Russiagate: Did Rod Reconnoiter Sheryl for Clinton?

We're opening a new can of worms today. Sheryl Attkisson, a former CBS reporter, now with Fox, has long accused the government of conducting a surreptitious electronic surveillance program on her. Frankly, I thought it sounded ridiculous, even a bit paranoid, but apparently even paranoids have real enemies, and they may include Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller. Horrifying, if true. Nice Deb at AmGreat, New Lawsuit Claims Rod Rosenstein Led Task Force that Spied on Sharyl Attkisson’s Computers. Attkisson apparently has a source inside the FBI giving her the scoop.

In a federal lawsuit filed this week, Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosentein has been implicated in yet another improper government spy operation. In the new complaint, Attkisson v. Rosenstein et.al., investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson names former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosentein and four other Justice Department officials as the government agents who of illegally survielled her electronic devices.

According to the complaint—filed in United States District Court in Baltimore, Maryland—Rosenstein led “a multi-agency task force in Baltimore that conducted surveillance of the Attkissons’ computer systems” and “used USPS IP addresses on other occasions to conduct operations.”

The complaint states that all of the defendants “were agents and/or employees of the United States Government working with Rosenstein”  to conduct “the unlawful surveillance and hacking of the computer systems of the Plaintiffs.”
. . .
In a comprehensive summary of the case at sharylattkisson.com, the reporter alleges that the intrusions began in 2011 while she was reporting at CBS on the massive government gunwalking scandal “Fast and Furious.” The government continued to spy on her computers while she was reporting on the Benghazi scandal.

Multiple forensic exams show that numerous electronic devices used by Attkisson and her family during this time frame were hacked or remotely compromised. Unauthorized parties used government Internet Protocol (IP) addresses to access Attkisson’s computers; placed government surveillance spyware on her devices; and illegally accessed her professional and personal information over an extended period of time.

The summary states that in March of 2019, an appellate panel of three judges determined the former Attorney General Eric Holder had immunity from Attkisson’s claims.

Two of the three judges ruled Attkisson’s claims should be dismissed because she took too long, three years— and without success—to determine the names of the “John Doe” federal agents involved in the intrusions of her computers.
A third judge rightly dissented, understanding that Attkisson consistently attempted to identify the John Does but the Department of Justice continuously blocked discovery, filed protective orders and filed motions to dismiss in an attempt to obstruct. The government did not turn over a single piece of paper in response to more than a dozen subpoenas.
The dissenting judge called the government’s actions “Kafkaesque” for obstructing Attkisson and then blaming her for “taking too long.”

“We have just filed a new complaint which I hope satisfies one of the issues a judge had that we’ve not been able to name the actual names of the government agents involved in the intrusion,” Attkison announced in her video. “Of course we argued we could not name the names because the government and courts would not permit us discovery to learn the names!”

She added: “We did some additional detective work. We have five names to present to the court—names based on our information that were directly involved in the surveillance of my computers. One of them is Rod Rosenstein, then U.S. Attorney in Baltimore, a former Department of Justice official.”
. . .
Besides Rosenstein, the other defendants named in the complaint are Shawn Henry, Sean Wesley Bridges, Robert Clarke, and Ryan White.

In 2010, then FBI Director Robert Mueller named Shawn Henry as the executive assistant director (EAD) of the Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch (CCRSB).

Henry left the FBI in 2012 and now is president of CrowdStrike Services, the cybersecurity firm hired by Democratic National Committee to examine its computer network in 2016 after it had been hacked. Crowdstrike ultimately determined Russia had hacked the DNC emails.

"Fmr. govt. agent admits illegally spying on Attkisson, implicates Rosenstein & colleagues."
"Fmr. FBI Unit Chief confirms he initiated forensics that proved govt. computer intrusion."
More at https://t.co/3duSZQk8eO@TheJusticeDept @realDonaldTrump https://t.co/FQwxpFdkhN pic.twitter.com/dDZQDgkXFp

— Sharyl Attkisson🕵️‍♂️ (@SharylAttkisson) January 9, 2020

And Sheryl has some backing as a Republican congressman backs her up. Paula Bedard, WaEx,  Justice, FBI pressed on Obama hacking allegations against Benghazi reporter

A key Republican Senate chairman is demanding answers from the Justice Department and FBI on whether Obama-era officials secretly accessed the phones and computers of a reporter probing the “Fast and Furious” scandal and debacle in Benghazi, Libya.

In going to bat for award-winning investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson, Sen. Ron Johnson is reopening a case that prompted a federal judge to hit the government for stalling.

In his letter to Justice and the FBI, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee said that “documented abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court applications” by the FBI in the Russia probe of President Trump raise new suspicions in the Attkisson case.

“I am especially concerned about these unresolved questions regarding the alleged surveillance of Ms. Attkisson,” said the Wisconsin lawmaker of the former CBS investigative reporter, now on Sinclair and host of the Full Measure show.

But don't you dare call it spying. Ace, New Sharyl Attkisson Lawsuit Over Alleged Government Spying Names Rod Rosenstein and Four Others As Involved in the Hacking

Margot Cleveland is still on the case of Stefan Halper, New Details About Meeting FBI Source Suggest Carter Page Was Set Up. She might want to get her computer checked for bugs too.

Yesterday’s exclusive at The Federalist, revealing that Carter Page first met Stefan Halper at a small dinner at Magdalene College in Cambridge, triggered an immediate response from Svetlana Lokhova, the Russian-born British citizen who sued Halper last year for defamation for branding her a Russian spy.

Magdalene College was Halper’s college, Lokhova tweeted, adding that he held a lifetime fellowship there.

This added detail raises even more questions concerning the mid-July encounter between Halper and then-Donald Trump campaign advisor Page, given what we now know from Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s investigation into the four Page Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) applications. We know from Horowitz’s report that the FBI tasked Halper, identified solely as Source 2, to target Page, campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, and a high-level Trump campaign member, Sam Clovis. And we know the IG’s report concluded that the FBI had not used any confidential human sources prior to the July 31, 2016, launch of Crossfire Hurricane.

These facts made Halper’s mid-July encounter with Page at a conference in the United Kingdom suspicious. The added fact that Halper met Page not during the conference proper, but at a small dinner gathering to kick off the conference, seemed even more suspect. Now that we know Halper wasn’t a mere fellow dinner guest at the gathering but was instead sitting abreast the table at his own college, it screams “set-up.”

PJ Media's Michael van der Galien calls DOJs Flynn sentencing recommendation Shameful: Prosecutors Demand Jail Time for General Mike Flynn. Trump should pardon him now and save everyone the trouble.

And the mighty Casey Huber has struck out (sundance, CTH) Report: John Huber Completes Review of Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, Finds Nothing… I think past performance indicates that even DOJ IGs and special prosecutors give government people way too much benefit of the doubt.

