Trust The Plan YouTube Where We Go 1 We Go All Qanon is 100% coming from the Trump Administration. - 6 min YouTube President Trump This Video Will Get Donald Trump Elected (The Plan) - 6 min Table tang-soo et. al. Q Boot Camp Quickest way to learn the basics about Q. CLICK HERE to see the full table
https://donsurber.blogspot.com/2019/05/the-walls-are-closing-in-on-obamas-spies.html
The walls are closing in on Obama’s spies
Washington Post in April 2018: “The walls are closing in. And Trump’s lawyers know it. “
CNN last December: “The walls are closing in on Trump.”
Newsweek in March: “Donald Trump Knows Walls Are Closing In As Mueller Report Looms.”
Then the Mueller Report arrived. Now the walls are closing in on the spies and others who broke the law on behalf of Obama.
Kimberley A. Strassel of the Wall Street Journal wrote, “Barr gets attacked because his probe endangers powerful people.”
(As I read that headline, I could have sworn I heard someone singing, “He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored.”)
Strassel wrote, “Mr. Barr made real news in that Senate hearing, and while the press didn’t notice, Democrats did. The attorney general said he’d already assigned people at the Justice Department to assist his investigation of the origins of the Trump-Russia probe. He said his review would be far-reaching — that he was obtaining details from congressional investigations, from the ongoing probe by the department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, and even from Mr. Mueller’s work. Mr. Barr said the investigation wouldn’t focus only on the fall 2016 justifications for secret surveillance warrants against Trump team members but would go back months earlier.
“He also said he’d focus on the infamous dossier concocted by opposition-research firm Fusion GPS and British former spy Christopher Steele, on which the FBI relied so heavily in its probe. Mr. Barr acknowledged his concern that the dossier itself could be Russian disinformation, a possibility he described as not “entirely speculative.” He also revealed that the department has “multiple criminal leak investigations under way” into the disclosure of classified details about the Trump-Russia investigation.
“Do not underestimate how many powerful people in Washington have something to lose from Mr. Barr’s probe. Among them: Former and current leaders of the law-enforcement and intelligence communities. The Democratic Party pooh-bahs who paid a foreign national (Mr. Steele) to collect information from Russians and deliver it to the FBI. The government officials who misused their positions to target a presidential campaign. The leakers. The media. More than reputations are at risk. Revelations could lead to lawsuits, formal disciplinary actions, lost jobs, even criminal prosecution.”
***
She has been one of the few voices of reason in a media filled with hysterical people who have a foaming-mouth hatred of Donald John Trump and now, every single one of his supporters. Witness the censoring of us on social media.
Judge Jeanine Pirro has been another Cassandra among the legions of liars.
On Saturday night, she said, “The Democrats have turned into the angry, unreasonable mob that you usually see in the movies, but have you ever seen a real-life bunch of crazies so desperate to hang on to a narrative dispelled by their own team that they’re running around like chickens with their own heads cut off? Their one mantra ‘impeach anyone who gets in their way’ and this week it was this man — Attorney General Bill Barr.”
She also said Mueller’s investigation was the “biggest political con job and the closest attempt to a successful coup in American history.”
What our Pravda media has failed to understand is the truth eventually seeps out.
And Americans side with the truth.
A CNN poll found “69% think Congress ought to investigate the origins of the Justice Department’s inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including 76% of Democrats, 69% of independents and 62% of Republicans.”
Discrediting Bill Barr will do these leeches and villains as much good as overselling Bob Mueller, who failed to find so much as even a jaywalking by President Trump.
Because truth and justice are the American way, the only way to truly Make America Great Again is by sending some people to prison for this coup d’etat by kooks.
Who was handling Halper and Mifsud? What is the Privy Council and what hand did it have in everything? Read and find out!
-SB
I tried to submit a post and it’s under review. I then tried to send you a freepmail, and was told my account was too new for that feature. I’ve been here since 2001 — what gives
Steele’s stunning pre-FISA confession: Informant needed to air Trump dirt before election
By John Solomon
FTA:
...
If ever there were an admission that taints the FBI’s secret warrant to surveil Donald Trump’s campaign, it sat buried for more than two-and-a-half years in the files of a high-ranking State Department official.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec’s written account of her Oct. 11, 2016, meeting with FBI informant Christopher Steele shows the Hillary Clinton campaign-funded British intelligence operative admitted that his research was political and facing an Election Day deadline.
ADVERTISEMENT
And that confession occurred 10 days before the FBI used Steele’s now-discredited dossier to justify securing a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page and the campaign’s ties to Russia.
