and to “subpoena numerous witnesses.” But a Republican motion to publicly release the unclassified transcripts was denied, according to Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas).

Democrats wanted to give Mueller access to the transcripts sooner, and they accused House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) of waiting too long to formally name the panel’s Republican members in order to slow down that process.

Cohen was slated to testify before the House Intelligence Committee behind closed doors on Friday, but Schiff said on Wednesday the appearance would be postponed until Feb. 28 “in the interests of the investigation.”

Trump and his allies have tried to downplay the charges against Stone and Cohen, claiming they don’t prove any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Stone has pleaded not guilty and has vowed to fight the charges against him, while Cohen has been cooperating with federal investigators and has said he regrets lying out of loyalty to Trump.

When Republicans controlled the committee last year, then-Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) ended the panel’s Russia investigation and concluded that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives.

But Democrats said they would press on with the probe, arguing that key witnesses had not been interviewed. Schiff is essentially moving to revive the investigation, placing a new focus on potential money-laundering and pledging to dive into the Trump Organization’s finances, among other issues.

Raw Story

Published  2 months ago

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday said that any corrupt activities surrounding President Donald Trump’s inauguration had “nothing to do with the Trump White House.”

During an interview with CNN’s John Berman, Sanders rejected the notion that a sweeping subpoena of documents related to possible corruption related to Trump’s inaugural committee reflected poorly on the president at all.

However, Berman pointed out that Sanders had tried using this same defense in the wake of the indictments or convictions of some of his closest associates, including longtime ally Roger Stone, former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former “fixer” Michael Cohen.

Sanders, however, denied that president deserves blame for associating himself with multiple convicted felons.

“Those things that have taken place have absolutely nothing to do with the president,” she said. “They have everything to do with the fact that people are spending their lives doing nothing but trying to find negatives when, in fact, the president has been incredibly successful.”

Watch the video below.

Trump’s SOTU attacks on investigations look like a desperate Hail Mary to escape political doom

The most memorable line from President Donald Trump's State of the Union address was his…

‘More indictments of Russians’: Mueller’s new court filings sending strong signals Trump probe isn’t over

Recent court filings suggest special counsel Robert Mueller is planning to indict additional Russians for…

Ocasio-Cortez: Trump’s attack on Socialism shows he’s ‘scared’ of popular progressive policies

While Republicans and many Democrats rose and enthusiastically applauded President Donald Trump's attack on socialism…

infowars

Published  2 months ago

Video surveillance footage of the FBI raid on Roger Stone’s house appears to show authorities giving directions to awaiting CNN reporters before the arrest, prompting fresh speculation as to whether the news network was tipped off in advance.

Despite the road leading to Stone’s home being closed off at both ends, a CNN camera crew and reporters were allowed inside the bubble to catch events live as they unfolded. According to Stone, his neighbors who were out walking their dogs were told to go inside, but CNN was allowed to stay.

Still Photos;

During an interview following the raid, CNN producer David Shortell admitted that he was “waiting” outside Roger Stone’s house at 5am, an hour before FBI agents and police arrived to arrest the former Donald Trump associate.

Shortell claimed that his “reporter’s instinct” was to thank and that he “thought maybe something was happening” because of “unusual Grand Jury activity in Washington DC yesterday”.

CNN producer @davidgshortell describes the moment Roger Stone was taken into custody by the FBI. The longtime Donald Trump associate has been indicted by a grand jury on charges brought by special counsel Robert Mueller https://t.co/wUJEIkKDTw pic.twitter.com/AJ3JWWSHs3

— CNN (@CNN) January 25, 2019

However, despite vigorous denials by CNN, questions continued to swirl.

Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker suggested during his testimony earlier today before the House Judiciary Committee that CNN may have been tipped off to the FBI’s raid, prompting CNN justice correspondent Evan Perez to accuse Whitaker of “trying to give oxygen to a conspiracy”.

As we reported earlier, the surveillance footage itself was not released by Stone and was likely leaked by someone inside the House or Senate intelligence committee.

Roger Stone will be on the Alex Jones Show today to discuss latest developments.

More exclusive photos from the raid can be seen below. Video footage will be added to this article later.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

Raw Story

Published  2 months ago

Trump confidante Roger Stone complained on Monday that he will not be able to raise money for his legal defense if a judge issues a gag order in the case.

While speaking to Phoenix radio station KFYI, Stone insisted that he would continue to support President Donald Trump in the face of charges of obstruction and witness tampering that have been put forth by special counsel Robert Mueller.

Stone noted that he “was one of the first staffers hired” for Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

“The judge, as you probably know, is considering issuing a gag for me,” Stone explained. “And that’s problematic for my legal defense and I can only do that by speaking out.”

Stone then encouraged listeners to contribute at his website.

“If I can no longer do that then I will not have the resources to fight these charges,” he said.

According to Stone, the case against him has left him “virtually broke.”

At a hearing on Friday, Judge Amy Berman Jackson insisted that the case is “a criminal proceeding and not a public relations campaign.” She cited “extrajudicial statements by the defendant” while suggesting the gag order.

Jackson has asked both Stone’s attorneys and the prosecution to respond in writing to a possibility of a gag order later this week.

Listen to the interview below from KFYI.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

The president laid out an agenda that wasn't Republican or Democratic — it was one for the American people

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

Donald Trump won 30 states in the 2016 presidential election. If the economy keeps going strong and security barriers are built on the southern border, it would be tough to imagine 45 losing in 2020.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

A MS-13 murder was captured on the 7 train in New York City. The horrific footage was captured by Progressive Action. You can see the MS-13 activists wrestling outside the 7 train and then you hear bullets flying. Via John Cardillo: Full unedited video of MS-13 murder on 7 Train in NYC. ***Graphic Credit @progressiveact […]

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Roger Stone Attorneys Provide Evidence of FBI Leak Ahead Of Conservative Author and Activist’s Arrest

Just over a week after his televised arrest was carried exclusively by CNN, attorneys for the longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone have sent a letter to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees detailing how some reporters may have received an early draft copy of the indictment.

Documents obtained exclusively by The Gateway Pundit show a copy of the draft indictment without the PACER filing number or official stamps of the court, with metadata on the document identifying it as being authored by “AAW”, who is suspected to be lead Special Counsel prosecutor Andrew Weissmann.

CNN’s camera crew allegedly arrived at Stone’s residence a whole hour before the raid and CNN’s Sara Murray provided Stone’s attorney with a draft copy of the indictment in an early morning communique to confirm the FBI raid and arrest.

CNN was the only camera crew on the scene of the FBI raid on Roger Stone’s home.

While CNN has spent an entire week claiming there presence at the FBI raid on Stone’s South Florida home was a combination of luck and hard work, this evidence proves that their “source” was indeed the Office of the Special Counsel, who colluded with the notoriously anti-Trump news network to produce a propaganda broadcast of the arrest that is reminiscent of the Nazi era tactics of the Gestapo and propaganda ministry lead by Joseph Goebbels.

Stone’s attorneys are asking both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees to investigate these leaks and provide answers to the American people on how someone could have obtained sealed grand jury indictments.

Here is a copy of the letter by Grant J. Smith.

Here is a copy of the Metadata that shows the copy CNN obtained came from the FBI and not the courts.

The DC judge in Mr. Stone’s case has claimed that the New York Times bestselling author and political commentator’s vigorous public defense against the sham charges being leveled against him could “taint the jury”, though she has failed to address CNN’s role in Stone’s arrest, or the illegal nature of CNN obtaining a sealed draft indictment.

** Roger Stone spent the past few days in DC for two court appearances and a media blitz to defend his honor. To help Roger fight back against this rogue prosecutor, patriots can visit StoneDefenseFund.com.

Big League Politics

Published  2 months ago

Saturday evening, Big League Politics’ Luke Rohlfing caught up with Roger Stone to discuss a variety of topics, including who Stone thinks tipped CNN off to the FBI raid at his Florida home.

“I think Josh Campbell of CNN, who’s a former special assistant to James Comey, and I think he should be questioned under oath by the Senate Judiciary Committee to find out how it is possible, because we now know that CNN’s truck arrived roughly 30 minutes before the FBI strike force,” Stone said. “I’m hopeful that Senator Graham will get to the bottom of that, because since they were executing a search warrant, the leak of that search warrant in advance violates the law.”

Stone also discussed the effect the raid has had on his family, particularly his wife.

“She’s traumatized, as you might expect,” Stone said of the raid. “She’s not guilty of any crime, but she was rousted from the house. She’s not allowed to use her cell phone all day. She’s not allowed to even go in the bathroom without be watched. She cannot go to the bathroom without being observed. Yet she’s not accused of any crime. Seems to me to be a violation of her Fourth Amendment rights.”

“They took her computers,” Stone continued. “They took her electronic devices. This is an extraordinarily police-state oriented overreach, but I think it’s backfired very badly on Robert Mueller and the deep state.”

Stone spoke about rumors of a potential gag order, which would require him to remain silent while court proceedings continue.

“If the court imposes [a gag order] I would obviously adhere to the order of the court, but I would also have the right to appeal the order,” Stone said. “Let’s see what [the judge] does. The lawyers will submit papers shortly. The purpose of a potential gag order is to not poison a potential jury pool, but I would argue that the raid on my house had the purpose of poisoning a potential jury pool. I ‘m hopeful the court will take that into consideration.”

Big League Politics will have continued coverage of our exclusive interview with Roger Stone. Stay tuned!

TheHill

Published  2 months ago

“Whom did Donald Trump Jr. speak to on his phone in between calls setting up the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russians?” That is the question the New York Times asked about “one of the more tantalizing mysteries of the whole Russia affair” in a glossy report on the campaign.

Hundreds of stories referenced the “blocked numbers” and speculated that those belonged to President Trump, who wanted an update on collusion efforts from his son. Last year, when asked by Wolf Blitzer of CNN if he was confirming that Trump Jr. phoned his father, House Intelligence Committee member Andre Carson simply said, “Stay tuned.” So we did, until this week, when it was revealed that Trump Jr. apparently phoned two business associates. The mystery over the blocked calls follows a series of overhyped collusion points that failed to pan out.

With the approaching final report from special counsel Robert Mueller, it may be useful to consider the current state of the collusion case. After dozens of indictments and filings, there is much that has been disclosed by the special counsel on Russian linkages and contacts. Congress and the media also have disclosed a fair degree of evidence from witnesses called before the federal grand jury and committees on Capitol Hill.

However, the publicly known case for collusion remains strikingly incomplete, if not incoherent. What is uniformly missing from the cottage industry of collusion theories is an acknowledgment of the threshold requirements of an actual crime. There is no crime in “colluding” with Russians without some cognizable criminal act or conspiracy to commit such an act. While some have dangerously stretched the criminal code to incriminate Trump, the most obvious viable and crime remains hacking into the email systems of the Democrats.

Mueller has thoroughly identified and detailed the Russian hacking and trolling operations to influence the 2016 election. Yet, these filings notably lack any link to the Trump campaign, let alone advance knowledge or support for the Russian operation. Indeed, key links have become even more implausible as part of a conspiracy with Russian intelligence.

First, there is the question of why Russian intelligence would tell the notoriously unpredictable and impulsive Donald Trump about one of its riskiest international operations in decades. Russian spymasters are not known for putting entire operations, or the future of Russian foreign relations for that matter, just one tweet away from utter destruction.

Second, there is the curious pattern of Trump officials trying to find contacts at WikiLeaks to obtain the Hillary Clinton emails. If there was such collusion, why were Trump associates like Roger Stone or Alexander Nix, who led consulting company Cambridge Analytica that worked for the Trump campaign, seeking contacts with access to the information?

Third, even Trump associates like Michael Cohen, who actively sought contacts with Russians about business in Moscow, also seemed to get nowhere. Indeed, Cohen had to try to contact aides to Vladimir Putin through public mailboxes on the internet. Like the Trump Tower meeting, the efforts made by Cohen during the campaign had failed miserably.

The public record reveals more confusion than collusion in the Trump campaign. If this was a grand conspiracy, there is a paucity of American conspirators and a plethora of clueless associates searching for access to WikiLeaks material. Indeed, in his indictments of various Russians, Mueller expressly said that any contact with them was unwitting, which happened also to be point emphasized by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

This all brings us to some type of “post hoc” conspiracy, or in this case, “post hack” conspiracy. The problem with this theory is that it is not a crime to seek access to material from organizations like WikiLeaks or other whistleblowers. If it were a crime, then journalists, campaigns, and public interest group all would be subject to regular criminal prosecution.

Indeed, the Clinton campaign spent massive amounts of money to fund the work of former British spy Christopher Steele and opposition research firm Fusion GPS to seek dirt on Trump from foreign sources, including Russian intelligence. The Clinton campaign then repeatedly denied its connection to that opposition research, until after the election when reporters found evidence that it hid its funding as legal expenses. Was that some crime of collusion or conspiracy before or after the fact? No. Likewise, it did not become a crime when Fusion GPS officials refused to testify before Congress, invoking the privilege against self incrimination.

The absence of a cognizable crime has not stopped conspiracy theories based on key alleged collusion points. There was the Steele dossier, which the Justice Department and FBI during the Obama administration used to secure secret surveillance against Trump aides like Carter Page, who has never been charged with a crime. Finally, there was the Trump Tower meeting. Nothing else fits a collusion theory better than some secret meeting with Russians in Trump Tower. The president reinforced that image by drafting a false account of the purpose of the meeting.

However, the meeting never seemed particularly secretive, let alone exclusive, for a conspiracy. It seems nonsensical for Russian intelligence to arrange a meeting of conspirators in the most iconic location of the campaign, with half the press corps camped downstairs. Yet, the Russians dispensed with the classic hollowed out pumpkins and sought to arrange the whole thing with an email from a music promoter filled with intrigue. Moreover, the meeting seems to refute any prior or existing arrangement.

Indeed, emails had to induce the meeting by falsely promising evidence of criminal conduct by Clinton. If this were a conspiracy, one would think the Russians would do the opposite of promising to talk about adoptions of Russian children but really come to hand over Clinton dirt. The Russians did not even know who would be in attendance. In the end, all witnesses confirmed that the meeting was short and ended when it became clear the Russians wanted to talk about adoptions rather than Clinton crimes.

Finally, there is the long discussed collusion point surrounding Stone and WikiLeaks. While Mueller certainly can add charges, his indictment of Stone was based on overlapping false statements from a transcript that he only recently obtained from Congress. It does not include any collusion crimes investigated over the last two years. Indeed, Mueller does not confirm a meeting, let alone collusion, between Stone and WikiLeaks.

The last two years often seem like a concerted effort to disprove “Occam’s Razor,” the theory that the simplest explanation is usually the right one. As long hoped for links fell through, more complex theories filled the void of collusion. Yet, the simplest explanation still remains most likely, that the Trump campaign, like virtually every reporter and political operative in Washington, wanted to see the WikiLeaks material and any dirt on the Clintons, just as the Clinton campaign paid for any dirt on Trump. The Russian efforts to influence our elections also is neither novel nor new.

Indeed, the United States has engaged in hacking not just our enemies but our allies, as well as intervening in the elections of other countries, just as many of those same countries attempt against us. There is nothing “tantalizing” or “mysterious” in such an explanation, because it is more factual than aspirational. The boring truth here is that criminal collusion theories are weaker today than they were a year ago. While Mueller has found ample basis to charge people with false statements, the record of these filings shows more confusion than collusion in the Trump campaign.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

Newsweek

Published  2 months ago

Donald Trump Jr. will be indicted and used by special counsel Robert Mueller to ensnare his father President Donald Trump, a former prosecutor predicted.