Hunter Biden, sigh. Ace, Judge Rules That Hunter Biden Is "Biological and Legal Father" of Stripper's Lovechild "Or, as CNN would say: Hunter Biden recognized for work with unwed mother." Stacy McCain, The Biden Legacy

When he wasn’t working tirelessly for the Ukrainian natural gas industry, Joe Biden’s son kept busy with cocaine and strippers:

Hunter Biden, the son of presidential candidate Joe Biden, is the “biological and legal father” of a child he fathered with an ex-stripper, an Arkansas judge ruled Tuesday, contradicting the younger Biden’s previous denials that he had any role in the pregnancy.
In an order establishing paternity, Independence County, Ark., Circuit Judge Holly Meyer noted that the results of DNA tests indicated Biden was the father “with near scientific certainty,” and instructed the Arkansas Department of Health to issue a birth certificate listing Biden as the father of 29-year-old Lunden Alexis Roberts‘ child.
Roberts, who The New York Post reported was a stripper at a Washington, D.C., club that Biden patronized, received “primary physical and legal custody” of the child. In previous filings, Roberts told the court that Hunter Biden “had no involvement in the child’s life since the child’s birth, never interacted with the child, never parented the child,” and “could not identify the child out of a photo lineup.”

Never name your daughter “Alexis.” Or “Crystal.” There are certain names that almost 100% guarantee a girl will end up as a stripper. But let’s get a little more background on Hunter’s baby mama:

The woman suing Hunter Biden for paternity was a stripper at a Washington, DC, club he frequented around the time he was dating his brother’s widow, sources told The Post.
Biden was repeatedly seen at the Mpire Club in the capital’s historic Dupont Circle neighborhood — where Lunden Alexis Roberts, the mother of his alleged love child, worked under the stage name “Dallas,” the sources said. . . .
Roberts worked there around the time she got pregnant — and when Hunter broke up with former sister-in-law Hallie Biden, the widow of his brother, the late Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, sources said. . . .

(You may have forgotten that Hunter banged his dead brother’s widow, but I think it’s important to remind you. The Iowa caucus is Feb. 3.)

The Mpire Club is about three blocks north of another DC strip joint, Archibald’s Gentlemen’s Club, where The Post previously revealed that workers suspected Hunter, who has a history of alcoholism and addiction, of smoking crack in a VIP room in late 2018.

(Smoking crack in a strip club — classy.)

In a New Yorker profile published on July 1, Hunter claimed he hadn’t been to a strip club in years before Page Six exclusively revealed his relationship with Hallie and details of a divorce filing against him by then-wife Kathleen Biden.
After the expose was published on March 1, 2017, Hunter said, “I went directly to a strip club. I said, ‘F–k them,’” according to the New Yorker.
That incident at Archibald’s — which came after Hunter’s most-recent admitted drug use, a crack binge during the fall of 2016 — occurred while he sat on the board of the Ukrainian natural gas-company Burisma. . . .
Robert’s former co-workers had only good things to say about the single mom, who’s a native of rural Batesville, Arkansas.
“She was really sweet,” the bartender said. . . .
Roberts graduated from Arkansas State University in 2014 and enrolled at George Washington University in DC to pursue a certificate program in Forensic Investigation.
She attended classes during the summer and fall semesters of 2015 but did not graduate, a university spokesman said.
Her mom, Kimberly Joan Roberts, was apparently unaware that her daughter had dropped out. On March 5, 2017, the mom told a friend on Facebook that her daughter “is in DC getting her masters in FBI CSI working for the FBI and CSI also.”

Getting her master’s and working for the FBI? No, ma’am, she’s shaking her money-maker naked on stage and getting knocked up by a crackhead. But there are worse crackheads in D.C. she could have gotten knocked up by, so the folks back in Batesville (population 10,268) might agree that she has done better than we’d expect of a girl named “Alexis.”

So how's that Shampeachment going Nancy? Apparently the constipation is on the verge of breaking loose. Sundance at CTH, Nancy Pelosi Says She’s Not Withholding Articles of Impeachment “Indefinitely”…, because she's getting heat from her own side, as well as Republicans. Breitbart, Feinstein Rips Pelosi for Holding Impeachment Articles: ‘I Don’t See What Good Delay Does’, AllahPundit, Hot Air, Top House Dem: It’s Time To Send Over The Articles Of Impeachment. Wait, Forget What I Just Said. Rusty Weiss and Jeff Dunetz at Da Lid, Democrats Are Starting To Defect From Pelosi Impeachment Charade "Pelosi got the idea to hold up the articles of impeachment from CNN" I thought sundance said it was the Lawfare folks. Maybe they gave it to CNN. News Thud, CNN: Pelosi “losing members of her own party” with impeachment delays



Liz Cheney says ‘Speaker Pelosi Is An Embarrassment And Unfit For Office’ (Da Caller), not that that's really unusual in Congress. Scott Jennings at CNN thinks McConnell just ate Pelosi and Schumer's lunch and from Joradain Carney on Da Hill, McConnell backs measure to change Senate rules, dismiss impeachment without articles. Threatening to go nuclear? Why not?

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is backing a resolution to change the Senate’s rules to allow for lawmakers to dismiss articles of impeachment against President Trump before the House sends them over.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) announced on Thursday that McConnell has signed on as a co-sponsor to the resolution, which he introduced earlier this week.

Spokesmen for McConnell didn't immediately respond to a request for comment about his support.

Changing the rules would either require a two-thirds vote or for Republicans to deploy the "nuclear" option.

The resolution would give the House 25 days to send articles of impeachment over to the Senate. After that, a senator could offer a motion to dismiss "with prejudice for failure by the House of Representatives to prosecute such articles" with a simple majority vote, according to Hawley's proposal.

Nathaniel Blake at DaFed explains how ‘Epstein Didn’t Kill Himself’ Explains Why Trump’s Impeachment Is A Sham

There is a simple reason President Donald Trump should not have been impeached by the House, and the Senate should acquit him: Epstein didn’t kill himself.

In writing this, I don’t mean I am convinced that the billionaire child sex-abuser was murdered by one of his many wealthy and powerful acquaintances to keep him quiet — although I wouldn’t rule that out. Rather, I mean it in the sense in which “Epstein didn’t kill himself” has become a pervasive cultural meme, as a general assertion of cynicism regarding the incompetence and moral degeneracy of our elites, which has produced a crisis of credibility for our leaders and institutions.
. . .
There is a spectacular absence of moral authority by which to condemn Trump, whether for the specifics of the impeachment charges or for his more general failings. This impeachment seems not to be about defending morality, democratic norms, or the Constitution so much as an ordinary power struggle, a suspicion Democrats confirmed by their gamesmanship in delaying sending the charges to the Senate.

At Hot Air, AllahPundit whines Trump Hints: We’ll Stop Bolton From Testifying At The Impeachment Trial. I'd like to hear from Bolton, but at the same time, I think conversations between a President and his advisers should be sacrosanct. If not, let's demand Eric Holder show up and answer questions about "fast and furious."

Fox News reports Dr. Drew says he might challenge Adam Schiff for congressional seat.

Addiction expert and reality show star Dr. Drew Pinsky is reportedly mulling a congressional run and is considering mounting a bid against his current congressman, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.

Pinsky, who has been an outspoken commentator on homelessness and the opioid crisis, told The Hill that seeing the impeachment hearings on television increased his desire to get involved in the political process.

“I was watching all the impeachment proceedings and I was going, ‘Oh my God, our Congress is tied up and we’re dying out here in California. What are these people doing?’ ”

Pinsky, 61, lamented the lack of action from Schiff, specifically with regard to the issue of homelessness in the state of California.

“I wake up every day and drive through this town and I am morally moved where I feel like I have to do something," he said. “We have people literally dying in our streets."