Steele’s client “is keen to see this information come to light prior to November 8,” the date of the 2016 election, Kavalec wrote in a typed summary of her meeting with Steele and Tatyana Duran, a colleague from Steele’s Orbis Security firm. The memos were unearthed a few days ago through open-records litigation by the conservative group Citizens United.
Kavalec’s notes do not appear to have been provided to the House Intelligence Committee during its Russia probe, according to former Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.). “They tried to hide a lot of documents from us during our investigation, and it usually turns out there’s a reason for it,” Nunes told me. Senate and House Judiciary investigators told me they did not know about them, even though they investigated Steele’s behavior in 2017-18.
One member of Congress transmitted the memos this week to the Department of Justice’s inspector general, fearing its investigation of FISA abuses may not have had access to them.
Nonetheless, the FBI is doing its best to keep much of Kavalec’s information secret by retroactively claiming it is classified, even though it was originally marked unclassified in 2016.
The apparent effort to hide Kavalec’s notes from her contact with Steele has persisted for some time.
...
DOJ to Nadler: Threaten Barr With Impeachment, You Get Nothing…
Smart move by DOJ lawyers. The letter below informs Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler the previous report content was provided without assertion of executive privilege; however, if Nadler follows-through with impeachment plan, executive privilege is now enforced and the totality of the report is withdrawn from congress.
**************
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Legislative Affairs
Office of the Assistant Attorney General
Washington, D.C. 20530
May 7, 2019
The Honorable Jerrold Nadler
Chairman
Committee on the Judiciary
United States House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Chairman Nadler:
As you know, the Attorney General has repeatedly sought to accomodate the interests of the House Committee on the Judiciary in the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III. On April 18, 2019, the Attorney General voluntarily disclosed to Congress the Special Counsel’s report, which was intended to be “confidential” under the applicable regulations, with as few redactions as possible, consistent with the law and long-established confidentiality interests of the Executive Branch. He also made available to you and other congressional leaders a minimally redacted version of the report that excluded only
grand-jury information, which could not lawfully be shared with Congress. In response, you refused even to review the minimally redacted report, and you immediately served a subpoena, dated April 18, 2019, demanding production of the fully unredacted report and the Special Counsel’s entire investigative files, which consist of millions of pages of classified and unclassified documents, bearing upon more than two dozen criminal cases and investigations, many of which are ongoing.
Since then, the Department of Justice has offered further accommodations to the Committee. In particular, the Department offered to expand the number of staff members who may review the minimally redacted report; to allow Members of Congress who have reviewed the minimally redacted report to discuss the material freely among themselves; and to allow Members to take and retain their notes following their review. We expressed our hope that these further accommodations would prompt you and your colleagues actually to review the minimally redacted report, which would allow the parties to engage in meaningful discussions regarding
possible further accommodations of the Committee’s additional expansive requests. We further proposed a framework for those discussions, and made clear that we were open to conducting them on an expedited basis.
Unfortunately, the Committee has responded to our accommodation efforts by escalating its unreasonable demands and scheduling a committee vote to recommend that the Attorney General be held in contempt of Congress. In particular, the Committee has demanded that the Department authorize review of the minimally redacted report by all 41 members of the Committee, as well as all members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and additional staff members. As we have explained, however, doing so would force the Department to risk violating court orders and rules in multiple ongoing prosecutions, as well as risk the disclosure of information that could compromise ongoing investigations. In addition, you have demanded that the Department join in a request that a court grant the Committee access to grand-jury material protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(r), even though we have explained that such a request would force the Department to ignore existing law. Such unreasonable demands, together with the Committee’s precipitous threat to hold the Attorney General in contempt, are a transparent attempt to short-circuit the constitutionally mandated accommodation process and provoke an unnecessary conflict between our respective branches of government. They are also counterproductive. They will not further the Committee’s interests in obtaining the requested information.
In the face of the Committee’s threatened contempt vote, the Attorney General will be compelled to request that the President invoke executive privilege with respect to the materials subject to the subpoena. I hereby request that the Committee hold the subpoena in abeyance and delay any vote on whether to recommend a citation of contempt for noncompliance with the subpoena, pending the President’s determination of this question.
This request is consistent with long-standing policy of the Executive Branch about congressional requests for information implicating executive privilege. See President Ronald Reagan, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, Procedures Governing Responses to Congressional Requests for Information 2 (Nov. 4, 1982) (directing executive agencies to “request the Congressional body to hold its request for the information in abeyance” in order to “protect the privilege pending a Presidential decision”). Regrettably, the Committee has made this request necessary by threatening to pretermit the constitutionally mandated accommodation process between the branches and to hold a vote on contempt tomorrow morning.