During a segment on MSNBC’s AM Joy on Saturday, Rick Butler, a former Department of Justice public corruption prosecutor, and host Joy Reid discussed the latest developments in Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and possible collusion between Trump’s campaign team and Moscow officials.

“Does Mueller have to indict Trump in order to put the proper coda at the end of the long symphony?” Reid asked the ex-prosecutor.

“Mueller is not going to indict Trump, because he’s going to follow the DOJ employee handbook, but he has leverage over the president in terms of Donald Trump, Jr.,” Butler explained. “We’ve seen Mueller use people’s kids to get to folks in the past. He could do this with Donald Trump, Jr.”

He continued: “Trump, Jr. went into the Senate Intelligence Committee, took an oath to tell the truth, and lied his butt off.”

“You think he will get indicted?” Reid asked.

“If Roger Stone and Michael Cohen get indicted for lying to the Intelligence Committee and Donald, Jr. lied, then he gets indicted too,” Butler responded.

Donald Trump Jr. speaks to West Virginia voters at a campaign event for Republican U.S Senate candidate Patrick Morrisey October 22, 2018 in Inwood, West Virginia. On Saturday, a federal prosecutor on MSNBC predicted that Donald Trump Jr. will get indicted and special counsel Robert Mueller will use that as leverage against his father President Donald Trump.

Earlier this week, Rep. Jackie Speier (CA), a Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee who grilled the president’s eldest son on his Russian contacts in December 2017, restated her concerns that Trump Jr. lied to the committee after suggesting in December that he lied on “at least two occasions.”

When asked by MSNBC Live host Katy Tur on Tuesday whether she suspected that anyone in Trump’s circle, in addition to the president’s former adviser Roger Stone, lied to the committee, she suggested Trump Jr. without directly naming him.

“I am concerned that other people lied to the committee and I wouldn’t be surprised if we find out through the Mueller investigation and report that he has identified others,” the Democratic representative said.

“Who potentially do you think could have lied?” Tur pressed.

“Well, I’m not going to go there with you right at the moment, but I think you could probably figure out. People within the Trump Organization who have testified before the committee,” Speier said, a description that pointed to Trump Jr.

After attending a Trump tower meeting in June 2016 where he was offered information about former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Trump Jr. told the committee he didn’t disclose the meeting to his father. However, Trump’s former attorney and personal “fixer” Michael Cohen, who pleaded guilty to making false statements to Congress last year, disagreed with Trump Jr.’s claims.

Watch the MSNBC segment below:

The Inquisitr

Published  2 months ago

Former adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton, Mike Penn, argued in an op-ed written for The Hill and published on Saturday that the Clinton campaign had “more contacts” with Russians than the Trump campaign.

Penn’s piece takes aim at Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian election interference and possible coordination with the Trump campaign. President Donald Trump is being accused of collaborating with official Moscow to sway the 2016 presidential election in his favor.

As detailed by a previous Inquisitr report, the most recent development in Mueller’s probe is the indictment of longtime Republican operative Roger Stone. Stone was indicted in the District of Columbia on charges of false statements and obstruction. CNN filmed Stone’s arrest, which drew criticism from Donald Trump.

Mike Penn appears to be in agreement with the president. “Something struck a raw nerve in this country when 26 agents showed up with automatic weapons drawn in a pre-dawn raid to arrest Roger Stone, terrorizing his deaf wife,” he wrote.

According to Penn, the manner in which Stone’s arrest was carried out demonstrates that Robert Mueller is a “public relations-conscious” prosecutor, and shows that Mueller is abusing his “enormous power.”

According to the Clintons’ former adviser, although it is obvious that the Trump campaign had “a string of contacts” with Russians, the accusations brought up by the special counsel’s office have “not amounted to anything remotely resembling the preposterous idea” that Donald Trump is a puppet of the Kremlin.

The Clinton campaign, according to Mike Penn, had more contacts with Russians than the Trump campaign. Both sides were simply trying to dig up dirt on their opponents, he argues.

“If anything, the Clinton campaign had more contacts with Russians in its attempt to destroy Trump. Frankly, neither of the campaigns conspired to do anything but to try to get the drop on their opponent.”

Robert Mueller’s investigation, according to the former adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton, is “the most destructive force here” because the special counsel’s office committed a “string of constitutionally questionable actions.”

"Mueller’s abuses on view for the world to see" (@TheHillOpinion) https://t.co/dnCX7jRpkr pic.twitter.com/nOofxxPLtO

— The Hill (@thehill) February 2, 2019

Furthermore, according to Penn, Mueller’s investigation has impacted foreign policy. Instead of developing better relations with Russia in an effort to distance it from countries such as China and Iran, the United States is hostile toward Vladimir Putin’s country.

While arguing that there was no coordination between official Moscow and the Trump campaign, Penn noted that both the Russians and the Chinese were spreading disinformation during the 2016 presidential campaign. He added that the United States has done the same to both countries.

Concluding the article, former adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton, Mike Penn, touched on Robert Mueller’s eagerly-anticipated report. The special counsel’s report will, according to Penn, “be designed to sow doubt rather than create finality.”

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Guest post by Joe Hoft Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointed liberal judge with a corrupt disposition and anger towards Americans who think differently than Obama, continues put her own distorted interpretation of reality ahead of the US Constitution. She is now overseeing Roger Stone’s case and is threatening to put Stone under a […]

cbsnews

Published  2 months ago

The following is a transcript of the interview with President Trump airing Sunday, Feb. 3, 2019, on "Face the Nation"

Homeland Security

Published  2 months ago

"Did anyone at the FBI, DOJ, or the Special Counsel's office alert CNN?"

Talking Points Memo

Published  2 months ago

How Did Roger Stone Know About The Access Hollywood Tape?

Conservative Tribune

Published  2 months ago

Expect a lot of unhappy days like this for Congressman Adam Schiff. The man has an impossible task, but for that you should give him no sympathy. It’s not a worthwhile task and it shouldn’t even be taken on, but he’s taking it on because that invested in the increasingly discredited notion that the Trump…

American Greatness

Published  2 months ago

After what seemed to be a done deal following a relatively smooth public hearing last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee now has delayed until February 7 the vote to confirm William Barr, President Trump’s nominee for attorney general. The reason, according to news reports, is lingering concerns about how Trump’s incoming attorney general would manage the investigation of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, which is soon expected to conclude.

Despite Barr’s repeated assurances that he will follow Justice Department rules in his handling of Mueller’s final report, as well as a pledge to resist any attempted interference by the White House, Democrats on the committee remain unconvinced. “[Barr’s] answer was not particularly reassuring or clear as to the public disclosure of the Mueller report,” Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell earlier this week.

Democrats also have accused Barr of bias against the Mueller investigation based on a detailed memo he authored last year that objected to the special counsel’s reported interest in whether President Trump obstructed justice. Some have suggested Barr should recuse himself from the investigation, which would be a repeat of a terrible mistake made by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in 2017.

The committee’s vote is scheduled to take place one day before acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker testifies in front of the House Judiciary Committee on a number of topics, including the Mueller probe; Trump foes claim Whitaker should have recused himself from oversight of the investigation based on some of his past comments, even though a Justice Department ethics review cleared him of any conflicts.

This one-two punch has a purpose: To taint Barr’s impartiality and discredit his office on all matters related to Trump-Russia. Why? Because during his confirmation hearing, Barr agreed—at the behest of Republican senators—to begin his own inquiry into who, why, and how the FBI launched several investigations into Trump’s presidential campaign and, eventually, into the president himself.

As indictments unrelated to Trump-Russia collusion pile up, Republican lawmakers and Trump’s base increasingly are outraged that the culprits behind perhaps the biggest political scandal in American history remain untouched. Barr signaled that the good fortune of these scoundrels could soon take a dramatic shift under his stewardship.

A few days before Barr’s hearing, the New York Times reported that in May 2017, the FBI opened an investigation into the sitting U.S. president purportedly based on suspicions he was a Russian foreign agent. Then-acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe—whom the Times does not mention by name at any time in the 1,800 words it took to report this information—initiated the probe immediately after Trump fired his predecessor, James Comey.

McCabe was fired last year and now is under criminal investigation for lying to federal agents.

“The decision to investigate Trump himself was an aggressive move by FBI officials who were confronting the chaotic aftermath of the firing of Comey and enduring the president’s verbal assaults on the Russia investigation as a witch hunt,” according to the Times. Just days after McCabe opened the investigation into President Trump, it was handed over to Mueller’s team.

That news did not sit well with Republicans on Capitol Hill. A clearly-agitated Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) raised the matter with Barr during his opening comments, reading aloud the Times’ headline from its January 11 front-page bombshell. “Would you promise this committee to look into this and tell us whether or not…a counterintelligence investigation was opened up at the FBI against President Trump? Have you ever heard of such a thing in all the time you’ve been associated with the Department of Justice,” the committee chair asked the nominee.

Barr, the former attorney general for President George H. W. Bush, replied that he had never heard of such a situation.

Graham then ticked off a list of names tied to the scandal, including McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, and Christopher Steele. He mentioned Fusion GPS and that its political opposition research in the form of the “dossier” was used as evidence to secure a FISA warrant to spy on Trump campaign aide Carter Page. Barr pledged to the committee that he would review whether the certification given to the FISA court by bad actors such as Comey and former acting Attorney General Sally Yates on the Page application was accurate. (The Justice Department’s inspector general is also reviewing potential FISA abuses related to the Page case.) Providing false information to the court is perjury.

The South Carolina Republican seems serious about his mission to clean up the Justice Department and hold people accountable. On Wednesday, he sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, demanding answers about the agency’s pre-dawn raid at the home of former Trump confidant Roger Stone and whether the arrest was leaked to CNN. (LOL) Wray has until February 5 to reply.

As Mueller’s work winds down and the public becomes increasingly weary of the sideshow that has yet to produce one charge related to collusion, Democrats, the media and NeverTrumpers are extremely nervous that their dependable cacophony of distraction in cries of “Trump-Russia collusion!” will be gone. Unless the final report produces some major bombshell about Trump or anyone in his orbit, Americans will re-examine what the purpose of this whole exercise was, and fume at the wasted time and money. Some will even question whether the political impartiality of that agency can be trusted again. Many will want answers and it appears as though Barr, in tandem with Senate Republicans, are set to deliver.

Barr could take immediate action once he’s confirmed, focusing on low-hanging fruit, including further declassification of the Page FISA application; the release of emails and texts between key Justice Department officials including Comey and McCabe; and any materials related to the interrogation of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. The testimony of witnesses who appeared before the congressional committee also should be made public, as requested last year by congressional Republicans.

Other materials of public interest include the initiating documents for Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI’s investigation into four Trump campaign aides—which Comey claimed he never saw—and any details about who at the FBI started the unprecedented counterintelligence and criminal investigation into a sitting U.S. president.

And while he’s at it, and before Mueller’s team is finished, Barr should begin a formal inquiry into why the special counsel’s office scrubbed the iPhones used by Peter Strzok and Lisa Page while they worked for Mueller for a brief time in 2017. The phones and the data contained on those devices are public property. Barr needs to find out why that information was not collected and archived since both FBI officials already were under scrutiny. Destroying potential evidence is a crime.

The enormousness of Barr’s task and the devastating consequences for those involved are now coming into clear view. The timing couldn’t be worse for Democrats and NeverTrump Republicans who are desperate to defeat Trump and the GOP in 2020. That’s why we can expect both parties to whip up more criticism of Barr over the next few months. One hopes he will resist that criticism—and both Trump and Graham need to reassure the new attorney general and the American public that his investigation will receive the same amount of protection that was afforded to the Mueller team.

Content created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com.

Photo Credit: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Former FBI Director James Comey lied to Congress.

While under oath fired FBI Director Comey blamed the decision on an underling for not telling Congress for 9 months about an investigation into candidate Trump before the 2016 election.

The underling, former FBI Director of Counterintelligence, Bill Priestap, refuted this and says that it was Comey’s decision to hide this critical information from Congress.

Jeff Carlson at the Epoch Times released a report on Thursday that provides information from an unsourced leak of a congressional hearing transcript highlighting the testimony of former FBI Director of Counterintelligence, Bill Priestap. The report is damning and although Priestap certainly appears to be withholding the facts in all his answers, one thing he was clear about – Former FBI Director James Comey made the call to not tell Congress about the ongoing investigation into candidate Donald Trump for nine months –

According to the Conservative Tree House, Preistap’s testimony is in direct conflict with Comey’s –

The question surrounds why congressional leadership, including the Gang-of-Eight, were not briefed about the opening of a counterintelligence operation into a presidential campaign. The investigation began on July 31st, 2016. Congress was not notified until early March 2017.

Rep. Jordan: I guess what I’m asking, Mr. Priestap, is who made the decision not to brief Congress in this particular instance?

Mr. Priestap: Mr. Comey.

This answer seems to be directly contradicting the March 20, 2017, testimony of FBI Director James Comey. Watch that first 3:00 minutes, ending with: ”because of the sensitivity of the matter.”

Last week, President Trump’s longtime friend Roger Stone was arrested at 5am in the morning by more FBI agents than there were Navy Seals at the Osama Bin Laden raid. The FBI stormed the 66 year old’s home and even had FBI agents on the water and in the air. The FBI also notified CNN because they were on site filming the action as it occurred. Stone has no guns and a deaf wife his age who was made to stand outside in her bare feet and nightgown while the FBI pillaged their house. Stone was arrested for allegedly lying to Congress.

So the question is, since we now know Comey lied to Congress, when will James Comey be arrested and be the victim of FBI harassment like Roger Stone was?

TheHill

Published  2 months ago

Something struck a raw nerve in this country when 26 agents showed up with automatic weapons drawn in a pre-dawn raid to arrest Roger Stone, terrorizing his deaf wife. Suddenly, all the mumbo jumbo about special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation being objective and focused on national security melted away in the face of a police-state action so completely inexplicable.

There could be no real excuse for such a potentially dangerous, life-threatening action except to use police power for the purpose of intimidation, under the color and cover of law.

Imagine the outcry if 17 vehicles and an amphibious unit had shown up to take one of Hillary Clinton’s aides into custody for lying about whether she had a mail server. Or to pick up disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner’s laptop. The outrage would have thundered across the country, echoed by the mainstream media. Civil libertarians would have jumped on the bandwagon. Congress would be calling for more supervision and restraints on the power of Mueller and his office.

Now, Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee who put former Trump presidential campaign chairman Paul Manafort in jail without bail and gagged him, is considering putting a gag order on Stone, a former Trump campaign operative. She said this is a criminal trial, “not a public relations campaign.” So what was CNN doing at Stone’s arrest and how did they get there? The arrest and indictment of Stone are evidence of a very public relations-conscious prosecutor. What were the indictment of Russians beyond the reach of prosecution about, if not PR?

Stone has called this a politically motivated prosecution. He is entitled to his full, unabridged First Amendment rights, especially in the face of such an unprecedented all-powerful, unaccountable machine that has certainly sought to convict him before trial. Stone may or may not be helping himself with his TV interviews but he is entitled to them, and the public has a right to hear him.

I am disappointed that more Democrats in Congress — who would obviously agree that the manner of the arrest and such arbitrary gag orders violate their basic beliefs — don’t join Republicans in questioning these actions for fear that anything that undermines Mueller in turn helps President Trump. They fail to see that the more dishonest they appear, the more they are in fact helping Trump. The true swing voters are not so insipid as to think actions like this are right because they are waged against political opponents. Swing voters don’t have political opponents and are not driven by partisanship. They care more about country than party.