He'll run as a Democrat, but at least from what I've seen on TV, he's not bat-shit insane; that would be an improvement.

Russiagate, Just the Russiagate

A lot of interesting stuff today, and in the interests of getting most of it out promptly, I'm going to break a potentially gargantuan post in related chunks. This one is "Russiagate" proper, or as some people call it, "Spygate"

Promises, promises! From Sundance at CTH, diGenova and Toensing on Upcoming IG Report: “it’s going to be worse than you can imagine”…



From Doug Ross, A REMINDER OF THE REAL SCANDAL: Here are the FISA Court Documents Revealing How the Obama-Comey FBI abused surveillance powers

In a little-publicized opinion issued on April 26, 2017, FISC Judge Rosemary Collyer scalded Obama-era intelligence agencies for rampant abuse of NSA databases.

These agencies, including the FBI, routinely accessed the communications (emails, texts, etc.) of American citizens. Nearly 90 percent of all such queries were deemed violations of various laws, starting with the Fourth Amendment prohibiting illegal searches. And no one, to my knowledge, has ever been held accountable.

 Sundance, Curiouser and Curiouser…

According to recent reports U.S. Attorney John Durham and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr are spending time on a narrowed focus looking carefully at CIA activity in the 2016 presidential election. One recent quote from a media-voice increasingly sympathetic to a political deep-state notes:

“One British official with knowledge of Barr’s wish list presented to London commented that “it is like nothing we have come across before, they are basically asking, in quite robust terms, for help in doing a hatchet job on their own intelligence services””. (Link)

It is interesting that quote comes from a British intelligence official, as there appears to be mounting evidence of an extensive CIA operation that likely involved U.K. intelligence services.

Jon Solomon reports, After Russia collusion controversy, FBI faces ‘red flag’ concerns over vetting informants. They need to face a lot more than "concerns." Also, a reminder from Dan Sobieski at AmThink, that there's good reason to suspect the Michael Flynn prosecution satisfied more than the "small groups" desire to get Trump; Andrew McCabe had a personal (or should that be personnel) beef with Flynn. The Flynn Investigation: McCabe's Personal Retaliation? Ace, Sydney Powell: We Were Just Informed That Our Infallible Government Workers Supposedly Marked All of Strzok's Notes as From Plietka and Vice Versa aside from mispelling Pientka

Why does this matter?

Well, among many complaints Powell lodged on General Flynn's behalf was the fact -- or so it seemed -- that Strzok and Plietka had lied to the court in claiming that it was Plietka who wrote up the form 302 (interview memo) based on his own notes, not Strzok's.

The problem with that is that if you look at the report, and the two sets of notes from the two FBI agents (one of them a disgraced former agent), it is clear that Strzok's notes mention a whole bunch of things Plietka's do not mention, and that Strzok, not Plietka, was the main mover in this report.

Twitter researcher John W. Huber demonstrated that, as compiled here by Twitchy.

Huber points out that based on these documents, it seems that Strzok lied to the government, breaking the same law that Flynn was pressured into pleading guilty to.

DOJ is now going to need a REALLY good explanation for why Peter Strzok & Lisa Page are so extensively editing the “first draft” (yeah right) Flynn 302 *two weeks after the interview* when Strzok’s notes were far less comprehensive than Pientka’s and missing 30+ key words/phrases pic.twitter.com/dDLaTPkGcZ

— Undercover Huber (@JohnWHuber) November 5, 2019

Capt. Ed at Hot Air, Smoking Gun? DoJ Misidentified Agent Authors For Flynn 302s

Bring out yer dead! Prosecutors in Roger Stone trial will call Steve Bannon to testify. Two names we haven't heard much lately.

Russiagate: Ratcliffe Out

Well that was fast. WaPoo (fresh 30 day pass) is triumphant, Ratcliffe withdraws from consideration for intelligence chief less than a week after Trump picked him. Lack of Republican support and abundant Democrat opposition:

In tweets, Trump said that Ratcliffe (R-Tex.) was being treated “very unfairly” by the media.

“Rather than going through months of slander and libel, I explained to John how miserable it would be for him and his family to deal with these people,” Trump wrote. “John has therefore decided to stay in Congress where he has done such an outstanding job representing the people of Texas, and our Country.”

Even by the tumultuous standards of the Trump administration, Ratcliffe’s nomination, which fell apart in less than a week, was a spectacular flameout.

leading to speculation as to who will be Dan Coats successor:

Trump also indicated that the current principal deputy director of national intelligence, Sue Gordon, might serve as the acting director when Coats leaves office Aug. 15. Trump had previously been unclear whether he expected her to fulfill the role. By law, the principal deputy director becomes the acting director when that position is vacant.

“I like Sue Gordon. Sue Gordon is there now, and I like her very much. I’ve always liked her,” Trump said adding, “Certainly she will be considered for the acting.”
. . .
Gordon is widely admired among Democrats and Republicans in Congress, and Burr offered a quiet endorsement Friday.

Ace, Trump Withdraws John Ratcliffe as Nominee for Director of National Intelligence

Ah darn. I thought he'd be good.
. . .
A friend who's an expert in this are is upset at this news of asking for a list of the top intelligence officials, because almost all of the people on that list are Deep State Obama operators. "Might as well just pick John Brennan and be done with it," he says.

Sundance, at CTH, Deep State Center Holds – John Ratcliffe Nomination Withdrawn…  "It always comes back to the SSCI."  I think you get the gist of it.

if you wanted a reason to oppose Gordon, you just have it https://t.co/4213dZZLnD

— streiff (@streiffredstate) August 2, 2019

Capt. Ed at Hot Air reads Da Beast so you don't have to. Daily Beast: Is Trump Going To Cashier Coats’ Deputy Too? Gordon. Generally speaking, the more firings the better. Keep them off balance.

Sundance at CTH was on fire with Comey posts: Moments Away – Inspector General Report on James Comey To Be Released Any Day… Moments away in government time could be months. James Comey Responds IG Investigation and Criminal Referral…

The interesting aspect here is to remind ourselves that James Comey is currently in the “Principal Review Phase” of a pending IG report that is specific to his conduct.

Inspector General Michael Horowitz has written a report of Comey’s conduct. Part of that process included a criminal referral to US Attorney John Huber, and a prosecution declination. James Comey has obviously reviewed the IG report (an NDA restricts his ability to talk specifically about it); and we are awaiting publication of the final report

It sounds like former FBI Director James Comey has concluded his response to the Inspector General’s report. Which means the IG report is soon to be released.

DOJ Files Motion to Block Court Order Forcing Release of “Archey Declarations” (Comey Memos)… I confess I don't understand the significance, except that the DOJ is still hiding something, and therefore,  I want to see it. Devin Nunes Discusses IG Criminal Referral and DOJ Position on James Comey… and holds out hope.



CNBC reports Robert Mueller’s Russia probe cost nearly $32 million in total, Justice Department says, a pittance by government standards, and they made money if you count what they seized from Paul Manafort. Say, let's try that with the Clinton Foundation!

Sundance posts Lou Dobbs Interviews Former Acting AG Matt Whitaker…



And in impeachment follies,  Yahoo!, Pelosi Cites Progress in Trump Probes as Impeachment Calls Rise, From Da Hill, An impeachment inquiry has begun and CNN, Majority of House Democrats now say they support starting an impeachment inquiry. Please, don't throw him in dat briar patch!