This request is not itself an assertion of executive privilege. If the Committee decides to proceed in spite of this request, however, the Attorney General will advise the President to make a protective assertion of executive privilege over the subpoenaed material, which undoubtedly includes material covered by executive privilege. President Clinton, acting on the advice of Attorney General Janet Reno, made such a protective assertion of privilege in similar circumstances. See Protective Assertion of Executive Privilege Regarding White House Counsel’s Office Documents, 20 Op. O.L.C. 1(1996). We remain open to further discussions with the Committee, and we hope that the Committee does not make it necessary for the President to take that step tomorrow.
Sincerely,
Stephen E. Boyd
Assistant Attorney General
cc: The Honorable Doug Collins
Ranking Member
**************
The only thing AG Barr was statutorily required to provide was the four-page summary letter he already presented. Asking President Trump to throw the executive privilege blanket over the full work product effectively shields it from congressional review; AND simultaneously blocks congress from proceeding with any impeachment action.
The assertion of executive privilege effectively removes any lack of production action (ie. the impeachment threat) by Chairman Jerry Nadler.
Essentially AG Barr et al is going old school with classic separation of power. POTUS Trump built a bridge from executive to legislative branch with voluntary production; however, if Nadler wants to be a resistance member then the executive branch will pull back and the customary three-branch separation of power rules will be the standard form of engagement.
Smart play.
Wow, I somehow came across this while digging. It’s General Mike Flynn on what Hillary really did in Libya, from October of 2016.
-SB
Farrakhan insists he doesn’t hate Jews, says his ideas labeled ‘dangerous’ because people can research them
By Lukas Mikelionis | Fox News
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan defended himself Thursday after Facebook banned him earlier in the week, saying he’s doesn’t hate Jewish people, women or the LGBT community.
The hate group leader was speaking at a Roman Catholic church on Chicago’s South Side after the Rev. Michael Pfleger invited him following his ban by the social media giant, which had labeled his ideas “dangerous.”
Farrakhan said people shouldn’t get angry with him because, “I stand on God’s word,” and that those who criticize and hate him have never had a conversation with him. Otherwise, he said, they might change their minds.
He agreed with Facebook that he’s dangerous, but said it was because he speaks on issues that can be researched by his listeners.
“Social media, you met me tonight. I plead with the rulers, let the truth be taught,” he said.
“Social media, you met me tonight. I plead with the rulers, let the truth be taught.”
— Louis Farrakhan
Farrakhan has long been criticized for his anti-Semitic and racist comments. Last year, he lost his verified status on Twitter after posting a hateful video in which he asked, “Will you recognize Satan? I wonder, will you see the Satanic Jew and the Synagogue of Satan, which has many races in it because Satan has deceived the whole world?”
LOUIS FARRAKHAN WON’T BE SUSPENDED BY TWITTER DESPITE ANTI-SEMITIC TWEET
He doubled-down on his anti-Semitic rhetoric, posting another video in recent months where he says that he wasn’t prejudiced against Jewish people but was simply “anti-Termite.”
In November, Farrakhan and his groupies went on a solidarity trip to Iran and led “Death to America” chants.
During the trip, Farrakhan told Iranian students that “America has never been a democracy,” and also led a “Death to Israel” chant at the end of his talk, Iranian news agencies reported.
In the past, he also expressed Holocaust denial and admiration for Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, prompting the media to dub him “Black Hitler.”
Farrakhan’s Chicago appearance didn’t go without controversy. The Archdiocese of Chicago said the decision to invite him was made solely by Pfleger, who didn’t consult with other church officials about it.
“There is no place in American life for discriminatory rhetoric of any kind,” the archdiocese said in a statement. “At a time when hate crimes are on the rise, when religious believers are murdered in their places of worship, we cannot countenance any speech that dehumanizes persons on the basis of ethnicity, religious belief, economic status or country of origin.”
The Illinois Holocaust Museum also spoke out against Pfleger for “giving hatred a platform.”
Museum president and Holocaust survivor Fritzie Fritzshall said that when community leaders like Pfleger give a platform to hate and anti-Semitism, “it increases the threat against all of humanity.”
Lukas Mikelionis is a reporter for FoxNews.com. Follow him on Twitter @LukasMikelionis.
...and YOU DO NOT WANT MY OPINION OF THIS POS...