The special counsel has enormous power and this arrest is, perhaps, the clearest, most visible sign of its potential abuse. Remember that Mueller was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein under questionable circumstances and despite Mueller’s own conflicts of interest, having interviewed with Trump for the FBI director job just the day before. He then hired a team filled with Democrats and even lawyers who represented the interests of the Clintons. The discovery of the extreme bias of former FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, through their text messages, appears to be the tip of the iceberg rather than the iceberg. Their text messages while they were in Mueller’s employ have gone missing. Yeah. Right.

The benefits of the $30 million Mueller investigation are sparse to date. We have some meaningless indictments related to a Russian troll farm, some unreported taxes and lobbying, and a series of crimes created by the tactics of the investigation itself.

Yes, there obviously was a string of contacts with Russians who were peddling one thing or another, but they have not amounted to anything remotely resembling the preposterous idea that Donald Trump, a billionaire in his own right, was an agent of Russia. If anything, the Clinton campaign had more contacts with Russians in its attempt to destroy Trump. Frankly, neither of the campaigns conspired to do anything but to try to get the drop on their opponent.

The most destructive force here appears to be the Mueller investigation itself because not only did it commit a string of constitutionally questionable actions, it also it drove a stake into the foreign policy objective of having a better relationship with Russia so as to peel them off of alliances with China, Syria and Iran. Russia needs us a lot more than we need it, and yet the real damage of the Mueller investigation is that it made détente with Russia impossible.

Of course the Russians, like the Chinese in the past, were trying to throw disinformation into our campaign. We had the Voice of America broadcasting for many years right into their society, along with a sophisticated spying apparatus. China, for the first time facing pressure from the United States for its unfair trade actions, is now moving into the vacuum Mueller created and strengthening its alliance with Russia.

Hopefully, the Mueller investigation will now wrap up after two full years. Likely its report will be designed to sow doubt rather than create finality, ignoring that this was all instigated by a fake, discredited dossier. If anyone lied to the FBI and caused the resources of the United States to be wasted, it is Christopher Steele — and yet, there is no evidence that any action is being taken to hold him accountable for the biggest hoax in American history. This is akin, in size and scope, to the Dreyfus affair in France. It may even languish for a while as that case did, but I predict there will be justice eventually for those who falsely created this hit to our democracy and foreign policy.

The act of arresting Roger Stone with an army of lawmen may seem trivial — and yet, it is the most visible action of an investigation drunk with its own power. It reminds us all just how broken this system is when an unelected, unconfirmed appointee can wield this kind of power in a democracy. A gag order would only compound these abuses.

Mark Penn is a managing partner of the Stagwell Group, a private equity firm specializing in marketing services companies, as well as chairman of the Harris Poll and author of “Microtrends Squared.” He served as pollster and adviser to President Clinton from 1995 to 2000, including during Clinton’s impeachment. You can follow him on Twitter @Mark_Penn.

Gizmodo

Published  2 months ago

An organization run by a former Trump campaign statewide director is being investigated by the New York Attorney General’s office for its role in submitting potentially hundreds of thousands of fraudulent comments to the Federal Communications Commission during the agency’s 2017 efforts to rollback Obama-era net neutrality rules.

americanthinker

Published  2 months ago

In a display of raw federal power unseen since Barack Obama rappelled from a Blackhawk helicopter to personally beat Bin Laden to death with an autographed copy of The Audacity of Hope, Roger Stone was arrested at his home by a 29-man, 17-vehicle tactical unit of the FBI.

Another Trump figure has fallen -- the end is near, and the noose is tightening. All Trump associates now fear for their lives and freedom. Yet some people who have committed crimes much more serious than any of the Mueller indictments remain, as always, unafraid. That list, by no means comprehensive, includes, Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Clapper, Brennen, Steele, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Ohr (Mr. and Mrs.), Rice, and Yates.

Some are guilty of lying to Congress or the FBI, mishandling classified information, obstruction, conspiracy, destroying evidence, and much more. A case could be made that the Mueller investigation itself destroyed evidence when it wiped clean the Strzok and Page cellphones to delete text messages requested by IG Horowitz. Yet being a Democrat means never having to say you’re sorry because the rule of law only applies to Republicans and conservatives. There are no pre-dawn, guns-drawn raids to arrest Democrats.

Hillary sold 80% of America’s uranium for a 20-minute, $500,000 Moscow speech by her husband and $140 million in donations to the “Clinton Foundation,” which foundationally was not a charity in any meaningful sense (unless of course, the charitable purpose was to make Bill, and Hill fabulously wealthy).

In contravention of campaign finance law, Hillary paid through her attorneys millions of dollars to a foreign national to use his connections with a foreign government to compile a dossier whereby both the foreign national and the foreign

government could interfere with a presidential election.

She knew her bathroom server was illegal and a risk to national security. But she wanted to keep her crimes secret. Mishandling of classified material and the wholesale flea-marketing of her office and influence are imprisonable offenses.

Yet, “What difference, at that point, does it make?” Hillary’s exempt from prosecution because she’s a Democrat and a bona fide leftist; and that provides blanket immunity. She knew, as did others from the Obama Administration, that a Democrat can’t get arrested in this town.

One can act with impunity when there is no fear of prosecution. Why not harvest ballots to steal elections, provide sanctuary for felonious illegal aliens, lie to Congress, or try to frame a president? Democrats never worry about financial ruin or Mueller going after their families (In like Flynn).

Sally Yates opened the Flynn investigation under the pretense that he violated the Logan Act, a 1799 law widely believed unconstitutional and never successfully used to prosecute anyone, and a law he didn’t violate since talking to the Russian ambassador was his job as National Security Advisor. Yet, John Kerry and his negotiations with the mullahs after Trump canceled the Iran deal was ignored.

Real crimes go unaddressed, while misstatements about lawful actions warrant incarceration. Mueller is fond of false-statement charges where the underlying actions aren’t illegal; he also loosely interprets the definition of “lie.”

Flynn was indicted for lying about lawful actions, as was Stone, and Papadopoulos. Cohen was indicted for testifying negotiations over a Moscow Trump Tower ended in January (2016) when they ended in June. George Papadopoulos told investigators a conversation with suspected CIA spy Joseph Mifsud took place prior to him joining the Trump campaign when he knew before their meeting that his appointment was imminent.

Stone testified he had contact with people solely by phone when he also spoke via email and text. He claimed to have used a single intermediary in communicating with Wikileaks when he used two. He said he didn’t discuss his conversations with his intermediary when he did. Those are three of the seven charges.

Most of Mueller’s indictments are process crimes which came about as a result of his investigation. By making people fear they might have committed a crime, Mueller induces them to lie so they can be indicted and turned against his real target, President Trump.

Clapper lied to Congress, as did Brennan and Comey, who can only remember things when he has a $15 million book to write. McCabe lied to the IG. Barack Obama weaponized federal agencies to attack his political opponents. Hillary sold her office as Secretary of State for money. Strzok disregarded his oath of office and used his power to attempt to destroy Trump. In fact, he guaranteed he’d destroy Trump. Then in testimony before Congress, he smirked with more arrogance than any Covington kid could ever muster. Yet, no arrests.

Hillary destroyed her phones and her illegal server, and Comey leaked classified FBI memos to impel the appointment of his best bro as Special Counsel. Again, no indictments.

Did I mention the newly elected anti-Semitic Islamic congresswoman who married her brother to commit immigration fraud?

Apparently, in America today the only people who should fear prosecution are those who disagree with the “ones we’ve been waiting for” because if you’re a Democrat, you can’t get arrested in this town.

William L. Gensert can be followed on Twitter @williamlgensert

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Judge Napolitano joined Stuart Varney on Varney and Co. on Thursday morning to discuss the Deep State FBI raid on Roger Stone’s home last Friday. As The Gateway Pundit was first to report — the FBI Mueller raid on Roger Stone included more armed agents than the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, […]

Dan Bongino

Published  2 months ago

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is demanding an FBI briefing on the arrest of political adviser Roger Stone who was recently charged by Special Counsel Robert Mueller with obstruction, making false statements, and witness intimidation.

Graham sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray yesterday and expressed his concerns over the tactics used during Stone’s arrest.

Stone was arrested in the early morning last Friday by armed FBI agents in full tactical gear.

In his letter to Wray, Graham wrote, “Although I am sure these tactics would be standard procedure for the arrest of a violent offender, I have questions regarding their necessity in this case.”

He continued, “The American public has had enough of the media circus that surrounds the Special Counsel’s investigation. Yet, the manner of this arrest appears to have only added to the spectacle. Accordingly, I write to seek justification for the tactics used and the timing of the arrest of Mr. Stone.”

Graham requested that the FBI brief the Judiciary Committee by Feb. 5.

Earlier this week, Stone appeared on Fox News’ the Ingraham Angle, and slammed the FBI raid, saying they sent more men to his house than they had to protect the Benghazi compound.

“The whole purpose of this over-the-top raid on my house, in which they sent in more men then were used to protect our compound in Benghazi, was to paint a picture of me coming to poison a jury pool as public enemy number one,” he said.

Former U.S. attorney and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie criticized Mueller’s decision to authorize the FBI raid of Stone’s house, calling it “overkill.”

“I think it’s the wrong thing for prosecutors to do. I think that Mr. Mueller made a mistake in authorizing that, because you’re going to be criticized, and rightfully so, if you’re a prosecutor using those means as a means of intimidation. If you’re using it as a way to protect FBI agents, that’s completely appropriate. And I’ve done it.”

He continued, “…when you get a pound on the door at 6:00 a.m., in the dark and you see a bunch of FBI agents with flak jackets on and semiautomatic weapons, to take somebody out who lied to Congress? To me, that’s overkill.”

I Love My Freedom

Published  2 months ago

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham has a few questions for the FBI about the arrest of Roger Stone. For example, wasn't it curious that CNN was on the scene of the arrest? Here's the bulk of

Dan Bongino

Published  2 months ago

In this episode I address the latest revelations, with regard to the DOJ and the Clinton team, in the plot to take down Trump team. I also address the radical policies of the Democrats running for President and why Howard Schultz creates a problem for them.

News Picks:

Can liberals do basic math? Apparently not.

Did this Spygate figure use her position to research Trump’s children?

A quick synopsis of why our healthcare system is broken.

Senator Lindsey Graham is demanding answers regarding the unnecessary tactics used in the Roger Stone arrest.

Voter fraud is real, and ignoring it won’t make it go away.

President Trump listens to his base on judicial appointments.

Rantt

Published  2 months ago

Debunking Donald Trump’s lies about climate change, an update on the government funding negotiations, and other stories to watch.

Today’s top stories:

1. Climate Catastrophe: As the polar vortex sweeps the nation, Americans are grappling with sub-zero temperatures and at least 20 deaths reported so far. While many areas in the midwest are seeing temperatures well below zero, by Super Bowl Sunday, some temperatures will go up into the 60s. President Trump took to Twitter to remark on the polar vortex, tweeting: “What the hell is going on with Global Waming?” (That “waming” typo is his, not ours.) This is an ignorant, climate change denying tweet that ignores the reality of the existential threat climate change poses to humanity. As we’ve seen, global warming is actually the cause of this and many other extreme weather events, as it speeds up climate change. Global warming is being exacerbated by human-driven carbon emissions, which President Trump is doing everything in power to increase to benefit fossil fuel companies. Note to media: if you report on the polar vortex without mentioning climate change, you’re doing it wrong.

2. Build The Wall That’s Already Built: Appropriation negotiations are underway, in an effort to avoid a February 15th government shutdown. President Trump sent a series of tweets attempting to make the case for his border wall, including one that announced the more troops being sent to the southern border. President Trump also falsely claimed much of his border wall is already built. Meanwhile, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said at a press conference that there will be no money for a wall in the deal, but she is open to some barriers. President Trump responded by claiming if that’s the case, the negotiators are wasting their time. As this back and forth was playing out, US Border Patrol made the largest fentanyl bust in its history. Important to note that this, like the majority of drugs apprehended at the border, happened at a port legal of entry. A wall wouldn’t have prevented that. In other immigration news, the Associated Press reported that ICE has force-fed detainees who were on a hunger strike.

3. Beefing With Intel: In a congressional testimony earlier this week, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and CIA Director Gina Haspel contradicted President Trump’s messaging on ISIS, Iran, North Korea, and other topics. Yesterday, President Trump called them “passive and naive” and later claimed the media misreported their statements, even though the entire country saw the live footage with their own eyes. It culminated with Trump tweeting a photo with him, Coats, and Haspel in the Oval Office, claiming they also said their testimony was mischaracterized. That claim should be taken with several grains of salt.

4. Mueller Moves: In a court filing, Special Counsel Robert Mueller revealed just how much evidence they raided from newly indicted Roger Stone. Mueller has seized several years of “multiple hard drives containing several terabytes of information consisting of, among other things, FBI case reports, search warrant applications and results (e.g., Apple iCloud accounts and email accounts), bank and financial records, and the contents of numerous physical devices (e.g., cellular phones, computers, and hard drives).” This comes as Roger Stone, who was released on bail he could afford unlike hundreds of thousands of poor Black Americans, and Republican allies claimed he was mistreated by investigators. In related news, ABC News reported that the identity of the block calls Donald Trump Jr. had around the time of the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting were with Nascar CEO Brian France and real estate developer Howard Lorber.

5. Senate Rebuke: In a bipartisan 68-to-23 vote, the Senate sent a clear rebuke to President Trump. The vote advanced legislation, written by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell himself, that strongly opposes Trump’s troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.

6. China Talks: After days of negotiations between American and Chinese negotiators, the talks end for now with no new deal. Trump plans to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping amid the tariff war that has rattled markets and ratcheted up global economic uncertainty. If a deal isn’t reached by March 1st, China tariffs will increase to 25% on March 2nd.

This article was adapted from our Rantt Rundown newsletter.

Rantt Media’s comprehensive articles source reporting from top news organizations, but they’re also built on brilliant analysis from our team. We are independently-owned and strive for quality, not clicks. We take pride in being reader-funded so that we are beholden to you, not corporate interests. If you like the work we do, please consider supporting us by signing up for a $1 monthly subscription.

Breitbart

Published  2 months ago

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC), in a letter to Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Christopher Wray on Wednesday, demanded answers on the FBI’s arrest of Roger Stone last week during a pre-dawn raid on his home filmed exclusively by CNN.

“I am concerned about the manner in which the arrest was effectuated, especially the number of agents involved, the tactics employed, the timing of the arrest, and whether the FBI released details of the arrest and the indictment to the press prior to providing this information to Mr. Stone’s attorneys,” he wrote.

Graham said although he has supported Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s ability to conduct his investigation without interference, he is “leery” that a subject of the investigation was arrested in this manner.

“Although I am sure these tactics would be standard procedure for the arrest of a violent offender, I have questions regarding their necessity in this case,” he wrote.

“The American public has had enough of the media circus that surrounds the Special Counsel’s investigation. Yet, the manner of this arrest appears to have only added to the spectacle. Accordingly, I write to seek justification for the tactics used and the timing of the arrest of Mr. Stone.”

Specifically, he asked Wray to answer:

Why was it necessary to arrest Mr. Stone at his home in the early morning hours rather than working through his attorneys to permit him to surrender voluntarily?

Was the manner of Mr. Stone’s arrest consistent with the arrests of, and procedure for the arrests of, similarly charged individuals?

