Posted on 03/06/2017 12:45:44 PM PST by RoosterRedux
Two separate sources with links to the counter-intelligence community have confirmed to Heat Street that the FBI sought, and was granted, a FISA court warrant in October, giving counter-intelligence permission to examine the activities of ‘U.S. persons’ in Donald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia.
Contrary to earlier reporting in the New York Times, which cited FBI sources as saying that the agency did not believe that the private server in Donald Trump’s Trump Tower which was connected to a Russian bank had any nefarious purpose, the FBI’s counter-intelligence arm, sources say, re-drew an earlier FISA court request around possible financial and banking offenses related to the server. The first request, which, sources say, named Trump, was denied back in June, but the second was drawn more narrowly and was granted in October after evidence was presented of a server, possibly related to the Trump campaign, and its alleged links to two banks; SVB Bank and Russia’s Alfa Bank. While the Times story speaks of metadata, sources suggest that a FISA warrant was granted to look at the full content of emails and other related documents that may concern US persons.
The FBI agents who talked to the New York Times, and rubbished the ground-breaking stories of Slate ( Franklin Foer) and Mother Jones (David Corn) may not have known about the FISA warrant, sources say, because the counter-intelligence and criminal sides of the FBI often work independently of each other employing the principle of ‘compartmentalization’.
The FISA warrant was granted in connection with the investigation of suspected activity between the server and two banks, SVB Bank and Alfa Bank. However, it is thought in the intelligence community that the warrant covers any ‘US person’ connected to this investigation, and thus covers Donald Trump...
(Excerpt) Read more at heatst.com ...
None of us are saying that this is "normal". What we are saying is that the "normal" you cite wasn't very healthy.
The liberals in the media would lay low and carp at the president from the sidelines. Now they plant themselves on center stage and make an excellent target of themselves.
A lot of the reason things looked "normal" was that the GOP president; i.e., a Bush, wasn't doing anything that bothered the liberals in the press.
Rejoice!! We now have someone in the White House that scares the beejeebers out of the left!
You are right, but you are late to the game. The 50 points were already won.
____________________________________
Oct 2016
Schweizer explained the “deep ties” the Clintons have to Russia, specifically how in 2010 then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton approved the sale and transfer of 20% of U.S. uranium output to the Russian government ...”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/22/schweizer-wikileaks-show-clinton-campaign-chair-john-podesta-became-business-partners-vladimir-putin/
______________________________________
As part of just-inaugurated President Obama’s new foreign policy to improve relations between the United States and Russia, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in March 2009. Meeting in her hotel’s Salon Panorama in Geneva, she presented him with a small gift box containing a bright red button symbolizing the Obama administration’s desire to “reset” the relationship between the two governments.
Thus began an effort to transfer American technology to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s own “Silicon Valley,” called Skolkovo. In a report released in late July by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) entitled From Russia With Money, authors Stephen Bannon and Peter Schweitzer reviewed the long sordid history of the technology transfer from companies such as Google, Intel, and Cisco of hi-tech technology with useful military applications.
The report quoted warnings from the FBI and the U.S. Army Foreign Military Studies Program at Fort Leavenworth that the transfer would work against American interests. Warned the U.S. Army:
[The “reset” would serve as] a vehicle for world-wide technology transfers to Russia in the areas of information technology, biomedicine, energy, satellite and space technology, and nuclear technology.
It was clearly a “quid pro quo” arrangement: 17 of the 28 companies involved in the technology transfer gave millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation or to Bill Clinton for giving some speeches.
When those authors, both of whom are affiliated with Breitbart News, summed up their conclusions, one question remained: “The GAI investigative report says it’s unclear how much, if any, money [John] Podesta made.” Podesta, having served the Clintons for years, first as chief of staff to President Bill Clinton and then as counselor to President Obama and finally as Hillary’s campaign chairman, deserved a payoff.
But it wasn’t clear until the latest batch of e-mails provided by WikiLeaks went public last week that Americans now know. For his efforts Podesta received thousands of shares of common and preferred stock in one of the companies involved in the transfer. The fact came to light when WikiLeaks published e-mails Podesta sent to the company ordering it to transfer his shares to a shell corporation he had created a month earlier.
The e-mails included a letter Podesta wrote to the corporate secretary of that company instructing him to retitle 33,693 shares of preferred stock to Leonidio Holdings, LLC, a corporation that Podesta (or one of his staff) created using a Corporation Service Company to hide the shares from public view.