Russiagate, with Added Ratcliffe

The hubbub over Muellermas appears to be largely behind us. On to Mifsud Mania! Courtesy of the Wombat's In The Mailbox: 07.30.19, Tom Maguire at Just One Minute picks up the thread in Joseph Mifsud, Maltese Man Of Mystery

Lee Smith, also writing for Real Clear Investigations, provided lots of background on Mifsud last May 2018. My fave from that article: Mifsud denies being an MI6 "agent", which fans of the genre (but not all legacy journalists) understand is quite different from being an MI6 "asset".

And the latest hook is the failure of Mueller to charge Mifsud with false statements, even though Mueller had no problem indicting unreachable Russians in Lenningrad and other Americans closer to home. Why so shy about the guy whose interactions with Papadopoluos ostensiblytriggered Crossfire Hurricane? Who knows? One day Mifsud may be singing a song under the bright Congressional lights and we'll be reading about the Maltese Canary.

But do let me highlight a problem faced by Mueller and noted by Mr. Felten: charging both Papadopoulos and Mifsud with false statements may have been challenging . . .

So who do you charge, the Trump loving Papadop or the assetfor the deep state? I think the choice was obvious. Capt Ed. at Hot Air, Russiagate Hinges On Mifsud — And The Mystery Of Why Mueller Didn’t Pursue Him

At the moment, the prospects for getting an answer to the question seem poor. Michael Horowitz’ inspector-general investigation into the beginnings of Operation Crossfire Hurricane will get released soon, perhaps in September, but Horowitz’ scope is the Department of Justice. The CIA would be beyond his purview, which means he’d only be able to determine what the FBI knew about Mifsud, if much of anything.

Appointing John Ratcliffe as director of national intelligence might uncork more, but if there is more, why isn’t CIA director Gina Haspel providing it? Mifsud’s name and picture are all over the place, so it’s not as if he can operate as an active asset now, if indeed he ever was one in the first place. As president, Trump can choose to declassify anything he likes (although with some potential for drastic consequences). Jim Jordan shouldn’t have to be berating Mueller about Mifsud; if there’s something besides smoke there, Trump and his team can provide it.

The best guess for why Mifsud hasn’t been fully explained is because he’s just not fully explainable. The lack of charges against him should be explained, however, because it certainly leaves the impression that the special counsel was playing favorites with obstructors.

Brian Cates at Uncover DC, The Return of Professor Joseph Mifsud, International Man of Mystery!

I’ve had a working theory for almost two years now that the SpyGate plotters needed at least ONE actual, real, live Russian agent in all of this, and they picked Mifsud to play that role….willingly or not.

I surmise that at the time Mifsud sat for an interview with the FBI back in February of 2017, he had yet to discover his FBI handlers had ‘volunteered’ him for the role of the being the only real Russian agent in the story.

Now its clear Durham’s investigative team has looked at the narrative about Mifsud that was told by the FBI in it’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation and in the Mueller report, and they simply aren’t buying it.  They want to talk to Mifsud himself.

And I believe if Mifsud ever does talk and reveal what he knows, this is going to cause a whole set of very real problems for people who’ve bought into the narrative that he was a genuine Russian agent making a real offer of Russian help to a Trump campaign advisor.

One bright spot in all this is that Mifsud will never be able to ply his trade, whatever it is, in the open again.

A reminder from Nice Deb at AmGreat, Joe diGenova: The DOJ Will Begin Dropping ‘Hugely Embarrassing’ Declassified Documents on Wednesday. I'm looking forward to it, but I've been disappointed before. Could this be part of it, sundance at CTH, James Comey Under Investigation – John Huber Investigating Comey Memos – Declaration Release This Week…. One can hope. The Guardian reports how Secret texts cast light on UK’s early role in Trump-Russia inquiry

Text messages between Andrew McCabe, the deputy director of the FBI at the time, and Jeremy Fleming, his then counterpart at MI5, now the head of GCHQ, also reveal their mutual surprise at the result of the EU referendum, which some US officials regarded as a “wake-up call”, according to a person familiar with the matter.
. . .
Their exchanges offer new insights into the start of the FBI’s Russia investigation, and how British intelligence appears to have played a key role in the early stages.

In one exchange in August 2016, Fleming noted that members of the FBI and MI5 had “met on our strange situation”, a veiled reference to discussions about Russian activities, according to the source.

The text messages between the two men were infrequent and cryptic and did not contain specific or sensitive materials, but occurred with some regularity after the referendum in June 2016.

With Boris holding the whip hand, expect more British cooperation in the probes. But, of course, the conspiracy originated in the Obama White House. Gateway Pundit, Transcripts Obtained of Former FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki Testifying Russia Conspiracy Came from Obama’s White House

From Liz Shield at AmGreat, Rep. Devin Nunes Says Mueller’s Team Obstructed Congressional Investigation. One of several theories long advanced by sundance at CTH is that a primary goal of the Mueller investigation was to provide an excuse to keep materials on FBI/DOJ activities secret for as long as possible.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) appeared on Maria Bartiromo’s Sunday talk to show to discuss Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s testimony before congress last week.  In his interview, Nunes says that the Mueller team would not turn over requested transcripts and information to the House Intelligence Committee for its investigation when the committee was under Republican control.

“The Mueller dossier team wouldn’t let us have them,” says Nunes.

Also from Nice Deb at AmGreat, Did John Brennan Lie to Congress About 2016 Gang of Eight Briefings? Well it wouldn't be the first time.

David McKay at AmSpec has The Seven Dumbest Things Democrats Demand You Believe. Only seven? And from the Cambrian Dissenters, As A Dog Returns to His Vomit So A Fool Returns to His Folly

The fight over the Ratcliffe nomination as DNI is starting to generate heat. Via Wombat's In The Mailbox: 07.30.19, Power Line, A DNI Trump Trusts? The Horror!

But the Democratic/media/intelligence community drumbeat against Ratcliffe ignores this important reality: The nation is ill-served when the president doesn’t trust his top intelligence adviser.

Because President Trump trusts Ratcliffe, or at least doesn’t view him as an adversary or tool of his adversaries, there is a chance that Trump will take Ratcliffe’s intelligence briefings seriously. With Coats, there was no such chance.

As Eli Lake reports, Trump kept Coats “out of the loop.” Thus, Trump hasn’t been getting “the intelligence” the Washington Post thinks “he needs” from the current director.

If Ratcliffe tells Trump only what the president wants to hear, then Trump still might not get “the intelligence he needs,” and the fact that the director is back in the loop will be of no consequence. But I don’t assume that Ratcliffe will act in bad faith.

Capt. Ed, Coats’ Resignation A Win For … Pompeo? Yeah, I'm OK with that. Sundance at CTH, Soft Coup and Impeachment Crew React to Removal of Dan Coats…. Comey and Brennan not pleased? That's telling; they've got a lot to lose potentially.

And, Ratcliffe’s Job Interview? “There Were Crimes Committed During The Obama Administration” Yep. Hopefully we'll get a clearer look at that under Ratcliffe.