We’re usual procedure for obtaining and executing arrest and search warrants followed with regard to Mr. Stone?

Did the Special Counsel’s office issue a press release and release the indictment to the press prior to informing Mr. Stone’s attorneys of the arrest?

Did anyone at the FBI, DOJ, or the Special Counsel’s office alert CNN, any other media outlet, or anyone outside of law enforcement that the arrest was going was going to occur on the morning of January 25, 2019?

CNN has denied being tipped off in advance of the raid.

Stone described the January 25 arrest hours later, declaring his innocence.

“This morning at the crack of dawn, 29 F.B.I. agents arrived at my home with 17 vehicles with their lights flashing, when they could simply have contacted my attorneys and I would have been more than willing to surrender voluntarily,” he said.

“They terrorized my wife, my dogs. I was taken to the F.B.I. facility, although I must say the F.B.I. agents were extraordinarily courteous. I will plead not guilty to these charges. I will defeat them in court. I believe this is a politically motivated investigation.,” he said.

“I am troubled by the political motivations of the prosecutors, and as I have said previously, there is no circumstance whatsoever under which I will bear false witness against the president nor will I make up lies to ease the pressure on myself. I look forward to being fully and completely vindicated.”

Media Matters for America

Published  2 months ago

Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and Roger Stone, a conservative pundit who has advised President Donald Trump for decades, visited a shooting range to fire weapons in preparation for a civil war in the event Trump is removed from office.

The visit was documented in a nearly one-and-a-half-hour-long December 19 video posted to Jones’ YouTube channel with the title “Roger Stone Prepares For Civil War After Trump Is Removed From Office: LIVE AUTO GUNFIRE.”

Jones set up the video by explaining that when Stone “was recently asked by TMZ what happens if Trump is assassinated or overthrown, he said it would cause a civil war.”

Asked to spell out his comment to TMZ, Stone, who is a contributor to Jones’ Infowars website, said, “We do not advocate violence or foment violence, but if there is a coup d’etat, if there is an illegitimate unconstitutional effort to remove Donald Trump on trumped-up charges by a biased and partisan prosecutors (sic) or an illegitimate takedown by the 25th Amendment, there will be a civil war in this country.”

“The Trump constituency has been awakened and they will not be put to sleep,” added Stone. He then said that he was at the shooting range to practice self-defense for himself and his family, but also to “defend the Constitution” if it is necessary.

Jones and Stone then entered the shooting area and fired an array of semi-automatic and fully automatic firearms, including one equipped with a silencer. At one point, Stone violated a basic safety rule by putting his finger on the trigger of an Uzi submachine gun before he was ready to shoot, causing the instructor to repeatedly remind Stone to take his finger off the trigger before physically removing it. Stone also remarked that he couldn’t see where the safety was because of the glasses he was wearing. While firing the weapons, Stone and Jones joked about shooting “commie dogs” and making a “JFK throat shot,” and Jones joked that Stone is “our Rambo” to “take on the globalists.”

On his program, The Alex Jones Show, Jones has repeatedly and baselessly claimed that there is a plot by Democrats, globalists, and other forces to violently overthrow the Trump presidency, which would lead to a bloody second American civil war. While talking about the prospect of a civil war, Jones frequently indicates his willingness to personally participate in violence, including serving as an executioner for convicted traitors. In other contexts, Jones has also raised the spectre of violence, including threatening to “beat” a Democratic congressman’s “goddamn ass” and discussing his willingness to take up arms in a race war.

POLITICUSUSA

Published  2 months ago

Rachel Maddow shed light on an apparent Republican effort to delay Robert Mueller’s investigation by delaying the formation of their side of the House Intelligence Committee.

According to Maddow, the GOP refusal to name their committee members for two weeks held up the release of key transcripts that Mueller could have used to bring further charges against anyone other than Roger Stone or Michael Cohen – like, say, Donald Trump Jr.

“The earliest date Mueller can get those official transcripts is next Tuesday, February 5th – more than a full month after this Congress was sworn in and supposedly starting its work,” the MSNBC host said. “The delay from the Republicans at least bought them another month.”

Rachel Maddow reports on how the GOP delay to name members of the House Intelligence Committee impacted the Mueller investigation. #ctl #p2 #maddow pic.twitter.com/8RkZyEpd4p

— PoliticusUSA (@politicususa) January 31, 2019

Maddow reported:

The intelligence committee has been unable to hold the required vote to release those transcripts to Mueller because of the two-week-long delay in Republicans naming any members to the committee, the intelligence committee hasn’t been able to hold that vote. So Democrats name their members two weeks ago. Republicans haven’t. They’ve just been sitting on it until finally today. And again, whether or not Mueller wants to bring any further charges on the basis of this testimony to Congress, whether Mueller and his prosecutors want to charge anybody other than Roger Stone and Michael Cohen with lying to Congress on the basis of what they said to the intelligence committee, it would appear that Mueller and his prosecutors can’t do that until they formally get official transcripts released to them from the committee. And the official transcripts can’t go to Mueller until the committee votes to release those transcripts to him for that purpose. And the committee cannot take that vote until they are formally constituted as a committee, and they can’t formally constitute themselves as a committee until they have all their members, and they only got all their members today. Having all their members as of today means they will finally be able to hold their first meeting as a committee three business days from now. In magical congressional calendar days, that means the earliest possible date at which these witness transcripts can be sent to Robert Mueller, just in case he wants to use them to bring more criminal charges, the earliest date Mueller can get those official transcripts is next Tuesday, February 5th. More than a full month after this Congress was sworn in and supposedly starting its work. The delay from the Republicans at least bought them another month.

Republicans are grasping at straws to defend Trump

While much of the focus of the past two years has (rightly) been on Donald Trump’s attempts to obstruct Robert Mueller’s investigation, Republicans in Congress have also been doing their part to undermine the special counsel probe.

When they had control of the House of Representatives, they didn’t use their power to hold the president accountable for his potential crimes. They didn’t conduct serious investigations of their own. Instead, they used it to undercut and discredit the Mueller investigation and shamelessly protect the president of the United States.

With Democrats now in control of the House, Republicans are grasping at straws to delay the roundhouse kick of oversight that Democratic-led committees plan to bring down on the president.

As Democrats prepare to ramp up their investigations, the GOP is only delaying the inevitable.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

We covered everything from Roger Stone to Roger Goodell

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

The Mueller Deep State with help from the police state FBI stormed conservative activist and author Roger Stone’s home last Friday in a predawn raid.

As The Gateway Pundit was first to report — the FBI Mueller raid on Roger Stone included more armed agents than the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

The Deep State had amphibious team in the water and an helicopter in the sky during the arrest.

The US is now a police state.

Napolitano added that the FBI-Mueller deep state will not even give Roger Stone a copy of the transcript where they accuse him of lying.

** FBI THUGS Forced ROGER STONE’S WIFE To Stand Outside, Barefoot in Nightgown During Home Raid

The US DOJ can never be trusted.

These are police state tactics.

Now this…

The Mueller deep state leaked to NBC News on Thursday that they now have a treasure trove of information from Republican Roger Stone’s decades of conservative activism.

The Democrats on the Mueller probe leaked this information to the press.

What is stopping them from leaking to the Democrat Party?

NBC News reported:

Federal investigators probing Roger Stone, the former Trump campaign official indicted last week in the Russia probe, have seized multiple hard drives containing years of communication records from cellphones and email accounts, the special counsel’s office said Thursday.

Robert Mueller’s prosecutors, in a new court filing, described the evidence as “voluminous and complex” in asking a judge to delay his trial to give them more time to sift through the seized devices.

The court papers said investigators grabbed hard drives containing several terabytes of information, including “FBI case reports, search warrant applications and results (e.g., Apple iCloud accounts and email accounts), bank and financial records, and the contents of numerous physical devices (e.g., cellular phones, computers, and hard drives).”

americanthinker

Published  2 months ago

The U.S. federal government (more precisely, only one quarter of the government) was shut down for 36 days. Opinions of this shutdown, as expected, vary. In the left camp, a victory is celebrated, and in the right camp, the range of assessments extends from bitterness of defeat (the majority) to cautious optimism like "well, we will see who wins" (a minority).

However, an idea that does not occur to anyone to consider is one of Trump's victory, no matter how unusual it sounds.

Why is this view not considered? Probably because it is based on the emotional background of the conflict – that is, the personal confrontation between Donald Trump and Nancy Pelosi, who is reveling in her newly acquired power. However, let's ask ourselves: would Trump's position change if, instead of Pelosi, there was someone else? Hardly anyone could argue that it was Pelosi who determined Trump's political moves.

In other words, would Trump have initiated a partial government shutdown if someone else owned a gavel in the House of Representatives (Republican, Democrat, or someone else – that doesn't matter anymore)? Of course he would, because his main strategic task is the wall on the southern border – not just a wall as a barrier, but a wall as a symbol of the sovereignty of the country.

To achieve this goal, Trump needs to drive the opposition into a deliberately uncomfortable corner – so uncomfortable that the opposition will begin to seriously think about its strategic role: either stubborn obstructionism or a constructive opposition.

What can make the Democrats do this? Only public opinion. The opposition of Trump and Pelosi should be reconsidered from this point of view – not from the standpoint of the opposition of the gladiator Trump and the gladiator Pelosi, but from the standpoint of winning the sympathies of the spectators in the political Coliseum. Then the idea of Trump's winning immediately moves from the realm of fantasy to the realm of reality.

For about one month, Trump slowly, step by step, squeezed out from the media narrative all the informational garbage not related to the problem of illegal immigration. In a month, everything suddenly became secondary: North Korea, Syria, economy, trade wars with China, the unemployment rate, and racial problems. No one is participating in heated debates over the fact that the number of vacant jobs in America has exceeded the number of unemployed. Few people outside Washington are interested in the vicissitudes of the Mueller investigation. Except for small fringe groups, no one raises the issue of impeachment. Everything has faded into the background except the wall.

As a result, Trump skillfully imposed his agenda on America. As part of this agenda, there came a clear understanding that two ideologies clashed in Washington – one that aims to turn America into a country akin to Venezuela, and the other to build a wall on the southern border. The tasks set by these ideologies are serious strategic goals, and Trump's achievement is the political equivalent of a successful reversal of the Titanic right before an iceberg encounter.

Thanks to Trump, no one in America is left with any doubt about the actual positions of the two opposing sides. It is now clear to all American citizens that the Republicans' position is to close the border and open the government, while the Democrats prefer to open the border and close the government.

Trump has skillfully arranged the scenery for the next stage of political drama. At the same time, he wisely saved his trump card for the final act, either in the form of a declaration of national emergency,or the wall built by the U.S. Army (the law allows this to be done even without the consent of Congress). Moreover, the Democrats are unaware: for some reason, they consider the partial government shutdown advantageous for them. If for the Democrats the upcoming 21 days of negotiations with Trump are a sign of their victory, then for Trump, 21 days of negotiations are the gun on the wall, which, according to Chekhov, must necessarily fire in the third act.

Declaring a state of emergency in America is a fairly frequent thing. President Obama declared national emergencies 12 times, and President G.W. Bush 13 times. By law, a national emergency may be declared by the president for only one year, but, as a rule, all presidents extend their own emergency declarations and the emergency declarations of their predecessors.

Trump extended all the emergencies declared by Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton. In addition, Trump extended the national emergency associated with Iran, which President Carter had previously declared. Currently, there are 31 active national emergencies in the United States. For reference, the U.S. Congress has the right to cancel a declaration of a national emergency, but only if both houses of Congress vote for it with a two-thirds majority.

The Democrats still haven't realized what happened to them. It seems that none of them read Machiavelli. After all, they just had to back down and quietly lose a small (only about 0.1% of the U.S. federal budget) political battle over the wall on the border with Mexico, but at the same time save their entire army of supporters, their entire reputation, and their entire political capital that would enable them to confront Trump in the next stage of political struggle.

The Democrats went all in. What the Democrats have done is worse than a betrayal of American citizens; this is a mistake.

Note that one of the key players, Mueller, understood what was going on and tried to change the course of the news cycle imposed by Trump. Mueller's photogenic arrest of Roger Stone had stopped the talk about illegal immigration and the wall for a few hours. However, this did not last long.

In conclusion, let's remind the Democrats about one of the best known of Murphy's Laws: "If everything seems to be going well, you have overlooked something."

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray on Wednesday demanding the FBI brief the Committee on the pre-dawn raid of Roger Stone.

Chairman Graham said in the letter he is “concerned about the manner in which the arrest was effectuated, especially the number of agents involved, the tactics employed” and if the FBI tipped off the press (CNN).

“Since his appointment, I have supported Special Counsel Mueller’s ability to conduct his investigation without interference. Moreover, I have always been a strong admirer and supporter of the FBI. However, while I firmly support law enforcement taking into account threats to officer safety, flight risk, and the need to ensure evidence is preserved, I am leery that a subject of the Special Counsel’s investigation, who had retained counsel, had publicly stated that he believed that he would at some point be indicted, and was apparently willing to surrender voluntarily, was arrested in a pre-dawn raid at his home,” Lindsey Graham wrote.

“Although I am sure these tactics would be standard procedure for the arrest of a violent offender, I have questions regarding their necessity in this case. The American public has had enough of the media circus that surrounds the Special Counsel’s investigation. Yet, the manner of this arrest appears to have only added to the spectacle. Accordingly, I write to seek justification for the tactics used and the timing of the arrest of Mr. Stone,” Graham added.

Chairman Graham asked the FBI to provide the Committee with a briefing on Roger Stone’s arrest by no later than Tuesday, February 5, 2019.

Prior to the briefing, the FBI must provide the Senate Judiciary Committee with answers to the following questions:

1)Why was it necessary to arrest Mr. Stone at his home in the early morning hours, rather than working through his attorneys to permit him to surrender voluntarily?

2)Was the manner of Mr. Stone’s arrest consistent with the arrests of, and procedures for the arrests of, similarly charged individuals?

3)Were usual procedures for obtaining and executing arrest and search warrants followed with regard to Mr. Stone?

4)Did the Special Counsel’s office issue a press release and release the indictment to the press prior to informing Mr. Stone’s attorneys of the arrest?

5)Did anyone at the FBI, DOJ, or the Special Counsel’s office alert CNN, any other media outlet, or anyone outside of law enforcement that the arrest was going to occur on the morning of January 25, 2019?

Last Friday the Mueller Special Counsel sent 20-29 armed FBI operatives in six vehicles and a CNN camera crew to film the arrest of Trump associate Roger Stone at his home in a predawn raid.

The FBI treated Roger Stone, a 66-year-old non-violent man like El Chapo or Osama Bin Laden.

The FBI even forced Roger Stone’s 72-year-old deaf wife to stand outside barefoot in her nightgown.

“They brought my wife out in her nightgown and also in bare feet to stand next to me even though she’s not accused of any crime,” Roger Stone told Hannity.

Christopher Wray is a disgrace to this country and should be forced out as FBI Director for allowing his agents to run around like KGB thugs.

NEW: Chairman Graham to FBI: Bureau Needs to Brief Committee on Roger Stone Arresthttps://t.co/l6zjjYEiSR pic.twitter.com/tgRvsdTsWK

— Senate Judiciary (@senjudiciary) January 30, 2019

The Independent

Published  2 months ago

Donald Trump’s former political adviser Roger Stone says that his former boss’ presidency is in big danger.

Mr Stone, who on Tuesday pleaded not guilty to seven charges brought forward by special counsel Robert Mueller’s office, said that the Russia investigation that brought him to court is basically a “speeding bullet heading for” Mr Trump’s head.

