What exactly was Justice Department official Bruce Ohr worried about being exposed? Nobody knows…yet. However, his email to the man behind the unverified “Steele dossier,” the misinformation fan fiction hand-delivered by the Kremlin to the Clinton Campaign, made clear that Ohr was “very concerned about Comey’s firing – afraid they will be exposed.” It has already been revealed by now fired FBI agent Peter Strzok that “the FBI received documents and materials from Mr. Ohr.” The FBI also used this unverified dossier as the basis for surveillance warrants against a presidential candidate. Perhaps it’s time the DOJ appointed another special prosecutor to investigate the special prosecutor.
Here’s more from Fox News…
A collection of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr’s emails, texts and handwritten notes, reviewed by Fox News, reveals that he was deeply connected to the unverified Steele dossier as well as its author and, during the presidential election campaign, the alleged government surveillance abuses involving a Trump campaign official.
The dossier, which was used by federal officials to justify the surveillance of a top Trump aide, Carter Page, was created by Fusion GPS and paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
Ohr wrote that Christopher Steele, the ex-British spy who wrote the salacious dossier, was “very concerned (abt) about [former FBI Director James] Comey’s firing — afraid they will be exposed.”
The Ohr documents shed more light on Steele’s activities before the presidential election. While Steele shopped the dossier to multiple media outlets, he also appeared to ask Ohr for help with a Russian oligarch — Oleg Deripaska — after rumors the U.S. might impose sanctions.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has now vowed his Capitol Hill claque will sue to get requested documents related to the Ken Starr investigation. These documents – numbering in the millions – are part of the left’s effort to find some sort of silver bullet to block Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings, which begin on September 4. The agency affected by the FOIA request has until September 6 to fork over the leviathan of paperwork, with Schumer pointedly noting “we stand ready to sue the National Archives” for failing to deliver. This is the left’s Hail Mary attempt.
Here’s more from PJ Media…
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) vowed today that Democrats are poised to sue to get documents on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh requested through the Freedom of Information Act last week.
Senate Democrats contend that Republicans are trying to conceal documents about Kavanaugh’s career, which stretches back into the Ken Starr investigation, his three years as staff secretary in the George W. Bush White House, and his appointment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Dems argue that their request is identical to the dig Republicans did through the records of nominee Elena Kagan, who was a domestic policy advisor in the Clinton White House and solicitor general under Obama.
Republicans say that the request for millions of documents is a stall tactic intended to derail Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) goal of having a new justice seated by Oct. 1.
Many months after his anti-Trump text messages were exposed during his tenure on Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation of alleged campaign collusion, FBI agent Peter Strzok has finally been fired. According to a report from The Washington Post, FBI Deputy Director David L. Bowdich overruled a junior director who had previously recommended that the 22-year veteran of the FBI–who also investigated Hillary Clinton’s secret server and classified emails–be merely demoted and suspended for sixty days over his “politically charged” texts. The obvious question is why Strzok has continued to be employed for so long after both his dalliance with a fellow FBI agent and the discovery of their apparent collusion to prevent the election of Donald Trump. Justice has been served albeit long overdue.
Here’s more from The Daily Wire…
The FBI has fired embattled agent Peter Strzok over a series of anti-Trump texts sent in the midst of his work on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russian officials to sway the 2016 Presidential election.
The Washington Post was the first to report that FBI Deputy Director David L. Bowdich ordered Strzok fired on Friday, overruling a more junior FBI deputy director who recommended Strzok be demoted and suspended for 60 days for his anti-Trump texts.
Strzok, of course, was a 22-year veteran of the FBI and a lead investigator on two crucial cases: an FBI probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server and a private email address during her time as Secretary of State and the all-important Mueller investigation.
Former presidential candidate New York City mayor and now Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani announced on Monday that President Trump will not interview before Special Counsel Robert Mueller because the investigation is a sham. During the Fox News Hannity appearance, Giuliani argued the potential Trump-Mueller interview would amount to a perjury trap. Further, Giuliani pointed out that Trump’s legal team is in a stronger position against the still unsubstantiated collusion allegations. The point is obvious: if Mueller had anything solid on Trump, we’d know about by now because the FBI’s collusion with the DNC would have produced it. It’s the new Red Scare in which Mueller is the new McCarthy.