The company that gave Podesta the stock shares, Joule Unlimited, claims to be a producer of “alternative” energy technology that will eventually be able to produce energy that will be competitive with oil priced at $50 a barrel. It was a recipient of millions of Putin’s rubles as one of the gang of companies working to transfer American technology to Russia, one of America’s enemies.
As Schweizer told the New York Post in an interview in July:
The Clintons, they get their donations and speaking fees in the millions of dollars. The Russians get access to advanced US technology. The tech companies get special access to the Russian market and workforce….
All I ask is that people look at the money. Who made the deals, who benefited from the deals?
Thanks to WikiLeaks the “people” now know the name of at least one of those who participated in the deals and how he benefited from them: John Podesta, Hillary’s campaign manager.
Former Senator Al D’Amato (R-NY) dropped a bomb on Sunday Morning Futures this AM. D’Amato told Maria Bartiromo that Hillary allowed Russia to take ownership of US uranium so they could sell it to Iran.
Hillary made it possible for the Russians to take control of one of our huge uranium producers and allow them to own the company, export the uranium and who do they sell the uranium to? Iran!
Now if people knew that and that the foundation as a result of that got $135 million. I think people would start saying, “What?”
It’s true.
In January 2013, Pravda celebrated the Russian atomic energy agency’s purchase of the company “Uranium One” in Canada.
That same company, Uranium One, owned uranium concessions in the United States. Because uranium is a strategically important commodity, the Russians would need approval from the Obama administration, including Hillary’s State Department, before the purchase took place.
Nine shareholders in Uranium One just happened to provide more than $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation in the run-up to State Department approval.
The Clintons took the cash from Uranium One officials before the deal was approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department. The Clintons hid the donations which is a clear violation of the Memorandum of Understanding Hillary Clinton signed with the Obama administration wherein she promised and agreed to publicly disclose all donations during her tenure as Secreatary of State. (Via Breitbart)
The New York Times reported on the crooked deal in 2015.
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
And then there’s this...
Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) told Greta Van Susteren the deal Hillary approved gave Putin ownership of 20 percent of US uranium and Russia sells uranium to unfriendly countries, including Iran.
______________________________________________________________
Remember those side deals Obama forged with Iran that were not part of the text of the official treaty? Now we are finding out some of the details.
Yesterday, the Washington Free Beacon reported that Iranian officials confirmed they have received at least $10 billion in cash, commodities, and assets from Washington since 2013. And that is likely a conservative estimate.
But cash is not the only thing the Islamic Republic of Iran is receiving for gracing us with their willingness to sign onto our own capitulation. The AP is reporting that Russia, with the support of President Obama, is shipping Iran 116 metric tons of natural uranium.
While Iranian officials have obviously declined to disclose the use of such uranium, AP notes that this is enough to enrich weapons-grade uranium for nuclear bombs:
“Despite present restrictions on its enrichment program, however, the amount of natural uranium is significant should Iran decide to keep it in storage, considering its potential uses once some limits on Tehran’s nuclear activities start to expire in less than a decade.
David Albright, whose Institute of Science and International Security often briefs U.S. lawmakers on Iran’s nuclear program, says the shipment could be enriched to enough weapons-grade uranium for more than 10 simple nuclear bombs, “depending on the efficiency of the enrichment process and the design of the nuclear weapon.” ...”
Without the net, cable, FB, TWITTER, etc., it took the damned lefties and Commies TWO DECADES to bring down Nixon, who DID "fight back"!
It took them 4-5 years to "ruin" W.
Not that I'm an Andy Jackson fan, but it took the WHIGS the whole election season to pile on, badly enough to KILL his wife; however, they sort of left him "alone" during his presidency.
You don't even understand what I meant by "normal"...or perhaps you are just twisting what I wrote to fit your own benighted, blind, view. I'm guessing the latter.
This nation will NOT come away from all of this unscathed. Neither is it "WINNING" when a large part of the populace will NEVER believe/care about what was and is still being done to the president and those around him.
Sure...Obama started and continues to fuel this, the MSM has been his "handmaiden", but face facts....TRUMP CAN'T CURE THIS; NOT IN 4 NOR 8 YEARS!
And the morons who constantly post "BEST ELECTION EVER", are out of their freaking minds!
Thank you for your post at #7. It provides an excellent summary for a drive-by Freeper.
But let me take polite issue with your conclusion above.
One of the benefits of having a bottom line operator in the Oval Office rather than a career politician is that he will most likely intuitively realize the players can provide too little, or nothing at all in the form of [B] enormous political concessions.