The remarks were made on “Breitbart News Daily”, a Sirius XM radio show.

The statement comes just after acting attorney general Matthew Whitaker said on Monday that he believes Mr Mueller’s investigation is nearing its end, ramping up speculation after nearly two years of a tight-lipped probe into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Mr Stone is among at least 34 people to have been charged in relation to the investigation, and is one of several Trump allies to be caught up in probe.

Created with Sketch. World news in pictures

Show all 50 Created with Sketch. Created with Sketch.

Created with Sketch. World news in pictures

Others have included individuals like former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who was convicted last year for financial crimes.

Mr Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, has also been charged, and last year pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with Mr Mueller’s probe.

In Mr Cohen’s plea and subsequent cooperation, the president’s former “fixer” said that he had lied to Congress about conversations with Mr Trump over a major deal to build a Trump property in Moscow.

He also indicated that he had paid off adult film actress Stormy Daniels during the campaign for the president, a felony violation of campaign finance laws.

The president has insisted repeatedly that he and his campaign did not collude with the Russian government during the campaign, and has repeatedly argued that he is not a focus of investigation for Mr Mueller’s probe.

It is not clear when the investigation may actually end, or whether the special counsel’s final report will be made public.

Fox News

Published  2 months ago

With all the people we know who lied to Congress – former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, ex-CIA Director John Brennan, the folks who lied to the FISA court and years of scandals like Fast and Furious, IRS targeting conservatives and Hillary Clinton's missing emails, it's good to know the feds finally got their man.

Roger Stone, who is being charged not with Russia collusion, but the process crime of lying to Congress, was targeted for the same reason U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis said they went after Paul Manafort and the same reason they tried to bankrupt Gen. Michael Flynn. They want to put the screws to Stone, who is 66, to make him sing or compose against Trump. That’s the only reason.

Otherwise, why would you arrest him? If it was really for lying to Congress, he'd be near the back of a long line.

Last week's pre-dawn raid on Stone home in Fort Lauderdale featured 17 vehicles, including armored tactical trucks. There were 27 heavily armed agents – I don’t blame them, they don’t have a choice when they’re told to do something - in tactical gear with weapons drawn.

For lying to Congress?

Stone got the same treatment as Manafort and Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen. All the other people who lied to Congress or to FISA judges got a pass. Roger Stone committed no violent crime. He’s not a drug dealer or a drug kingpin. He’s not a Mafioso or a gangster. He’s not El Chapo. He may have lied to Congress.

All the feds had to do was call his lawyer and say, "Be at police headquarters for processing at 9 a.m. or we’re putting a warrant out for your arrest," and he would have shown up.

Hillary Clinton and her cronies ignored subpoenas for emails, wiped her hard drive with BleachBit and smashed phones to pieces to avoid turning them over. Do you think you would get away with that? You might, if you could help the Depp State with its witch hunt for President Trump.

There’s a danger here. We are a democratic republic. The Constitution that we cherish so much is the foundation of all law and order in this country. If you don’t apply the laws equally, only going after one group of people because of their political views, and you protect people with other political views, you’ve lost our Constitution. We've lost our country.

Without equal application of our laws and equal justice under the law, there's one thing left to say to our great nation: Goodbye.

Adapted from Sean Hannity's radio program, "The Sean Hannity Show,' airing 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. on stations around the country

senate

Published  2 months ago

United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary

Blunt Force Truth

Published  2 months ago

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) sent a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray on Wednesday demanding the FBI brief the Committee on the pre-dawn raid of Roger Stone.

Chairman Graham said in the letter he is “concerned about the manner in which the arrest was effectuated, especially the number of agents involved, the tactics employed” and if the FBI tipped off the press (CNN).

“Since his appointment, I have supported Special Counsel Mueller’s ability to conduct his investigation without interference. Moreover, I have always been a strong admirer and supporter of the FBI. However, while I firmly support law enforcement taking into account threats to officer safety, flight risk, and the need to ensure evidence is preserved, I am leery that a subject […]

Want more BFT? Leave us a voicemail on our page or follow us on Twitter @BFT_Podcast and Facebook @BluntForceTruthPodcast. We want to hear from you! There’s no better place to get the #BluntForceTruth.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

'That was a very, very disappointing scene'

Judicial Watch

Published  2 months ago

January 29, 2019- JW President Tom Fitton appeared on “Fox and Friends First” on the Fox News Channel to discuss Roger Stone’s indictment and the Mueller Investigation.

View Article

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/in-the-news/tom-fitton-targeting-of-trumps-team-worst-corruption-by-doj-in-modern-times/

Dan Bongino

Published  2 months ago

In this episode I address the political problem the Democrats have created for themselves in the shutdown fight. I also address the reason that the Roger Stone indictment is devastating for the collusion narrative. Finally, I address the catastrophe in Venezuela and the liberal effort to cover it up.

News Picks:

Debunking liberal lies about Venezuelan socialism.

Andy McCarthy’s new piece is a devastating blow to the “collusion” narrative.

The discovery process in the Roger Stone case could be devastating for Mueller.

The Supreme Court will decide a critical case in defense of the Second Amendment.

Roger Stone’s indictment is a big flop. There’s still no collusion.

Big move by President Trump as he remakes the federal court system.

Is Hillary going to run again?

Sara A. Carter

Published  2 months ago

The process of discovery is going to be fascinating in this case, and I can’t wait to watch it, Devin Nunes

Ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee Rep. Devin Nunes played down Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of Roger Stone, but warned “the process of discovery is going to be fascinating in this case.”

Stone was indicted last week by a grand jury on 7 counts of lying to congress, witness tampering and obstruction. The FBI has been criticized for sending a dozen armed FBI agents and vehicles to take Stone into custody after the indictment during a predawn raid. The indictment stems from testimony he gave to the House Intelligence Committee in September 2017 as part of its investigation into the 2016 Russian election interference.

“Bottom of the Barrel” Indictments By Mueller

Nunes told Maria Bartiromo on Fox News Sunday Morning Futures that Mueller seeks information from his committee’s investigation. He said, it’s ironic how much information the Special Counsel wants from his committee, despite criticism from the media and Democrats about its investigations.

More importantly, said Nunes, the indictment does not accuse Stone of colluding with Russians.

“For two years our committee has been mocked by the left and the media as not a serious investigation – yet, if you look at the indictments of the Russia actors those came from our committee,” said Nunes, who described Stone as a “flamboyant character.”

“I think the Mueller investigation is really at the bottom of the barrel when they’re looking at people like this because we already found in our report that Roger Stone wasn’t colluding with the Russians, which that was the original intent of all this,” said Nunes.

Mueller’s team “must be embarrassed that they have to come to House Republicans in order to have us to give them the information from the transcripts, so that they can go get Roger Stone on a process foul that occurred in 2017.”

“The process of discovery is going to be fascinating in this case, and I can’t wait to watch it,” said Nunes.

Stone has said he will plead not guilty to the charges.

gofundme.com

Published  2 months ago

ALERT: ROGER STONE INDICTED 1/25!

President Donald J. Trump made it crystal clear: he knows who is loyal to him, and who is not. My old friend Roger Stone has been under fire for two years, as FBI and Congressional investigators have been picking him apart. And now they have charged him.

On December 3rd, The President sent the remarkable Tweet below. Stone, he wrote, has "guts!"

That's because when George Stephanopoulos of ABC's "This Week" asked Roger if he would testify against The President, Roger was very clear: "There is no circumstance where I would testify against The President because I would have to bear false witness against him, I'd have to make things up."

By now, Special Counsel Robert Mueller knows: there is nothing to tell, no evidence of Trump campaign Russian collusion. But that doesn't stop his investigators from torturing innocent people like Roger Stone.

Roger was indicted on January 25th for process crimes he did not commit - no collusion, no conspiracy, no Russia. He has been speaking out against these allegations for months. He has the proof to prevail in court.

Roger was willing to present himself to the FBI at their convenience. Instead, the Office of Special Counsel Robert Mueller led a predawn raid on his home, with two dozen agents in SWAT attire pointing automatic weapons.

It was surreal, way over the top.

Roger Stone is my dear friend of 35 years and I know: Roger has done nothing wrong. He's accused of colluding with the Russians via Wikileaks, but there's absolutely no proof he did any such thing. He never received materials from Wikileaks, nor coordinated with Wikileaks for the Trump campaign. He's done nothing wrong, but that hasn't stopped the torture!

The leftist media is after Roger, too. They have accused him for two years of lying, of colluding, of running a rogue operation to stop Hillary Clinton Roger recently released text messages and emails that prove his innocence, but the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post have never covered this evidence.

It's hard enough to fight a witch hunt, but fighting the national media, too? This is an impossible task, and his legal defense bills will be over two million dollars in the end.

The President is right: Roger Stone has "guts." He's as tough as nails, and he'll never "bear false witness against The President."

But the most difficult part of this is the outrageous legal costs. Investigators are trying to break him financially. Roger can only rely upon you - We the People, who elected Donald J. Trump as President of the United States.

I personally set up this GoFundMe page to help pay Roger's legal bills.

As you know, Roger has encouraged the President to run for the White House since 1988! He's been behind President Trump all the way, all those years. He's always had his back.

Now, Roger needs you to have his back. Let's show Roger that, just like our President, we love his "guts!" If you can donate $20, $50, $100 or even more - whatever you can afford - it will help Roger fight off an indictment on false criminal charges the Mueller team hopes will turn him against Donald Trump.

East Aurora, NY

PS: Please take it from Kelly Guy, a dear friend of mine and an important ally of Roger: This is important!

RedState

Published  2 months ago

You can never say never with the Clinton’s unless they are dead. Even then it is a 50/50 shot they are still running for something.

In the file under “What could you be possibly thinking?” drawer comes news that former first lady, carpetbagging Senator from New York and Secretay of State, Hillary Clinton, has not closed “the door” on a 2020 run for President.

Miracles never cease.

According to Rolling Stone

“Clinton is telling people that she’s not closing the doors to the idea of running in 2020,” Jeff Zeleny said on Inside Politics. “I’m told by three people that as recently as this week, she was telling people that, given all this news from the indictments, particularly the Roger Stone indictment, she talked to several people, saying ‘Look, I’m not closing the doors to this.’”

An already amazing primary season for the Democrats just became a lil more magical.

Hillary Clinton allowed Donald Trump to win in 2016. There was no way in hades that Trump should have won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. All those states had gone blue since at least the 1992 POTUS cycle and were solidly in her corner if even by 5 points 60 days out. Hillary and her campaign just were plain arrogant and lazy and allowed the Trump team who was hustling to take it away from them. Just on that basis alone she should never be allowed to consider running again for anything.

That, of course, is NOT the Clinton way. She feels she is owed this somehow. She is the only truly qualified female ( are we still allowed to say male and female on the Dem side) and no other person would be nearly as good as her. She put up with all that crap and humiliation of Bill chasing skirts in Little Rock and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, so the country and her party owe her one or something.

Even if everyone that had a cup of coffee with Trump gets dinged in the Mueller probe and there is no proof of collusion, which was the whole point of this thing, she is not vindicated from 2016. That campaign was a white-hot mess and I can’t believe anyone in the DNC wants a Clinton 3.0 run to happen.

Plus, she won’t be the only woman ( are we allowed to say, woman, if they have not publicly declared a preference?) running on the Dems side this time. Harris and Warren aren’t just going to lay down for Hillary being she thinks she is owed this shot ONE MORE TIME.

Of course, this is just probably all a massive P.R. trial balloon to see if anyone still loves Hillary and would get behind her for the third time. Even Jeff Zeleny from CNN says as much on the Rolling Stone article.

Zeleny, a White House correspondent, was careful to clarify that this news “does not mean that there’s a campaign-in-waiting, or a plan in the works.” But, Clinton is considering it.

Well if it is just a trial balloon here is some helpful advice. Stay home and enjoy the grandkids.

If you really want to make 2020 really exciting though, JUMP IN, THE WATER IS FINE.

God Bless America.

Check out my other post on Harry Potter Slams Tom Brady Over MAGA Hat And Trump Support my podcast Bourbon On The Rocks plus like Bourbon On The Rocks on Facebook and follow me on the twitters at IRISHDUKE2

POLITICUSUSA

Published  2 months ago

Sean Hannity may soon find himself in the crosshairs of Robert Mueller’s investigation into collusion and conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Dan Bongino

Published  2 months ago

Twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is keeping the door open to the possibility of a 2020 presidential run, according to a CNN reporter.

On CNN yesterday, White House correspondent Jeff Zeleny said “I’m told by three people that as recently as this week, she was telling people that look, given all this news from the indictments, particularly the Roger Stone indictment, she talked to several people, saying ‘look, I’m not closing the doors to this.”

He continued, “It does not mean that there’s a campaign-in-waiting or a plan in the works.”

Zeleny said that most losing presidential candidates “never totally close the doors to running for president…But I think we have to at least leave our mind open to the possibility that she is still talking about it,” he added. “She wants to take on Trump.”

Clinton has fueled speculation of a 2020 presidential run after making public comments about wanting to be commander-in-chief.

In October, when asked if she wanted to run for office again, Clinton replied, “No. I’d like to be president.”

In November, former longtime Clinton advisor Mark Penn predicted the former Secretary of State would reinvent herself as a “liberal firebrand” and run again for president in 2020.

Penn, along with co-writer, New York politician Andrew Stein, write that voters could “expect Hillary 4.0 to come out swinging,” suggesting Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton could have key fundraising roles. “She has decisively to win those Iowa caucus-goers who have never warmed up to her. They will see her now as strong, partisan, left-leaning and all-Democrat — the one with the guts, experience and steely-eyed determination to defeat Mr. Trump.”

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

According to Hillary Clinton insiders, the twice-failed presidential hopeful is considering a third run for the White House.

CNN White House Correspondent Jeff Zeleny said Sunday on CNN’s “Inside Politics” that Hillary Clinton has been telling people as recently as this week that she isn’t “closing the doors to the idea of running in 2020,” reported The Hill.

“I’m told by three people that as recently as this week, she was telling people that look, given all this news from the indictments, particularly the Roger Stone indictment, she talked to several people, saying ‘look, I’m not closing the doors to this,’ ” Zeleny said.

“It does not mean that there’s a campaign-in-waiting, or a plan in the works,” Zeleny continued.

Mr. Zeleny said that Hillary believes she has a shot in 2020 because she won the popular vote in 2016 and given the recent indictment of Roger Stone, a longtime advisor and confidant to Donald Trump.

“She wants to take on Trump. Could she win a Democratic primary to do it? I don’t know the answer to that,” Zeleny added.

Last year Mark Penn and Philippe Reines, two of Hillary’s advisors said she may run again in 2020.

Hillary Clinton also posted a couple of vintage photos from her days as First Lady to her Twitter account fueling rumors she was going to throw her hat into the ring again.

Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill are struggling to sell tickets to their tour dubbed ‘An Evening with the Clintons,’ but she’s so delusional and driven by her lust for power that she may just go for it a third time.

Sean Hannity

Published  2 months ago

Longtime Clinton insiders confirmed Sunday that the former Secretary of State and twice-failed presidential nominee is considering a third run for the White House in the coming months, reports the Hill.

“I’m told by three people that as recently as this week, she was telling people that look, given all this news from the indictments, particularly the Roger Stone indictment, she talked to several people, saying ‘look, I’m not closing the doors to this,'” said CNN White House correspondent Jeff Zeleny Sunday.