Hot Air cites NYT in Trump’s Choice Of A Partisan For Top Intelligence Post Rattles Critics. And that's a good thing. ABC claims Trump's pick for intelligence director misrepresented role in anti-terror case, but reading the article, it seems like a matter of interpretation.

At the New Yorker, Trump’s Message to U.S. Intelligence Officials: Be Loyal or Leave. It should be sufficient if they wouldn't plot against the President. Mediaite, Ralph Peters Blasts Trump’s DNI Nominee as Unqualified: ‘You’re Gonna Put a Monkey in There?’ I'm not impressed. AllahPundit prays Is Trump’s New Pick For Intelligence Chief About To Be Blocked By The Republican Senate?

Fox News, Judge dismisses DNC hacking lawsuit against Trump team, says claims 'entirely divorced from the facts'

A federal judge in frank terms Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) against key members of the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks over hacked DNC documents, saying they "did not participate in any wrongdoing in obtaining the materials in the first place" and therefore bore no legal liability for disseminating the information.

The ruling came as Democrats increasingly have sought to tie the Trump team to illegal activity in Russia, in spite of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's findings that the campaign in fact refused multiple offers by Russians to involve them in hacking and disinformation efforts.

President Trump, in a tweet late Tuesday, noted that the judge in the case, John Koeltl, was appointed by Bill Clinton. The president called Koeltl's decision "really big 'stuff'" and "yet another total & complete vindication and exoneration."
. . .
Republicans, meanwhile, have focused increasingly on the DNC's own apparent role in the origins of the FBI's probe into the Trump campaign, which began in the summer of 2016 -- after British ex-spy Christopher Steele, a longtime FBI informant funded by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign, began work on his now-discredited dossier.

The dossier was used in secret surveillance warrants to monitor members of the Trump team, and later fueled media reports that kept the investigation going, despite many apparent problems with its reliability. Multiple DOJ reviews into the dossier's use, and related matters, were ongoing.

The chances of the FBI securing a secret 2016 surveillance warrant for a Trump campaign aide were “50/50” without the controversial anti-Trump “dossier,” according to testimony in recently confirmed congressional transcripts from senior FBI lawyer Sally Moyer to House investigators.

And, Papadopoulos on Sunday told Fox News he was heading back to Greece to retrieve $10,000 that he suspected was dropped in his lap during the campaign as part of an entrapment scheme by the CIA or FBI. Federal investigators want to see the marked bills, which he said were stored in a safe.

Papadopoulos said on "Sunday Morning Futures" he was "very happy" to see House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., grill Mueller about the summer 2017 payment during last week's hearings -- even though Mueller maintained, without explanation, that the matter was outside the scope of his investigation.

"I was very happy to see that Devin Nunes brought that up," Papadopoulos said. "A man named Charles Tawil gave me this money [in Israel] under very suspicious circumstances. A simple Google search about this individual will reveal he was a CIA or State Department asset in South Africa during the '90s and 2000s. I think around the time when Bob Mueller was the director of the FBI."

And things that just reawaken anger, Rick Moran at PJ Media, The Fix Was in from the Start for Hillary's 'Exoneration,' Immunity Agreements with Aides Suggest, but we knew that.

The American Center for Law and Justice finally got some satisfaction from its numerous FOIA requests to the Department of Justice. It took a specific court order from a federal judge to release long-secret documents that might raise a few eyebrows among those who are still interested in matters pertaining to Hillary Clinton's aides and the former secretary of state's missing emails.

The ACLJ has obtained the DOJ’s infamous immunity agreements with Hillary Clinton’s top aides Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson – documents previously unreleased to the public and which include the DOJ attempting to enter an agreement not to comply with the requirements of FOIA, and which confirm it agreed to “dispose” of evidence, including Mills’ and Samuelson’s “culling laptops” which contained all of the missing emails from Hilary Clinton’s private homebrew server.

The immunity agreements signed by Mills and Samuelson are, to say the least, overly generous to their legal interests:

As we have advised you, we consider Cheryl Mills to be a witness based on the information gathered to date in this investigation. We understand that Cheryl Mills is willing to voluntarily provide the Mills Laptop to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, if the United States agrees not to use any information directly obtained from the Mills Laptop in any prosecution of Cheryl Mills for the mishandling of classified information and/or the removal or destruction of records as described below.

That might be fairly standard. But what's highly unusual is that the content of those laptops remains the private property of the aides. In other words, some of the content is immune from FOIA requests.
. . .
Additional information uncovered by ACLJ is even more shocking:

The DOJ agreed that the FBI would “dispose” of Mills’ and Samuelson’s laptops after the search. According to the agreement:

As soon as the investigation is completed, and to the extent consistent with all FBI policies and applicable laws, including the Federal Records Act, the FBI will dispose of the Device and any printed or electronic materials resulting from your search.

In other words, after agreeing to limit its search of Mills’ laptop to (1) only a certain method of searching; (2) only for certain email-related files; and, (3) only files created within a certain time-frame, the DOJ/FBI agreed to dispose of the laptop – meaning anything else embarrassing, negative or potentially implicating on the laptop – including official State Department records – would be destroyed and never be exposed. (Emphasis mine)

You may recall former FBI Director James Comey explaining to Congress that "no reasonable prosecutor" would have brought charges against Hillary Clinton. Under this immunity agreement, it's hardly surprising that Comey would have made such a self-serving statement.

And Yet Still More Russiagate

Hot Air cites the WSJ in William Barr’s Fresh Air. I can't read it all, but maybe you can.

If you want to know why William Barr is under political attack, consider his interview last week with Jan Crawford of CBS News. It’s a humdinger, in which the Attorney General challenges the received wisdom about the investigation into Trump-Russia collusion.

Doug Ross reprints Julie Kelly's ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR: ‘Small Group at the Top’ Directed ‘Bogus’ Russia Collusion Probe

Without naming names, Barr hinted that former top officials may have abused their power by violating department protocols to launch an unprecedented counterintelligence probe into a political rival.

“These counter-intelligence activities that were directed at the Trump Campaign were not done in the normal course and not through the normal procedures as a far as I can tell,” Barr told CBS News’ legal analyst Jan Crawford. “And a lot of the people who were involved are no longer there.”

Sundance at CTH, John Ratcliffe Discusses Current Barr Review…

and Modified Declassification Expectations Amid Clarity of Purpose from Ratcliffe…

Jonathon Turley, Mueller’s Lack Of Explanations Raises New Questions of His Motivations On Three Key Decisions

It is not just his legal interpretation that is incomprehensible. Mueller was appointed almost two years before he released his report. He was fully aware that Congress, the Justice Department, the media, and the public expected him to reach conclusions on criminal conduct, a basic function of the special counsel. He also was told he should do so by the attorney general and deputy attorney general. Yet, he relied on two highly controversial opinions written by a small office in the Justice Department.

Over those two years, Mueller could have asked his superiors for a decision on this alleged policy barring any conclusions on criminal conduct. More importantly, he could have requested an opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel. That is what the Office of Legal Counsel does, particularly when its own opinions are the cause of confusion. One would think you would be even more motivated to do so, if you intended to ignore the view of the attorney general and his deputy that there is no such policy.

Mueller, however, is an experienced litigator who knows not to ask a question when you do not know the answer or when you know the answer and do not want to hear it. His position is even more curious, given his lack of action after Barr and Rosenstein did precisely what he said could not be done under Justice Department policies. If Mueller believed such conclusions are impermissible, why did he not submit the matter to the Justice Department inspector general?