This for three reasons: either they cannot provide anything of size at all, or can provide only something with a limited shelf life, or will be able to provide only that which he himself can obtain in the normal course of his presidency.
It is true, of course, that he will certainly dangle benefits to entice the fringe players to be of assistance.
But I think he will choose to “behead” those in the top ranks with [A] above as being the more effective. (AKA, the "heads on pikes" gambit.)
Please explain!We got liberals and RINOs - literally - crying every other day and/or pulling their hair out. It is like Disneyworld for me every day! OMG, it is so much fun to monitor Trump's Twitter feed and watch the latest fallout. This is too much fun!
I personally have never posted “Best Election Ever” but I feel that the extreme negative reaction you have to this phrase is a little weird. All the illegal and immoral actions that Obama, the Democrats, and the leftist media took to destroy Donald Trump are boomeranging back at them. We do not know how this will all turn out, but the ultimate result is likely to be irreparable damage to all of their credibility. We are watching the whole dirty game blow up in their faces. So I understand exactly why there are many people who believe that this is the “best election ever”.
Enjoy your giggles, as this nation disintegrates, Trump et al are savaged, the president's cabinet and 1,000s of those he needs in place takes forever, if ever, neither Hillary nor Obama or anyone else goes to jail, and at least 40% of this nation believes the lies.
My "negative" reaction is valid. Posting that, NOW, is STUPID to keep posting that, now that Trump is president! It's childish, banal, and yes, uneducated...not to mention meaningless. And WHY it gets posted when BAD NEWS/CRAP is being talked about, is DELUSIONAL in the extreme.
Taking down the left means breaking them up into pieces allowing each piece to go its own way. That entails names, sources, assets, methods.
Example: Human trafficking unraveling, foreign funding, shady pay for play trade deals, NY Fed/Wall St. Capture
It also means standing down as the President passes his agenda.
Reagan defeated the USSR by allying with JP II, Margaret Thatcher to cause overwhelming internal dissension in the streets of Moscow, Leningrad, etc., by starving them of oil revenue, by arming their peripheral enemies.
Internal dissent, defunding, arming enemies, these things may also lead to the breakup of the leftist socialism of the democratic party. What will be left are the soul searchers.
Trump’s biggest weakness or biggest challenge will be in developing an effective succession plan. He will be an enormously hard act to follow. To prepare for this deficiency, an outside restructuring effort will be needed so that the country is better able to handle the dark or misguided ambitions and inadequate talents of lesser persons.
Here is a prescription for that:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3523449/posts?page=15#15
On the other hand, the nation could be fortunate to have two back-to-back great leaders. But the above prescription is good insurance regardless.
Now the Obamacare repeal and replace news just hit the headlines so this topic will slip for a time.
This from the Daily Beast: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3532153/posts
This is a good thing! The left is eating its own. Notice the author of this article complaining about the lack of “normal”.
The Wikileaks info turned the Sanders liberals against the establishment left. The Daily Beast is not giving Obama a pass! This type of article is the natural fallout.
On the other hand, YOU would have been happier with a POTUS who didn’t stir the waters and a POTUS with which the MSM would have played footsy just so you could feel “normal”?
We can hope he will indeed make substantial headway with the larger task and perhaps as you point out, he will be succeeded by one with a similar approach.
Oh, yes. They lied. The real reason to wiretap Trump was to get information on him to use against him.
The ENDS justify the MEANS. They had to lie to put the caper into place without getting stopped.
To a democrat, that’s just a little lie, like calling in sick to work so you can go fishing. “Hey, the fish are biting and I don’t feel like working! What’s the big deal, man!?”
Some will even argue that because it was about getting info on Trump, it was justified,
Bookmark
That plan failed. And he became president. Is there a plan B to destroy Trump? Do they have an ultimate solution planned?
BEST ELECTION EVER!!!!!!
By the way, I am 85 and have witnessed a lot of elections. I remember vividly Pearl Harbor and the death of FDR.
Newspapers and the nine P.M. news on radio were our only sources for news back then.
I read your posts religiously, but can’t agree with you on this.
Is that probable cause? Probable cause is "reasonable grounds to suspect a person is or has committed a crime."
"A server possibly related to the Trump campaign" and "alleged links" sound too far-fetched for probable cause.
From what I can tell no evidence was or has been produced to raise probable cause.
If that is the case, the warrant, which requires probable cause, was erroneously issued.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.