Clinton has not ruled out 2020 bid: report https://t.co/rsSTtVWn9q pic.twitter.com/htcoKNdqCY

“But I think we have to at least leave our mind open to the possibility that she is still talking about it,” he added. “She wants to take on Trump. Could she win a Democratic primary to do it? I don’t know the answer to that.”

Read the full report at the Hill.

True Pundit

Published  2 months ago

When the FBI stormed Trump campaign strategist Roger Stone’s Florida home Friday, CNN was right there with them filming every second. How did CNN get the drop on the rest of the media?

In The Daily Caller News Foundation fact check videos, Anders Hagstrom highlights claims from politicians and the media alike, setting the record straight on double standards and mischaracterizations.

TheDCNF has torn down former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s infamous and much-peddled 17 intelligence agencies claim and exposed the liberal media for running damage control for Hamas. Check out a few of our other greatest hits, and subscribe to TheDCNF’s YouTube channel to make sure you never miss out.

Big League Politics

Published  2 months ago

The Phyllis Schlafly Eagles conservative women’s organization is calling for the resignation of FBI director Christopher Wray after Roger Stone’s arrest on process charges following a lengthy Robert Mueller investigation that found no Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.

The Democrats, meanwhile, actively sought dirt on Trump from Russians during the 2016 election, according to the Washington Post.

Stone’s arrest came Friday, but the government shutdown is over now because President Donald Trump can use the national emergency option to generate funding for the border wall on February 15, when his deadline for Congress expires.

The presence of a Washington, D.C. resident and CNN reporter at the scene of the FBI’s over-the-top arrest of Stone at his house in Florida prompted outrage from the conservative movement.

“These terrorizing tactics are are absolutely despicable,” stated Phyllis Schlafly Eagles president Ed Martin. “The Department of Justice and the FBI should be ashamed not only with what took place but especially for colluding with CNN to allow cameras on a ride along. Fake news media is helping Mueller create a spectacle with all flash and – as we now know – absolutely no substance. Acting Attorney General Whitaker and FBI Director Wray ought to be ashamed. They should either resign for allowing CNN to manufacture such sensational ‘reporting’ or do their job and stop the Mueller witch hunt.”

The late Phyllis Schlafly — who was targeted by political vultures in her twilight years due to her early unwavering support for President Donald Trump — was a lady of charm and grace.

Here she is at a Trump rally in St. Louis.

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

There are two sides to special counsel Robert Mueller's indictment of longtime Trump associate Roger Stone. On one side there are the under-oath statements Stone made to the House Intelligence Committee that Mueller says are false. On the other, there are the Stone statements Mueller did not challenge.

Dan Bongino

Published  2 months ago

In this episode I address the radical, and economically destructive, costs of this new generation of Democrats’ big government plans.

News Picks:

Did the FBI ignore evidence that Hillary’s emails were stolen by foreign actors?

An excellent summary regarding the negative effects of heavy taxes and big government.

Are the Democrats already getting tired of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?

Roger Stone pleads not guilty to Mueller’s charges.

Democrats are trying to remove “So help you God” from this oath.

Gatestone Institute

Published  2 months ago

If there was no legitimate reason for the arrest and handcuffing of this presumed innocent defendant, what was the illegitimate reason? The illegitimate purpose of the arrest was to intimidate the potential witness -- namely Stone -- into not invoking his constitutional right to remain silent, rather than to testify as a government witness.

As Judge T.S. Ellis, III, who presided over the Manafort trial observed: "You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud – what you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment."

The ACLU has been absolutely silent in regard to the questionable tactics employed by Mueller. They, too, would have been up in arms had these tactics been employed against their favorite candidate and mine, Hillary Clinton. Their silence speaks volumes about their partisanship and lack of neutral standards of civil liberties.

Congress must act to prevent these abuses from recurring.

The reasons given thus far for Roger Stone's pre-dawn arrest by armed FBI agents are utterly unconvincing. He was not a flight risk, as evidenced by the low bail and easy conditions of release set by the judge without objection from the government. Stone knew he was going to be indicted and if he wanted to flee, he had plenty of time to do so. The same is true of destroying evidence, wiping his electronics or doing anything else that would warrant an arrest rather than a notice to his lawyer to appear in court at a specified time. A search was conducted of various residences pursuant to a search warrant. No arrest was necessary to conduct these searches.

So, if there was no legitimate reason for the arrest and handcuffing of this presumed innocent defendant, what was the illegitimate reason? To paraphrase the indictment against Stone, the illegitimate purpose of the arrest was to intimidate the potential witness -- namely Stone -- into not invoking his constitutional right to remain silent, rather than to testify as a government witness.

The arrest was nothing more than a show of toughness -- a foretaste of what Stone could expect if he did not cooperate with Mueller. Police do this all the time: "Look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." The tough arrest with handcuffs and shackles was a demonstration of the hard way.

Prosecutors have enormous power and discretion whether and how to use it. All too often they use it the way Mueller has been using it during this investigation: to pressure witnesses to testify against Trump. As Judge T.S. Ellis, III, who presided over the Manafort trial, observed: "You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud -- what you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment."

Judge Ellis also pointed out the dangers of this tactic: "This vernacular to 'sing' is what prosecutors use. What you got to be careful of is that they may not only sing, they may compose."

If Hillary Clinton had been elected president and if a special prosecutor had arrested one of her associates in the rough and demeaning manner by which Stone was arrested, civil libertarians would be up in arms. They would correctly argue that to marshal dozens of armed FBI agents to arrest an elderly man accused of non-violent crimes is an abuse of authority and a waste of FBI resources. They would complain that it constitutes intimidation and violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. But because the arrest is of a Trump associate and the purpose is to get evidence against President Trump, we have not heard from fair-weather civil libertarians who use civil liberties and constitutional rights as tactics to serve their partisan political agendas.

The ACLU has been absolutely silent in regard to the questionable tactics employed by Mueller. They, too, would have been up in arms had these tactics been employed against their favorite candidate and mine, Hillary Clinton. They would have demanded an explanation as to why the extraordinary power of arrest, which is supposed to be reserved only for cases warranting this use of force, was employed in this case. Their silence speaks volumes about their partisanship and lack of neutral standards of civil liberties.

The American public is entitled to an honest explanation of why Stone was arrested. We have not received the truth. Congress should hold a hearing and call as witnesses those who ordered the arrest and demand they explain and justify it. It is unlikely that a plausible and credible explanation will be offered, but Mueller and his FBI agents should at least have an opportunity to set the record straight. Maybe there is a good reason for why the arrest was necessary, but if so, we have not heard it and it is unlikely that the reason involves national security or other secrets. These hearings should lead to legislation setting enforceable standards for when the kind of arrest to which Stone was subjected should be permissible. The power to arrest, using armed FBI agents, handcuffs and shackles must not become a tactic to be used by law enforcement for impermissible reasons. Nor should it become routine. Congress must act to prevent these abuses from recurring.

Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law Emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of The Case against the Democratic House Impeaching Trump (Hot Books, January 2, 2019), and a Distinguished Senior Fellow of Gatestone Institute.

Follow Alan M. Dershowitz on Twitter and Facebook

© 2019 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free gatestone institute mailing list.

Conservative News Today

Published  2 months ago

In an early morning tweet Saturday, President Donald Trump wondered aloud why corrupt members of the left were being allowed to get off scot-free with their glaring lies. Like others in the past, the tweet hit a big nerve with angry former CIA director John Brennan: Your cabal of unprincipled, unethical, dishonest, and sycophantic cronies […]

Crooks and Liars

Published  2 months ago

An item in the indictment of Roger Stone states that in August, 2016, Jerome Corsi urged Stone to “start suggesting” Hillary Clinton was feeble and had had a stroke. It just so happens that’s exactly what Sean Hannity did shortly thereafter. Was Hannity caught up in the Russia conspiracy to win the election for Trump? We don’t know yet.

Item 13 c., beginning on Page 4 of the indictment states (with my emphases added):

On or about August 2, 2016, Person 1 emailed STONE. Person 1 wrote that he was currently in Europe and planned to return in or around mid-August. Person 1 stated in part, “Word is friend in embassy plans 2 more dumps. One shortly after I’m back. 2nd in Oct. Impact planned to be very damaging.” The phrase “friend in embassy” referred to the head of Organization 1. Person 1 added in the same email, “Time to let more than [the Clinton Campaign chairman] to be exposed as in bed w enemy if they are not ready to drop HRC. That appears to be the game hackers are now about. Would not hurt to start suggesting HRC old, memory bad, has stroke – neither he nor she well. I expect that much of next dump focus, setting stage for Foundation debacle.”

Person 1 is believed to be Corsi; Organization 1 is obviously Wikileaks.

Coincidentally, Hannity began baselessly suggesting Clinton had suffered a stroke and was suffering from seizures less than a week later.

My earliest indication is on August 8, 2016, when Hannity cited a Drudge Report headline, “detailing Hillary Clinton's history with falls and speculating that the former Secretary of State could be experiencing a serious undisclosed medical condition.”

Two nights later, on August 10, Hannity unsuccessfully pressed two medical doctors to diagnose Clinton as having suffered seizures, based on her behavior with a group of reporters in a video. “This looks like violent, out of control movements on her part,” Hannity insisted. One of those reporters in the video, AP’s Lisa Lerer, later came forward to say that she thought Clinton was deliberately exaggerating her response for comic effect, not having any kind of health problem. She also noted that nobody from Fox had ever asked for her eyewitness account.

On September 7, 2016, Hannity had better luck getting Herman Cain to diagnose Clinton. “This shows that [Clinton’s] staff is pushing her out there despite her physical condition. She needs to get medical help,” “Dr.” Cain asserted.

On September 14, 2016, Hannity sought medical diagnoses from two anti-Clinton authors. One, a former Secret Service agent who wrote a discredited anti-Clinton book, said he’s an “expert on observation” and on “Secret Service procedures” and, therefore, a video clip of Clinton stumbling into a van “disturbs me greatly.” “You’re saying there’s something seriously wrong with her,” Hannity said eagerly. The other guest, discredited Hillary-hater Ed Klein, claimed “friends and associates” had told him that Clinton “frequently faints or swoons” and that is “just the tip of the iceberg of something that’s been going on for a long time.”

On September 23, 2016, Hannity played some of his favorite video clips and said to his political panel, “She seems unhinged! … What is that? … “I think there’s something wrong here … Watch all of a sudden her head twitching and twitching and twitching.”

On September 25, 2016, Hannity fruitlessly prodded Newt Gingrich to diagnose Clinton: “Watch this twitching that she does! One, four, five, six and does it again! ….Boom, boom, boom! … Add that to the deep-vein thrombosis, the cerebral venal thrombosis. Add that to her collapse and all the other health issues she’s had. What do you think’s going on here?”

On August 15, 2016, Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald condemned Hannity’s behavior in a column titled, “SEAN HANNITY: APOLOGIZE TO THOSE WITH EPILEPSY, OR BURN IN HELL.” Eichenwald, an epileptic himself, noted that Clinton’s behavior in no way resembled a seizure and condemned Hannity for promoting falsehoods about what a seizure might look like. Even worse was Hannity’s suggestion that someone with epilepsy was unfit for the presidency.

So it was no surprise that the passage about Clinton’s health in the Stone indictment also caught Eichenwald’s attention. In a series of tweets yesterday, he argued that, whether wittingly or unwittingly, Hannity became part of the Russian conspiracy to elect Trump.

Eichenwald highlighted how that August email, in which Corsi urged Stone to start “suggesting HRC old, memory bad, has stroke” was in preparation for a damaging October document dump that was expected to focus on Clinton’s health. However, it’s not at all clear that Hannity knew what Wikileaks was up to, much less the machinations of Russia.

It seems quite possible to me that someone on the Trump team merely told Hannity they wanted to target Hillary about her health and he happily complied or that he merely adopted the strategy as his own, after seeing it on Drudge first.

However, it’s also quite possible that Hannity knew what was going on, at least to some extent, and was a willing participant.

In any event, if Fox didn’t see a need to provide a full explanation of Hannity’s relationship with Trump and the Trump campaign previously, the Stone indictment ought to be a wake up call that the network better get to it now.

Republished with permission from Newshounds.us

HuffPost

Published  2 months ago

Following the arrest of longtime Donald Trump confidant Roger Stone, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) delivered a damning rebuke of the president’s choice of friends, questioning the legitimacy of his election and his ties to Russia.

“The indictment of Roger Stone makes clear that there was a deliberate, coordinated attempt by top Trump campaign officials to influence the 2016 election and subvert the will of the American people,” the congresswoman said in a statement Friday evening. “It is staggering that the President has chosen to surround himself with people who violated the integrity of our democracy and lied to the FBI and Congress about it.”

Stone, who was charged with seven counts Friday, including lying to Congress, obstruction of justice and witness tampering, has credited himself with Trump’s presidential run and was an informal adviser to his campaign until the summer of 2015. Stone appears to have seen the indictment coming, often saying that he expected this day to come.

In her condemnation of the president, Pelosi accused Trump of continuing to attempt to subvert special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the election, arguing it raised serious questions, including “what does Putin have on the President, politically, personally or financially,” and Trump’s motivations behind weighing a NATO pullout. Pelosi said a NATO withdrawal would be a win for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Offering as much insurance as possible that Mueller’s work would be safeguarded, the congresswoman also spoke out against witness intimidation, stating that any effort to “prevent them from appearing before Congress” must be stopped.

“The Special Counsel investigation is working, and the House will continue to exercise our constitutional oversight responsibility and ensure that the Special Counsel investigation can continue free from interference from the White House,” she added.

Shortly after Stone’s indictment, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders insisted to CNN that it was not related to Trump and the White House.

True Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Following the FBI’s raid on President Trump associate Roger Stone on matters related to the Mueller investigation, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders openly blasted the agency’s double-standard for seemingly to always raid members of Trump’s team while ignoring other high-profile figures like Hillary Clinton.

In an early morning interview with CNN, Sanders wondered aloud why the FBI will not apply the same standards to other people in the 2016 election that lied to the agency. Stone was indicted by a grand jury for allegedly lying to Congress, witness tampering and obstructing a government investigation.

“We’ll let the courts make the decision,” Sanders said. “A bigger question is: If this is the standard, will the same standard apply to people like Hillary Clinton, James Comey and Clapper?”

Sanders continued, “Will we see the same people we know have all made false statements? Will that same standard apply? That’s a question we’ll see what happens on that front.”

In the same interview with CNN on Friday, Sanders emphasized that Roger Stone’s arrest has nothing to do with the president, according to The Hill.

“This has nothing to do with the president and certainly nothing to do with the White House,” Sanders said on CNN. “This is something that has to do solely with that individual.”- READ MORE

Raw Story

Published  2 months ago

Fox News host Sean Hannity appears to have acted on the directives from the emails between President Donald Trump’s longtime political adviser Roger Stone and the advice apparently passed to him by Wikileaks through an intermediary. On Twitter, author Kurt Eichenwald points out that, among the details in the indictment of Stone, is a passage about Wikileaks’ plan to leak emails suggesting Hillary Clinton was seriously ill and Sean Hannity’s focus on Clinton’s health in […]

Washington Examiner

Published  2 months ago

President Trump on Saturday questioned why Hillary Clinton, former FBI Director James Comey, as well as other intelligence and FBI officials, have not been punished for making false statements following the indictment of his longtime political adviser Roger Stone.

“If Roger Stone was indicted for lying to Congress, what about the lying done by Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Lisa Page & lover, Baker and soooo many others? What about Hillary to FBI and her 33,000 deleted Emails? What about Lisa & Peter’s deleted texts & Wiener’s laptop? Much more!” Trump tweeted.