His press conference captured his report perfectly. It was an effort to allude to possible crimes without, in fairness to the accused, clearly and specifically stating those crimes. Mueller knew that was incrimination by omission. By emphasizing he could not clear Trump of criminality, Mueller knew the press would interpret that as a virtual indictment.

What is concerning is not that each of his three decisions clearly would undermine Trump or Barr but that his decisions ran against the grain for a special counsel. The law favored the other path in each instance. Thus, to use Mueller’s own construction, if we could rule out a political motive, we would have done so. This is why Mueller must testify and must do so publicly.

At Hot Air, Allahpundit reports that the Dersh asks If Mueller Couldn’t Indict Trump, Why Did We Have A Special Counsel At All? Good question. He also says Corrupt Mueller probe should be ‘the death knell’ for special counsels (Video). One can hope. From WaPoo, (new 30 day pass) Hugh Hewitt claims The Mueller fiasco proves that a special counsel position can’t work and Child porn charge for Mueller witness. But trust us!

NPR considers Democrats' Dilemma: Would Pushing For Mueller To Testify Hurt Or Help? I certainly have some questions for him. At Da Beast, David Lurie says Mueller Screwed Up by Staying Silent So Long, while at NYPo, Marc Thiessen says Mueller should have just kept his mouth shut. Well, he certainly didn't clear anything up, did he?

At Epoch Times, Stephen Meister notes, A Partisan Mueller Seeks, Without Evidence, to Incite Impeachment. At AmThink, Thomas Lifson writes that Mueller Report busted for doctoring transcript and misleading on obstruction of justice evidence and  Daniel John Sobieski calls out Mueller for Obstruction of Justice.

By his own standards Robert Mueller was guilty of making “false statements” in his parting gift to Democrat impeachment seekers. He was not, however,  under legal oath, which is maybe why Democrats did not want him to be questioned by Congress in a hearing beforehand.

Mueller has had to walk back his lie about Office of Legal Counsel policy keeping him from indicting a sitting president. In his alleged “farewell” address, former Special Counsel Mueller managed to channel former FBI Director James Comey. Where is it written that former FBI directors get to recite a litany of possible charges against someone they are not going to charge? If, as Mueller had said, you could indict a sitting President,  and that is why he was not indicted, then why did he spend some $40 million the past two years pursuing an indictment? Just what happened to the presumption of innocence?

Also from AmThink, In All the Mueller Talk, Don't Forget the Embarrassing Jerrold Nadler by Gordon Wysong

Once Nadler decided to champion a conspiracy theory — that is as patently false and easily disprovable as Russian collusion — he and we have to play out the string.  In doing so, he got applause from the MSM that would embarrass a self-respecting person.  Like the dupe whitewashing a fence, there is no awareness of being used.  Now he is stuck with his weird position, since he cannot muzzle the ego that motivates him and thereby run the risk of disappointing his MSM worshipers.  Not self-aware enough to know he is UFO crazy, he keeps going, and going, and going.

From Wombat's In The Mailbox: 06.03.19, Don Surber's Democrats stuck with Russiagate

The only collusion in the 2016 election was between Donald John Trump and voters in 30 states.

But Democrats manufactured the Russian Collusion excuse after he beat them, their crone candidate, their billionaire donors, and their sycophants in the media.

For two years, Democrats promised the Mueller Report would bring him down.

But it didn't. Mueller could not find a smidgen of collusion.

This presents a problem for next year because Democrats promised their base they would impeach the Orange Man. They didn't. In the eyes of their base, they are failures and cowards.

To the rest of us, Democrats are fools who fell a hoax.

Byron York at WaEx, Law enforcement, media changed standards for Trump. Guilty until exonerated, and even then, maybe not.

It's not surprising that commentators, especially those with partisan motives, would adopt such a low standard. It was surprising when — and this is example number two — Trump-Russia special counsel Robert Mueller upended the justice system's traditional norms by declaring that his investigation, while not accusing the president of committing a crime, also could not exonerate him.

Also Daniel John Sobieski at AmThink, John Huber Took Us for a Ride, to nowhere.

When you keep losing evidence providing documentation for Hillary's crimes and sit on an investigation of FISA abuses involving your boss, Rod Rosenstein, something's fishy. Huber, like Rosenstein, Mueller, and a few others, should be the target of an investigation, not conducting them.

Jed Babbin at AmSpec, Who Ran Crossfire Hurricane? Barr’s investigators should focus on John Brennan and Gina Haspel. Turns out Gina Haspel, a John Brennan mentee, was CIA boss where a lot of spygate skullduggery took place (London). We need to know what she knew and when she knew it.

Haspel’s longstanding loyalty to Brennan ranks her among the two or three worst personnel choices made by President Trump.

Her loyalty to Brennan is more than a little relevant to Durham’s investigation because, as noted above, Haspel was the CIA’s Chief of Station (COS) in London from 2014-2017. It was during the latter two years of her tenure there when all of the FBI/CIA spying operation on Trump and his campaign occurred.

Breitbart reminds us, Biden Present at Russia Collusion Briefing Documented in ‘Odd’ Susan Rice Email.

Biden’s largely unreported role in the initial Obama administration meetings on the matter of Russian interference could spark further questions now that Attorney General William Barr has appointed a U.S. attorney to investigate the origins of the Russia collusion claims.

On the impeachment follies, from Chuck Ross at Da Caller, Third-Ranking Democrat Says House Will Eventually Impeach Trump  (all they need is the excuse), but Dem Congresswoman Says Impeaching Trump Would ‘Play Into Russia’s Hands’ (Pj Media's Matt Margolis). They'd help Putin if it helped them get Trump. From Big League Politics, LIFE IMITATES MEMES: Democrats Chant “Orange Man Bad” At Trump Impeachment March. Also via the Wombat, Volokh Conspiracy: No, I’m Serious – The Roberts Court Won’t Save Trump From Impeachment. I would expect no less.

Russiagate: The New Sheriff in Town

A lot more on the "new" prosecutor appointed by AG Barr to look into the origins of the Trump/Russia collusion story.   Althouse read the NYT so you don't have to: "Attorney General William P. Barr has assigned the top federal prosecutor in Connecticut to examine the origins of the Russia investigation..."  and teases out the distinction between his investigation and IG Huber's.

His inquiry is the third known investigation focused on the opening of an F.B.I. counterintelligence investigation during the 2016 presidential campaign into possible ties between Russia’s election interference and Trump associates. The department’s inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, is separately examining investigators’ use of wiretap applications and informants and whether any political bias against Mr. Trump influenced investigative decisions. And John W. Huber, the United States attorney in Utah, has been reviewing aspects of the Russia investigation. His findings have not been announced."

Da Hill, Prosecutor appointed by Barr poised to enter Washington firestorm.

Durham has a reputation for nonpartisanship and investigating sensitive national security matters, including leading a Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation into the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which are now widely viewed as torture, on terrorist suspects starting in 2008 under the appointment of then-Attorney General Eric Holder. He also helped prosecute Connecticut’s former Gov. John Rowland, who is a Republican.

The attorney received a positive recommendation by his state’s two Democratic senators, Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, when he was appointed to his position in Connecticut by President Trump. The Senate confirmed Durham by voice vote.