Here’s more from PJ Media…
Former New York City mayor-turned-Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani said Monday night that he will likely not allow Trump to be interviewed by anyone on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team because the Russia investigation is not legitimate.
Appearing on Fox News’ Hannity, Giuliani said a potential Trump-Mueller interview is “highly unlikely” because he would be walking into a perjury trap.
“I always have to leave the option open as a lawyer in case they come across with something that really startles us or fills some of the things that we feel are important,” he said.
Giuliani explained that because of the great work Trump’s attorneys did early on — providing Mueller with “1.4 million documents” and “32 witnesses” — Trump’s legal team is in a position today in which they no longer need to cooperate.
“I believe we are coming toward the end, so I’m talking to some of the people that were involved in the original part of the investigation,” he said.
With a hefty six-figure salary and naps on the daily agenda, it’s not surprising that 85-year-old U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg refuses to retire. Her job commitment, however, has nothing to do with the benefits and everything to do with spiting President Donald Trump. Instead, the possibility of a Democrat appointee has her thinking she’s got “at least five more years.” President Trump fired back via Twitter regarding her comments made during a CNN interview: “Her mind is shot–resign!” A more substantive issue at hand is Canon 5 of the Code of Conduct, which says a federal “judge should not publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office.” RBG has violated that numerous times. In other words, she’s a typically hypocritical leftist.
Here’s more from BPR…
U.S. Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 85, refuses to retire and wants to stay on the bench for another five years. Not because she loves her job, but because she apparently wants to spite President Trump.
“I’m now 85,” Ginsburg told CNN on July 29. “My senior colleague, Justice John Paul Stevens, stepped down when he was 90, so think I have at least five more years.”
Ginsburg, a liberal, was appointed in 1994 by Bill Clinton. Ginsburg previously suggested that she would have retired this year if Hillary Clinton had won the presidency.
Ginsburg is now digging in her brittle heels amid liberal hysteria that President Donald Trump will get to appoint three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court when she retires.
In 2017, Trump appointed 50-year-old Neil Gorsuch to SCOTUS. He recently nominated appellate court judge Brett Kavanaugh, age 53, to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy, who’s retiring.
Members of the House’s conservative Freedom Caucus introduced articles of impeachment for Rod Rosenstein this week in what is being seen as a shot across the FBI’s bow. Though the move is almost certainly not going to cross the two-thirds vote threshold in the Senate (assuming it even gets out of the House), it does send a signal to heads of the FBI and DOJ that Congress’ patience is growing thin. With Mueller’s interminable investigation still churning will little results and with perpetual stonewalling of congressional investigations, we’re beginning to wonder if the ‘I’ in FBI might more appropriately refer to incompetence.
Here’s more from PJ Media…
Some members of the House Freedom Caucus introduced articles of impeachment against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein today, charging that the Justice Department official has withheld investigative information from GOPs in Congress, failed to comply with congressional subpoenas and abused the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
The impeachment documents may not even come to the House floor for a vote, though. They were introduced by Freedom Caucus founder Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and current Chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), along with nine other members.
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) was not among the co-sponsors. Ten days ago, he was asked on CBS if he would be on board the effort. “No. For what? Impeach him for what? No,” Gowdy replied.
If the proposal cleared the House, it would need a two-thirds vote in the Senate for Rosenstein to lose his job. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) already cast his vote, tweeting this evening, “This Senate Republican does not agree.”
A just released poll is frustrating for the Democratic Party going into November. Not only is the generic ballot advantage for Dems now virtually nonexistent, but the latest poll also shows that voters in key states approve of the Senate’s prospective confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. What’s more important is that the poll was conducted in four states where major Senate elections will be held in November, which are critical to the possibility of the Democrats regaining control of the Senate. The gist: if the Democratic candidates run against Kavanaugh in those states, they’ll likely lose and be unable to prevail. Pick your poison, boys.
Here’s more from The Daily Caller…
New public opinion polling shows strong majorities of voters favor the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court in red states represented by Democratic senators standing for ree-lection in November.
The poll also indicates that opposition to Kavanaugh is negligible in the opening stages of the confirmation process.
The survey polled voters in Alabama, Indiana, North Dakota, and West Virginia, four states President Donald Trump carried comfortably in the 2016 presidential election. Incumbent Democratic senators are running for reelection this November in Indiana, North Dakota, and West Virginia, while Alabama Democratic Sen. Doug Jones faces voters again in 2020.