Stone was indicted by a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., on Thursday as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Stone was arrested at his Fort Lauderdale, Fla., home in an early-morning raid by the FBI on Friday and subsequently appeared in court.

He faces seven charges, including lying to Congress, witness tampering, and obstruction of justice.

A federal judge ordered him to be released on a $250,000 bond and restricted his travel to Washington, D.C., Florida, and New York.

Following the indictment, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders distanced the White House from Stone, telling CNN in an interview it had “nothing to do with” Trump.

The president frequently voices his ire at Mueller’s probe, calling it a “witch hunt” and raising questions as to why the Justice Department has not taken action against Clinton and others.

POLITICUSUSA

Published  2 months ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The House Intelligence Committee will release all transcripts of interviews in its probe of Russian election interference to the special counsel’s office, its Democratic chairman said after Roger Stone, a longtime ally of President Donald Trump, was charged with lying to Congress.

“This is now the second witness who has been indicted for or plead guilty to making false statements in testimony before our Committee,” Rep. Adam Schiff said in a statement. “The first order of business for the Committee will be to release all remaining transcripts to the Special Counsel’s Office, and we will continue to follow the facts wherever they lead.”

Schiff and Elijah Cummings, the chairman of the House oversight committee, said on Wednesday they expect Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, to testify before both panels, despite his decision to postpone his Feb. 7 appearance, citing threats against his family from Trump.

The chairmen said they understood Cohen’s security concerns, but added in a statement: “This will not stop us from getting to the truth. We expect Mr. Cohen to appear before both committees, and we remain engaged with his counsel about his upcoming appearances.”

Cohen is scheduled to begin a three-year prison sentence in March after pleading guilty to charges including lying to Congress.

(Reporting by Doina Chiacu; Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe)

AOL.com

Published  2 months ago

Unable to play video. HTML5 is not supported!

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday issued a blistering statement, hours after FBI agents arrested President Trump’s long-time ally Roger Stone.

“The indictment of Roger Stone makes clear that there was a deliberate, coordinated attempt by top Trump campaign officials to influence the 2016 election and subvert the will of the American people,” Pelosi said.

She continued: “In the face of 37 indictments, the President’s continued actions to undermine the Special Counsel investigation raise the questions: what does Putin have on the President, politically, personally or financially?”

SEE ALSO: Trump to college graduates in 2004: 'If there's a concrete wall in front of you, go through it, go over it, go around'

“The Special Counsel investigation is working, and the House will continue to exercise our constitutional oversight responsibility and ensure that the Special Counsel investigation can continue free from interference from the White House,” Pelosi added.

Several charges were filed against Stone, including witness tampering and false statements.

He was “charged as part of the special counsel investigation over his communications with WikiLeaks, the organization behind the release of thousands of stolen Democratic emails during the 2016 campaign,” reports the New York Times.

Reacting to the development, Trump tweeted: “Greatest Witch Hunt in the History of our Country! NO COLLUSION! Border Coyotes, Drug Dealers and Human Traffickers are treated better.”

More from Aol.com:

Steve King applauded at first Iowa event since House rebuke

Fox News' Sean Hannity issues warning to people saying Donald Trump 'caved'

Explainer: How Congress will negotiate border security deal

The Inquisitr

Published  2 months ago

Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner appear to be in danger of being indicted next after Robert Mueller’s investigation nabbed longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone, a legal expert said.

In the pre-dawn hours on Friday, FBI agents raided Stone’s home in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. As CNN reported, he is charged with obstruction, making false statement, and witness tampering. He made an appearance in court later on Friday before being released on $250,000 bond.

He is now the sixth person closely connected to Donald Trump’s campaign to be arrested as part of the Russia probe, and some legal experts believe that some of the biggest ones are now on the way. That includes Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., who supposedly engineered the now-infamous Trump Tower meeting in 2016 in which he and other top members of the Trump campaign met with a Kremlin-connected lawyer promising dirt on Hillary Clinton that had been allegedly stolen by Russian hackers.

Keith Boykin, a legal analyst for CNN and former White House aide, said on Friday that Roger Stone’s arrest shows that Robert Mueller is “methodically working his way to the top” by making smaller arrests first. Other legal experts have said that this was Mueller’s style while he was head of the FBI and leading other large investigations, using lower-level members of a criminal conspiracy to flip and offer information on larger targets.

As Boykin said, it’s likely that Donald Trump Jr. is one of those larger targets.

Roger Stone will not be the last Trump associate to be charged. Special Counsel Robert Mueller is methodically working this case to the top. If I were Donald Trump Jr. or Jared Kushner, I would be very afraid right now. https://t.co/yL2DFcDEVJ

— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) January 25, 2019

There have been reports for several weeks that Donald Trump Jr.’s arrest may be imminent, likely for lying to Congress about the Trump Tower meeting and of Donald Trump’s knowledge of it. In November, Politico reported that Trump Jr. was telling close friends that he expected to be indicted imminently.

“Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., who served as a key campaign surrogate for Republican candidates, has told friends in recent weeks that he believes he could be indicted, according to one of those people,” the report noted.

Indictment Friday! Roger Stone has been indicted and arrested in the Mueller probe for seeking stolen emails from WikiLeaks that could damage Trump's opponents at the direction of "a senior Trump Campaign official."

Now do Donald Jr! https://t.co/RNWnzrk2bU

— Amy Siskind ????️‍???? (@Amy_Siskind) January 25, 2019

Though Trump Jr. reportedly told investigators he did not tell his father about the Trump Tower meeting, reports claimed Robert Mueller’s team has evidence that he did, NY Magazine reported.

Others have hinted that Donald Trump Jr. would likely be a top-level target for Mueller, given his high-profile role in the campaign and with setting up the controversial meeting with Russia. So far, the tight-lipped leaders of the Russia investigation have given no hint of who could be the next target.

Conservative News Today

Published  2 months ago

An immature CNN commentator known for pretending to be a conservative reacted to the indictment Friday morning of President Donald Trump’s former campaign adviser Roger Stone by again acting like a spoiled, temperamental and hypocritical 12-year-old teenage child. “I am just so damn happy this guy is indicted and arrested. He is a horrible human […]

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Actor Michael Rapaport went off on a violent homophobic rant against the Covington High School Catholic children on Twitter on Saturday.

After three days the tweet is still live.

Twitter found NO VIOLATION of policy with the far left comedian’s violent content against the young high school boys.

They endorsed it.

Via Mark Dice:

Twitter has officially endorsed Michael Rappaport's video attacking the Covington boys as "Catholic c*ck suckers" (the same term that got Roger Stone banned permanently after he called Don Lemon one. He posted this bragging about how they won't suspend him. #VerifiedBullies pic.twitter.com/J3dXFwqrmo

— Mark Dice (@MarkDice) January 23, 2019

Rappaport’s vile tweet is still live.

Michael Rapaport received quite the response after making this rambunctious video calling the Covington MAGA children numerous derogatory terms, including “C*cksuckers”. Now the Netflix actor may have to pay out of his own pocket for his actions.

NEWS – A team of very high profile lawyers are joining together to fight for justice for the Covington Catholic High School students who were ruthlessly attacked by the media following a school trip to DC for the March for Life. According to lawyer Robert Barnes, who is representing several of the families, the team will include at least five lawyers from five different law firms — all with a record of high profile civil cases. We cannot yet report the names of the lawyers who are joining forces — but we can assure you that you have heard of their cases. When asked about who exactly they are planning to sue out of the hundreds of celebrities and journalists who defamed these boys, Barnes confirmed that former CNN host Reza Aslan, actor Michael Rapaport and ABC News senior political analyst anchor Matthew Dowd are on the list, “for starters.”

David Harris Jr

Published  2 months ago

Roger Stone is preparing for a war against the Robert Mueller witch hunt. He has added additional legal experts and has taken two comprehensive lie detector tests and passed them both with flying colors. Stone confirmed to The Hill that he hired Florida attorney Bruce Rogow as his lead lawyer. Rogow recommended that Stone take a lie detector test and he ended up taking two and passed them both.

Rogow said:

“I suggested a polygraph in order to pin down the veracity of Roger’s positions on the investigation by the special counsel with regard to Julian Assange and Wikileaks. I have great confidence in the polygraph examiner, to whom I sent Mr. Stone.”

ABC reported that Stone responded “no” to polygraph questions about whether he communicated with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange during the 2016 presidential election, and whether he ever discussed any stolen information from WikiLeaks with Trump during the same timeframe.

The news outlet noted that it was not able to verify the accuracy of the results.

Stone told The Hill he was “found to be truthful in both tests evaluated by two respected experts.” The Hill is not able to independently verify the test results.

While the Justice Department does not have specific rules on the use of polygraph tests in a trial, the practice has been found inadmissible in numerous cases.

Wild day that ended with us tracking down Roger Stone in a parking garage tonight. He told me he never talked to @realDonaldTrump about Wikileaks or hacked emails. And he says he’ll fight the charges. pic.twitter.com/HNQMMyNPpU

— Brian Entin (@BrianEntin) January 26, 2019

Roger Stone says he will not commit perjury and implicate the president in any wrong doing.

My book is here! And I personally handed a copy to our President at the White House!!! I hope you enjoy it @realDonaldTrump!

Follow David on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Patreon and YouTube @DavidJHarrisJr

Axios

Published  2 months ago

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued a statement Friday in response to the arrest of longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone, in which she claimed that Stone's indictment "makes clear that there was a deliberate, coordinated attempt by Trump campaign officials to influence the 2016 election and subvert the will of the American people."

"It is staggering that the President has chosen to surround himself with people who violated the integrity of our democracy and lied to the FBI and Congress about it."

The big picture: Pelosi points out that the 37 indictments issued by Robert Mueller, as well Trump's repeated attempts to undermine the special counsel's investigation, raise questions about his relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The New York Times reported earlier this month that Trump has privately considered withdrawing from NATO, which Pelosi says would be a "massive victory for Putin."

"The indictment of Roger Stone makes clear that there was a deliberate, coordinated attempt by top Trump campaign officials to influence the 2016 election and subvert the will of the American people. It is staggering that the President has chosen to surround himself with people who violated the integrity of our democracy and lied to the FBI and Congress about it.

In the face of 37 indictments, the President's continued actions to undermine the Special Counsel investigation raises the questions: what does Putin have on the President, politically, personally or financially? Why has the Trump Administration continued to discuss pulling the U.S. out of NATO, which would be a massive victory for Putin?

Lying to Congress and witness tampering constitute grave crimes. All who commit these illegal acts should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. We cannot allow any effort to intimidate witnesses or prevent them from appearing before Congress.

The Special Counsel investigation is working, and the House will continue to exercise our constitutional oversight responsibility and ensure that the Special Counsel investigation can continue free from interference from the White House."

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) issued a statement Friday night accusing President Donald Trump of being blackmailed by Russian President Vladimir Putin into undermining NATO. “What does Putin have on @realDonaldTrump, politically, personally or financially?” “Why has the Trump Administration continued to discuss pulling the U.S. out of NATO, which would be a […]

POLITICUSUSA

Published  2 months ago

Pelosi is not just doing her job to finally put a constitutional check on this presidency -- this crime and ethics violation ridden presidency, but she is quietly giving the women of this country the feeling that they matter and she won’t let this subjugating tyrant get off on hurting people anymore.

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Guest post by Joe Hoft Every time the corrupt Mueller gang, FBI and DOJ come out with a major news story it is strategically synchronized to cover up another scandal involving their corrupt actions.  Today’s arrest of Roger Stone is no exception. Today the corrupt Mueller gang arrested long time Trump friend Roger Stone.  He […]

Speaker Nancy Pelosi

Published  2 months ago

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after Special Counsel Mueller released a seven-count indictment of top Trump campaign advisor Roger Stone, for lying to Congress, witness tampering, and obstruction:

“The indictment of Roger Stone makes clear that there was a deliberate, coordinated attempt by top Trump campaign officials to influence the 2016 election and subvert the will of the American people. It is staggering that the President has chosen to surround himself with people who violated the integrity of our democracy and lied to the FBI and Congress about it.

“In the face of 37 indictments, the President’s continued actions to undermine the Special Counsel investigation raise the questions: what does Putin have on the President, politically, personally or financially? Why has the Trump Administration continued to discuss pulling the U.S. out of NATO, which would be a massive victory for Putin?

“Lying to Congress and witness tampering constitute grave crimes. All who commit these illegal acts should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. We cannot allow any effort to intimidate witnesses or prevent them from appearing before Congress.

“The Special Counsel investigation is working, and the House will continue to exercise our constitutional oversight responsibility and ensure that the Special Counsel investigation can continue free from interference from the White House.”

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

The FBI and Special Counsel Robert Mueller conducted a pre-dawn raid of 66-year-old Roger Stone on Friday morning in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Stone is under investigation for a process crime by Deep State Mueller. These police state tactics do not bother the FBI. They are proud of the work they do harassing innocent Americans in […]

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

The Mueller Witch Hunt and Deep State FBI stormed 66-year-old Roger Stone’s apartment on Friday morning with six vehicles and 29 fully armed FBI agents — not counting the CNN television crew who tagged along.

The Pentagon used less force when they used 25 Navy SEALs to storm Al-Qaeda 9-11 terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden’s home in 2011.

So it’s no wonder then that a majority of Americans — 50% — understand the Mueller probe is complete rubbish based on deep state lies.

Only 24% of Americans have a “great deal” of confidence in the coup d’etat investigation.

Even the left leaning WaPo-ABC poll finds that 50% of Americans don’t trust #Mueller to be completely fair and ethical.

Only 24% gave a “great deal” of confidence in Mueller’s integrity. https://t.co/YRjpaCLj6x

— John Cardillo (@johncardillo) January 27, 2019

TheHill

Published  2 months ago

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of Roger Stone elucidates what has been apparent to the public for a year, and therefore must have been known to prosecutors and the FBI for much longer: There was no criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian government. That is, the Kremlin’s cyber-espionage efforts to undermine the 2016 election by hacking Democratic email accounts were not coordinated with the Trump campaign.

In the Stone indictment, Mueller offers up 20 pages of heavy-breathing narrative about the Russian theft of tens of thousands of emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, the transmission of the purloined materials to WikiLeaks (portrayed as a witting arm of the Putin regime), and their subsequent media publication in the final weeks of the campaign. But the big wind produces no rain. At the end, we get a couple of pages of process crimes.

Stone is charged with such comparative trifles as concealing from Congress that his communications with an associate were in writing. The seven counts are offenses generated not by an espionage conspiracy but by the investigation of an espionage conspiracy that did not exist.

Not one that “may not have existed.” The Trump-Russia conspiracy did not exist.

This should not be controversial. It should not matter whether you like Donald Trump. It should not matter whether you believe, as I do, that Trump’s ingratiating campaign posture toward Vladimir Putin’s murderous anti-American regime was detestable, and that the Trump orbit’s cajoling of WikiLeaks — a cat’s paw of the GRU, Russia’s largest foreign intelligence agency, that has done immense damage to U.S. intelligence and national security — was reprehensible. It is simply a matter of reading the special counsel’s indictments, of seeing through their ambitious storytelling and grappling with what they actually charge.

It is very simple. If the Trump campaign had been in an espionage conspiracy with Russia to hack Democratic email accounts, why would the campaign have needed Stone to try to figure out what stolen information WikiLeaks had and when it would release that information?