But Democrats are blasting the purpose of the investigation, accusing Barr of fueling conspiracy theories and GOP talking points by dedicating resources to a third investigation into the origins of the Russia probe, a move they say threatens to alienate members of the attorney general’s own law enforcement team.

“It is another very professional public servant tasked with a very unprofessional and unbecoming job,” said Blumenthal.

Blumenthal said Durham risks “sullying” his long record as a straight shooter.

“This investigation of the investigators is a politically motivated distraction. And it threatens to degrade the career professionals who devote their lives — like John Durham — to law enforcement,” the Connecticut senator added.

Front Page Mag, Barr Selects Connecticut Attorney to Investigate Collusion Hoax Origins, more excoriation from Blumenthal.  From RCI, New Russiagate Prober Has Haunted FBI for Months indicates that he has truly been on the job for a while, and is the reason James Baker is under criminal investigation, and is acting nervous.

In fact, the U.S. attorney from Connecticut appears to have begun that work more than seven months ago, to judge from an underreported transcript of an October congressional interview with Baker. The Baker interview, at which Durham was not present, suggests that the prosecutor nevertheless has some people very worried.

Ace, AG Barr Appoints Prosecutor to Probe Whether Spying on Trump Campaign Was Illegal, Citing the AP, notes,

Seizure Warning Ahead:

Barr provided no details about what “spying” may have taken place but appeared to be alluding to a surveillance warrant the FBI obtained on a former Trump associate, Carter Page, and the FBI’s use of an informant while the bureau was investigating former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos.
Trump and his supporters have seized on both to accuse the Justice Department and the FBI of unlawfully spying on his campaign.

The GOP, a party comprised, apparently, almost entirely of epileptics, once again seize, this time seizing on evidence of spying to claim that there is evidence of spying.

A friend says he's amused by the AP pretending they have no idea whatsoever about what could be worthy of investigating here. I told him, "Never ascribe to malice what can be more easily explained by ignorance and incompetence, plus malice."

Federal prosecutor John Durham, whom AG Bill Barr tasked to investigate the 2016 anti-Trump spy operation, is no stranger to FBI corruption. In 2000, he uncovered evidence that FBI agents framed four men for murders committed by FBI informants. https://t.co/afvp0WZ9PI

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) May 14, 2019

CNS News, Trump on AG Appointing Durham to Look into Russia Probe Origins: ‘I Didn’t Ask Him to Do That’. Via the Wombat's In The Mailbox: 05.14.19, Don Surber concludes FBI spies are Toast. I am only cautiously optimistic. Also, Just One Minute, Send Better Apologists! NY Times Loses Plot On FBI Surveillance-Not-Spying On Trump. And more bad news for the spies? NR, CIA Joins Barr in Investigating Origins of Trump Campaign Surveillance

Attorney General William Barr has enlisted the help of the CIA to investigate whether the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign was motivated by partisan bias, CNN reported Tuesday.

CIA director Gina Haspel, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and FBI director Chris Wray are all participating in the investigation, which Barr first announced publicly during a congressional hearing last month.

But will they assist or hinder? Ace, CIA Joins DOJ Probe of #Spygate Origins "But is the CIA getting involved to find the truth, or to bury it?

I still have my doubts that the Deep State, and those with friends in the Deep State, will permit any kind of real investigation to happen. And I'm quite sure that Deep State apparatchiks are completely immune to prosecution for the perjury and obstruction they charge their targets with.

 Also from RCI, MUST WATCH: John Solomon Describes What He Thinks Strzok’s ‘Insurance Policy’ Meant (Among Other Things) It truly is a great interview:



At the Epoch Times, Mark Tapscott, Judicial Watch Head: Russia Hoax Prosecutions More Important Now Than New Investigations.

“We don’t need special prosecutors at this point, we just need prosecutions,” Fitton said. “I mean people like Peter Strzok and people of that ilk who quite obviously abused their offices for political purposes.

“How much more investigating is needed here? We just need decision-making on prosecutions. I mean there’s not much else to do here. We don’t need a two-year investigation here, they should be able to figure out what they need to do.”

Nice Deb at PJ Media, Trey Gowdy: Investigators Need to 'Look for Emails Between Brennan and Comey in December of 2016'. A good start.



Insty, YES. NEXT QUESTION? Did Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS, the Clinton Campaign & DNC Make Up the Russia Collusion Hoax? PJ Media, Report: Obama White House Orchestrated Clinton Email Cover Up. Well yeah.

Margot Cleveland at Da Federalist, Why Both The Left And The Right Should Defenestrate James Comey From Public Life. It all depends on which window they choose to throw him out of. Trump Tower might be appropriate.

WaPoo (secret link) is shocked, shocked at How William Barr, now serving as a powerful ally for Trump, has championed presidential powers. How about the next Democrat President appoint an AG who will limit his authority, as an example? Also, that meanie, Trump: FBI director’s comments were ‘ridiculous’, after all, it's not spying when we do it.

Ed at Hot Air, Rosenstein: How About James Comey’s New Career As A “Partisan Pundit,” Huh? Mary Chastain at LI, Rosenstein Unleashes Fury on Comey, Defends Handling of Mueller Probe. There's a lot here, but I'll highlight this, because it summarizes my feelings about Rosenstein:

Rosenstein brought up the fact that people have tried to determine which side he lands on:

“People spend a lot of time debating whose side I was on, based on who seemed to benefit most from any individual decision” to appoint Mr. Mueller, he said. “That is because partisans evaluate things in terms of the immediate political impact, and cable TV pundits fill a lot of time by pretending there is always serious breaking news. But trying to infer partisanship from law enforcement decisions is a category error. It uses the wrong frame of reference.”
Mr. Rosenstein added: “My soul and character are pretty much the same today as they were two years ago. I took a few hits and made some enemies during my time in the arena, but I held my ground and made a lot of friends. And thanks to them, I think I made the right calls on the things that mattered.”

 PJ Media, Rosenstein Laughs When Asked if He Offered to Wear a Wire Around Trump

"Adam Mill" at Da Federalist conceives 21 Questions To Ask Robert Mueller If He Testifies To Congress, all good ones, and most not ones I would have thought to ask. This is why the democrats will probably not force Mueller to testify.

18. There is a report that you turned over the day-to-day operations of the special counsel team to Weissmann. How do you respond to that account? Is there any evidence or log of how much time you physically came to the office to supervise the team?

From the WaPoo, cited by MSN(BC), House Democrats plan marathon public reading of Mueller report. How droll.

From the WaFreeBee, Rubio Renews Push to Investigate Whether John Kerry Violated Logan Act. I think the Logan Act is unconstitutional, but I'm tired of it being hauled out every time a Republican does something to oppose a Democrat. It was cited by Sally Yates as the excuse to spy on Michael Flynn. Let's settle this once and for all. And Kerry (or rather, his wife) has deep pockets.

AmThinker, Obama's Other Investigation

Much attention has been paid to Crossfire Hurricane and rightly so. But it’s well past time that more attention was given to Obama’s other higher-level shadow investigation into Russia’s alleged efforts to put Trump in the White House to determine what information was shared, if Brennan’s operation also involved any spying on Trump’s campaign, and whether it was justified by the completely discredited, Clinton-funded Steele dossier.