The polls show voters favor Kavanaugh’s confirmation by a wide margin: 54 percent of Alabama voters, 52 percent of Indiana voters, 60 percent of North Dakota voters, and 55 percent of West Virginia voters answered affirmatively when asked if the judge should be confirmed to the high court. Results were similar among registered independents across all four states.
Over the weekend the FBI dumped the much-maligned FISA Warrant application (translation: media avoidance strategy) after months of prodding from Congress. Though it was highly-redacted (translation: lots of details still unknown), what we can see demonstrates that the memo from Rep. Devin Nunes from back in February was overwhelmingly accurate. And lest we forget, the conclusions included the facts that the FBI used sketchy details about its investigation of a low-level Trump adviser as an excuse to file for the FISA Warrant and that the Russia dossier base on that investigation was created in coordination with the DNC. And now the left is heaping the criticism (translation: they’re circling the wagons).
Here’s more from Washington Examiner…
The weekend release of a highly-redacted version of the FBI’s application for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to wiretap onetime Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page has renewed the argument over the Nunes memo — the brief report produced by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes detailing problems in the application. From the time of the memo’s release in February, Democrats and some in the press have denounced it as a collection of lies and mischaracterizations. On Saturday night, the denouncing started again. “The only thing the newly released FISA documents show is that Republicans have been lying for months,” the lefty think tank Center for American Progress said in a typical response.
Now, however, we have both the memo and the FISA application, if in a blacked-out state. We can compare the two. And doing so shows the Nunes memo was overwhelmingly accurate. Perhaps some Democrats do not believe it should have been written, or they dispute what it included and left out, or they do not agree with its conclusions, but it was in fact accurate.
The memo comprised a short introduction followed by 13 substantive paragraphs. Here is a look at each one.
The first paragraph:
On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a US citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI.
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals delivered yet another key victory to the Trump administration which also doubles as a direct rejection of the Obama administration. The court’s decision was in response to a suit brought against a new agency called the Fair Housing Finance Agency, which was established by Congress under Democrat control shortly after the housing crash in 2008. The problem is the agency was given almost total autonomy to regulate Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae — the two quasi-government mortgage finance agencies — with nearly zero power of authority from the White House. And that lack of authority, according to the court, is unconstitutional. It’s a precedent that could be used soon to rein in other rogue agencies. Beautiful.
Here’s more from Daily Signal…
President Donald Trump will soon be able to use his famous catch phrase against the head of a troubled federal agency, the Fair Housing Finance Agency, which is led by a single Obama appointee with no meaningful oversight from the president.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that the agency’s structure is unconstitutional.
In Collins v. Mnuchin, a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit issued a per curiam opinion holding that Congress unconstitutionally “insulated the [Fair Housing Finance Agency] to the point where the executive branch cannot control the [agency] or hold it accountable.”
The judges sent the case back to the district court, ordering it to strike down a statutory limit (in 12 U.S.C. § 4512(b)(2)) on the president’s power to remove the agency’s director.
This is an important decision for our government’s separation of powers and for keeping the executive branch agencies accountable to the president.
In Robert Mueller’s topsy-turvy world, prosecuting white collar crimes that have nothing at all to do with the entire purpose of his special counsel appointment is apparently peachy keen. What’s also apparently okay is giving immunity to a Hillary crony who might have been connected to the actual election collusion by the FBI and the DNC. Tony Podesta, brother of Hillary campaign chairman John Podesta, was offered a get out of jail free card by Mueller in exchange for testimony against Paul Manafort, former Trump campaign adviser, for alleged crimes entirely unrelated to the presidential election. Facepalm.
Here’s more from PJ Media…
Special Counsel Robert Mueller has offered Clinton crony and fundraiser Tony Podesta immunity to testify against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Fox News host Tucker Carlson reported Thursday night based on two sources.
Podesta, whose brother is Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, is the founder of the now-defunct Podesta Group, a Democratic lobbying group that worked with Manafort’s consulting firm in 2012 on a sham campaign called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, which supported then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.
Manafort’s lobbying work for Ukraine reportedly ended two years before he joined the Trump campaign.
Neither Manafort nor Podesta properly registered with the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) in 2012, and both retroactively registered their firms with the Department of Justice as foreign agents of Ukraine in 2017.