Mind you, it appears that Stone did not know, either. The indictment suggests he was expecting a lollapalooza of a Clinton Foundation exposé that never materialized. Mueller does not make the claim, suggested widely in the media, that Stone had foreknowledge that Podesta’s emails would be disclosed. And, to repeat, Stone is not charged with being in a conspiracy with WikiLeaks.

As Election Day approached, then, the Trump campaign did not know what Russia had hacked and, indeed, had no more reason than the rest of us news consumers to suspect that Russia was behind the hacking of Democrats. It knew WikiLeaks might have emails that were somehow related to Mrs. Clinton because Julian Assange had said so quite publicly in June 2016. But the campaign did not know whose emails these were, or that WikiLeaks — which has many sources of stolen communications — necessarily got them from Russia. People in and around the Trump campaign had a dialogue with Stone about what WikiLeaks might be planning, but Stone was just speculating; though he had sources with better access to WikiLeaks than he had, they, too, were unsure.

Indications of the Trump campaign’s lack of knowledge about, much less involvement in, Russia’s operations are not new. They are completely consistent with the two indictments Mueller has filed against Russian enterprises: the “troll farm” case, charged in February 2018, and the hacking case, charged five months later. While the Russians never have been particularly effective at meddling in U.S. elections, their intelligence apparatus has been at it for the better part of a century. Peddling propaganda and, in modern times, hacking are not activities they need help with — not from Trump’s campaign or anyone else’s.

Democrats speculate that Putin wanted Trump to win. Most of us on the other side counter that he wanted to sow discord into American society regardless of who won. In either event, Putin’s desires do not make Trump complicit in Putin’s violations of American law — even if most of us can agree that Trump’s courting of Putin’s favor was nauseating (as were the Obama/Clinton “Russian Reset,” the Uranium One deal, Bill Clinton’s collection of a tidy $500,000 for a quickie Moscow speech, Barack Obama’s hot-mic promise of “flexibility” on Russian demands once the 2012 election was over, and so on).

There is abundant evidence of bipartisan American naiveté and policy foolishness regarding Putin’s regime. There is no proof of a criminal conspiracy between Trump and the Putin regime. To the contrary, Mueller continues to pile up proof in the opposite direction.

This being the case, there are three questions I’d suggest to Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who now chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee and has done yeoman’s work investigating Obama-era politicization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) process.

In all four of the warrants the Justice Department and FBI sought to monitor Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, the purportedly “verified” applications outlined Russia’s hacking operations and then, following a passage that has been deleted from the publicly released application, informed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) that “the FBI believes the Russian government’s efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with [Donald Trump’s] campaign.” This representation echoed then-FBI Director James Comey’s March 2017 House Intelligence Committee testimony that the FBI believed there was a basis to investigate “whether there was any coordination between the [Trump] campaign and Russia’s efforts.”

So here are the questions that Chairman Graham might consider putting to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein (who approved the last FISA warrant application on Page):

Do the Justice Department and the FBI still stand behind their representation to the FISC and their highly irregular, publicly announced suspicion that the Trump campaign coordinated in Russia’s cyber operations against the 2016 election?

If they do not continue to stand behind their representation to the court and public announcement to the committee, have they corrected the record with the FISC or the House Intelligence Committee (there not having been any public retraction)?

If they do stand behind their representation, how do they square that position with the indictments filed by Mueller, which have charged no Trump-Russia conspiracy, and which indicate there was no Trump-Russia conspiracy?

Many would say such questions can await Mueller’s final report. But even if the special counsel’s investigation is winding down, the indictment of Stone eventually could lead to a trial, and there is an active grand jury, so additional indictments are possible. The Mueller probe could go on for months. Americans are entitled to know now if the president and his campaign are suspected of being clandestine agents of Russia.

Former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior fellow at National Review Institute, a contributing editor at National Review, and a Fox News contributor.

Katrina Pierson

Published  2 months ago

As reported by DailyCaller

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders openly wondered if the FBI would be raiding the homes of Hillary Clinton, James Comey and James Clapper Friday morning after Roger Stone’s indictment.

The FBI raided the Florida home of Trump-confidant Roger Stone Friday morning after Stone was indicted by a grand jury on charges with seven counts, including allegedly making false statements to Congress, tampering with a witness and obstructing a government investigation.

The high-profile indictments were brought by special counsel Robert Mueller in the second year of the Russia collusion investigation.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders responded to the Roger Stone news Friday in an early interview with CNN. Sanders wondered if the same standards the FBI is employing with Stone would apply to other players in the 2016 election who have lied to the FBI.

When asked by CNN about the recent arrest, Sanders said, “We’ll let the courts make the decision. A bigger question is: If this is the standard, will the same standard apply to people like Hillary Clinton, James Comey and [James] Clapper?”

Clinton, former FBI director James Comey and former CIA Director James Clapper have all allegedly made false statements or been dishonest with the authorities during moments of official testimony.

Sanders continued, asking, “Will we see the same people we know have all made false statements? Will that same standard apply? That’s a question we’ll see what happens on that front.”

New York Post

Published  2 months ago

Self-styled dirty trickster Roger Stone whined to the media again Monday about how unfair the feds were when they raided his house Friday — claiming he was treated worse than Osama bin Laden, who was shot dead by Navy SEALs.

“I’m 66 years old, I do not own a gun, I do not have a valid passport, I have no prior criminal record, I’m charged with nonviolent process crimes,” President Trump’s longtime confidant mewled outside his Fort Lauderdale home, a day before his next court appearance.

“To storm my house with greater force than was used to take down bin Laden or El Chapo or Pablo Escobar, it’s unconscionable.”

Stone, an unofficial adviser on Trump’s campaign, was slapped Friday with a seven-count indictment on charges of witness tampering, lying to Congress and obstruction.

He’s also accused of inquiring about Hillary Clinton’s campaign’s stolen emails possessed by WikiLeaks on orders from a senior Trump campaign official.

Stone made similar self-pitying remarks Sunday on ABC News’ “This Week,” ripping the FBI for sending a SWAT team to his home, which the feds said was standard operating procedure in such cases.

Talking Points Memo

Published  2 months ago

Win McNamee/Getty Images North America

Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC), the new chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is demanding an explanation from the FBI about its handling of last week’s arrest of Roger Stone.

In a letter sent Wednesday to FBI Director Chris Wray, Graham said he was “leery” of Stone being arrested at his Florida home in the early morning hours Friday, rather than being allowed to surrender voluntarily. He questioned whether the “tactics” were necessary in Stone’s case. Graham suggested that those tactics “only added to the spectacle.”

That the FBI abused its power in its arrest of Stone, who was charged by special counsel Robert Mueller, is a growing conspiracy theory on the right, with Stone himself comparing the arrest to raids on Osama bin Laden and the drug lord El Chapo.

Among the questions Graham asked Wray to respond to specifically by Feb. 5, is whether federal law enforcement alerted CNN — which had a reporting team at Stone’s house when he was arrested — or other media outlets when the arrest was going to occur.

CNN, the only outlet there that morning, published an account of how its large team of reporters covering the Mueller probe put together that Stone’s arrest might be happening Friday, including clues from Mueller grand jury’s schedule and from how Mueller has handled previous defendants. Nowhere has CNN indicated that it was tipped off to the arrest by a source in Mueller’s team or the Justice Department.

Prosecutors, in seeking to place Stone’s indictment and arrest warrant under seal, said in court filings that public disclosure of the charges “will increase the risk of the defendant fleeing and destroying (or tampering with) evidence.”

FBI agents also showed up with a search warrant for Stone’s home when he was arrested, and his duplex in New York was also raided, an associate of his told CNN.

Read Graham’s letter below:

The Gateway Pundit

Published  2 months ago

Big League Politics writer Peter D’Abrosca is the latest casualty in Twitter’s war on free speech. As leftists continue to be allowed to call for acts of violence against the Covington teens, D’Abrosca was literally banned for breaking a rule he never broke.

According to an article on BLP from his compatriot Tom Pappert, Twitter has alleged that D’Abrosca was permanently banned for violating the platforms rules against “evading permanent suspension.” However, there’s one huge problem with Twitter’s reasoning for his ban, D’Abrosca has never been suspended in any form or fashion from the platform.

So how could he have been banned for violating a suspension that NEVER occurred? It seems that Twitter HQ is growing tired of even pretending to find “legitimate” reasons to censor conservative voices, seemingly adopting a program of immediate and final suspension of dissident voices that stand against globalist driven thought policing tactics that would put pep in the step of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels.

You see… leftists who are verified and empowered by Twitter can call for the Covington teens to be burnt alive or force fed into a woodchipper head first without facing suspension. But peaceful conservatives like D’Abrosca get banned FOR NOTHING.

Per Big League Politics…

“D’Abrosca and Big League Politics have attempted to contact Twitter to learn more about why the Big Tech platform decided to ban the conservative journalist and social media influencer and did not receive an immediate response.

This ban occurred on the heels of Big League Politics contributor Laura Loomer’s permanent suspension from the platform last month, when Twitter bowed to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and banned Loomer at its command. Loomer famously handcuffed herself to Twitter’s headquarters in protest, sparking national news over allegations of political censorship.”

Roger Stone has spent the past week framing the censorship of conservatives like D’Abrosca on digital platforms as the single biggest issue of our time. Watch him discuss it on the Infowars platform with Owen Shroyer.

In an exclusive quote for GP, D’Abrosca called the ban “egregious”.

“This appears to be the most egregious Twitter ban of a reporter yet. I was not banned for a specific Tweet that allegedly violated Twitter’s terms of service, but rather for a generic “evasion of permanent suspension. By definition, every Twitter user is trying to “evade permanent suspension” by conforming to the terms of service. I’m not even sure what that explanation means”

It was Alex Jones, Roger Stone, Laura Loomer and many others. Now it’s Peter D’Abrosca. Tomorrow… it’s you or me. This has to end.

dailycaller

Published  2 months ago

President Donald Trump responded Saturday to news of his confidant Roger Stone’s Friday indictment with a list of Democrats and justice officials he wants to see in trouble for alleged lying.

“If Roger Stone was indicted for lying to Congress, what about the lying done by Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Lisa Page [and] lover, Baker and soooo many others? What about Hillary to FBI and her 33,000 deleted Emails? What about Lisa [and] Peter’s deleted texts [and] Wiener’s laptop? Much more!” Trump wrote Saturday.

If Roger Stone was indicted for lying to Congress, what about the lying done by Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Lisa Page & lover, Baker and soooo many others? What about Hillary to FBI and her 33,000 deleted Emails? What about Lisa & Peter’s deleted texts & Wiener’s laptop? Much more!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 26, 2019

Stone was indicted Friday morning on five counts of lying to Congress, one count of witness tampering and one count of obstruction of a government proceeding. Stone appeared on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” Friday evening and said Trump never told him to get in touch with WikiLeaks and claimed the indictment was about “silencing” him.

Trump accused Hillary Clinton of lying to the FBI in his Saturday tweet over the tens of thousands emails deleted from the private server she used while U.S. secretary of state. (RELATED: Stone Indictment Undercuts Trump-Russia Collusion Narrative)

The FBI looked into Clinton’s handling of classified information on a private server, and it was a sticking point in the 2016 presidential election. The Daily Caller News Foundation reported on Jan. 12:

Clinton was interviewed by the FBI as part of the investigation on July 2, 2016, three days before then-FBI Director James Comey announced he would be recommending that Clinton be charged in the case.

The FBI concluded that Clinton had been “extremely careless” in using a private email server, language that rebuked the former secretary of state but did not carry legal weight. Ex-FBI Director James Comey, also mentioned in Trump’s Saturday tweet, had considered Clinton’s handling classified information on her private email account to be “grossly negligent” according to a 2016 memo draft, but the language was later softened.

Gross negligence in the handling of classified information can result in jail time.

Trump also dredged up the congressional interviews with former FBI employees Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, who had central roles in the investigations of the Trump 2016 campaign and special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, in his tweet. The president has used the pair’s apparent anti-Trump bias to characterize the investigations as a “witch hunt.”

Texts between the two former FBI employees, who were having an affair, show they said “we’ll stop” Trump from getting elected. The FBI “failed to preserve” five months’ worth of text messages between Strzok and Page.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The Washington Times

Published  2 months ago

WikiLeaks denied federal charges unsealed Friday against Roger Stone indicate a covert back channel existed between the antisecrecy group and President Trump’s former election campaign adviser.

Referred to as “Organization 1” throughout the seven-count indictment charging Mr. Stone, Mr. Trump’s longtime confidant, WikiLeaks reacted to its unsealing on Twitter by asserting that federal prosecutors presented: “New evidence of no ‘back channel’ with WikiLeaks.”

“Roger Stone indictment proves what @WikiLeaks has always said,” reads another tweet shared by WikiLeaks. “Stone ran around trying to claim a ‘back channel’ to draw attention to himself.”

Mr. Stone, 66, was arrested hours earlier at his home in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on federal charges of obstruction, lying to Congress and witness tampering, making the former Trump campaign adviser the sixth member of the president’s campaign to be indicted as a result of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the 2016 race. He was released on a $250,000 bond later Friday morning and said he will plead not guilty when he is formally arraigned.

WikiLeaks published emails during the 2016 race damaging to Mr. Trump’s opponent, former Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, and Mr. Mueller’s office is investigating the circumstances surrounding the theft and disclosure of that material, among other matters, on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Russian military officials sourced the stolen emails published by WikiLeaks, including Democratic National Committee dumped in late July 2016, and messages belonging to John Podesta, the chairman of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, leaked in the weeks prior to Mr. Trump’s victory that fall, according to U.S. intelligence officials.

Mr. Stone repeatedly touted WikiLeaks in the weeks between the DNC and Podesta leaks, including a new infamous Twitter post that seemingly predicted the latter. “Trust me, it will soon the Podesta’s time in the barrel,” Mr. Stone tweeted on Aug. 21, 2016.

Testifying before Congress in late 2017, Mr. Stone told members of the House Intelligence Committee that his references about WikiLeaks during the race referred exclusively to his contacts with an unnamed individual he described as a “go-between, as an intermediary, as a mutual friend” of Mr. Assange, the indictment noted. He later identified his source to Congress in a letter submitted through his lawyer as Randy Credico, an activist and radio host who has interviewed Mr. Assange, though Mr. Credico has denied acting as their intermediary.

“Back channel bs,” Mr. Credico wrote in a 2017 email to Mr. Stone cited by the special counsel’s office. “I have pieced it all together … so you may as well tell the truth that you had no back-channel or there’s the guy you were talking about early August.”

Indeed, the indictment alleges that Mr. Stone sought access to Mr. Assange in Aug. 2016 through Jerome Corsi — a conspiracy theorist and conservative author referred to as “Person 1” in the indictment — prior to attempting to create a cover story making Mr. Credico, referred to as “Person 2,” his link to the WikiLeaks publisher.

Mr. Stone “had directed Person 1—not Person 2—to contact the head of Organization 1,” Mr. Mueller wrote, albeit without disclosing those exchanges and others when asked by Congress.

Mr. Corsi, 72, previously said that he was able to “deduce” that WikiLeaks would publish emails belonging to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager, explaining: “I said, ‘I bet that’s what Assange is going to do because it’s what I would have done.”

WikiLeaks has “none whatsoever” connection to Mr. Corsi, a representative for the antisecrecy group told The Washington Times. Mr. Assange, 47, previously denied ties to Mr. Stone and asserted he was “trolling” Democrats.

“The document reflects existing reporting on Stone, Corsi & Credico’s attempts at braggadocio in response to WikiLeaks’ announcements,” WikiLeaks tweeted Friday.