William Saletin at Slate rallies the "Resistance",  Don’t Impeach - Polls show there are smarter ways for Democrats to hold Trump accountable. At the AmSPec, David Catron asks Constitutional Crisis or Dem Crisis of Confidence? Another way the losing side is losing its mind. The crisis is that they lost an election they expected to win.

Breitbart, 'Art of the Deal': Richard Burr Relents on Trump, Jr. Subpoena

Trump, Jr., will now, sources familiar with the deal that Burr and Trump, Jr.,cut early this week appear in early June sometime before the committee for between two and four hours–but no longer, terms that Burr originally opposed limiting. The scope of topics is also going to be limited. The deal that Burr has agreed to comes after last week the matter blew up in serious public fashion in Burr’s face–where an embarrassing amount of Republicans undercut Burr, including several members of his own Senate Intelligence Committee, several other committee chairs, and his own home state colleague.

AllahPundit has the sads; Donald Trump Jr Reaches Agreement With Burr On Testifying Before Senate Intel Committee

According to Axios, Junior’s lawyers told Burr that they wouldn’t agree to an open-ended interview but that Trump wouldn’t assert his right against self-incrimination if called, essentially an invitation for a time-limited interview as a compromise. Why Don Jr didn’t want to take the Fifth and refuse to testify altogether, I don’t know: Sure, the headlines would have been bad, but his father’s political enemies already assume the worst about the family’s behavior regardless of what they do. Meanwhile the right-wing commentariat would have rallied with praise for the glorious Fifth Amendment right to refuse the government’s demand that you speak, with solemn warnings that guilt must never be presumed from a witness’s reluctance to answer questions. No one’s mind about the propriety of Junior’s behavior would have been changed either way. He would have had two days of bad press but he also would have ensured that, having eluded prosecution by Mueller and the DOJ, he wouldn’t be snagged at the last moment by somehow providing false information to Congress.

Some Russiagate to Get Rolling

Starting with the Wombat's In The Mailbox: 01.08.19 who brings us Don Surber's response to the newest Manafort "revelations" Mueller grasps at another straw

The Washington Post: "Paul Manafort shared 2016 polling data with Russian employee, according to court filing" !!!

The New York Times: "Manafort Shared Trump Campaign Data With Russian Associate, Prosecutors Say" !!!

The Guardian: "Manafort accused by Mueller of sharing 2016 polling data with Russian linked to Moscow intelligence" !!!

So? Is this illegal? No.

Is the man a spy? No.

Hillary hired a firm that worked with Kremlin officials and Russian spies to get dirt on The Donald. That Russian Dossier is the basis of Bungling Bob Mueller's witch hunt.

Guess what? The Washington Post shared polling data with Russian spies and anyone else with access to its web site. Ditto the Times and the Guardian.

Mediaite:  New York Times Makes Major Correction to Report on Manafort and Russian Oligarch

New York Times has made a significant edit to their report on Paul Manafort‘s sharing of Trump campaign polling data with an associate believed to be connected to Russian intelligence.

There’s been a great deal of commotion lately after Manafort’s legal team botched a series of court redactions and inadvertently revealed that he gave campaign data to his former business partner, Konstantin Kilimnik. When the Times initially reported on the news, they said Manafort had his former campaign deputy Rick Gates pass the data to Kilimnik so it could be relayed to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch closely tied to the Kremlin.

On Wednesday, the Times made a correction to their piece, saying Manafort actually wanted Kilimnik to direct the data to Ukrainian oligarchs Serhiy Lyovochkin and Rinat Akhmetov, not Deripaska.

Ukrainians, Russians, The NYT doesn't know the difference, they all talk funny. Instapundit: But you can be sure that these “inexplicable” errors will all point in one direction.

Three journalists with a byline on this story somehow got it inexplicably wrong. Three. https://t.co/X89RcD8q8Z

— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) January 9, 2019

Giving hope to democrats and anti-Trumpers, Lindsay Graham says Barr expressed confidence in special counsel,

Graham listed a number of questions that he had put to Barr: “I asked Mr. Barr directly, ‘Do you think Mr. Mueller is on a witch hunt?’ He said no. ‘Do you think he would be fair to the president and the country as a whole?’ He said yes. ‘And do you see any reason for Mr. Mueller’s investigation to be stopped?’ He said no. ‘Do you see any reason for a termination based on cause?’ He said no. ‘Are you committed to making sure Mr. Mueller can finish his job?’ ‘Yes.’”

I still predict Barr gets zero Democratic votes for confirmation.



More from the Daily Mail: Trump's pick for new attorney general is 'BEST FRIENDS' with Robert Mueller who was a guest at his daughters' weddings - and their wives share a Bible study (so did anyone warn the president?).

Rosenstein to leave DOJ in coming weeks. (Fox) When/if Barr is confirmed. If I were Rosenstein, I'd want out of that mess and into the more lucrative world of high level lawyering too. Plus, he's hopelessly conflicted with the Mueller probe, and he should leave before he gets tainted too badly. I'm still not sure if he's a white hat or a black hat. Gray is good too.

Speaking of which, Jim Jordan, Doug Collins and Mark Meadows Take Action to Expose Ongoing DOJ Institutional Fraud… (Sundance at CTH) Where in the world is John Huber who is supposed to be investigating it?

According to our own independent sourcing, as a direct consequence of the Sessions recusal issues, DAG Rosenstein was in charge of approving all OIG investigative document production and DOJ/FBI scheduling for testimony. Mueller’s team gave Rosenstein a list of restrictive lines of inquiry that would be considered obstructing their own investigation and should thereby be considered ‘out-of-bounds‘ for OIG review; those instructions broadly created limits on what Horowitz could see, and who Horowitz could interview.

According to a person directly involved, an internal investigative complaint was filed to the AG; however, due to recusal issues that complaint was forwarded (by Sessions) to FBI chief-legal-counsel Dana Boente.

General Counsel Boente, hired by Christopher Wray, ultimately concurred with Mueller and Rosenstein’s decision thereby blocking any internal investigative efforts under the auspices of protecting the integrity of the ongoing Mueller probe. A bureaucratic catch-22.

As a result of team Mueller’s moves, multiple people including John Carlin, Mary McCord, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Carter Page and any other inside official with knowledge of the FISA application and downstream issue, is off-limits for DOJ-OIG questioning.
. . .
You see, here’s where Mueller and Rosenstein are Machievellian. IG Horowitz will be allowed to see the material, but only *after* the Mueller team is finished with their probe. So technically Rosenstein wasn’t lying to the President – he just wasn’t being entirely forthcoming with the timing. So long as the Mueller probe exists, the IG is blocked from review.

Which could change with the departure of Rosenstein.

Ace: The Democrats Efforts to Attack Our Democracy Didn't Stop With the Jones-Moore Race in Alabama -- The False Flag Campaign of Deceit Continued Into the 2018 Midterms

Adam Schiff will hop right on this. (Thanks, NeverTrump!)

Democratic operatives, led by a former Obama official, bought ads on misleading Facebook pages to suppress GOP turnout in the midterm elections.
The pages appear to be designed to give the impression that they were operated by disgruntled conservatives rather than Democratic operatives.
The operatives were funded by left-wing billionaire Reid Hoffman, who previously funded a "false flag" effort in the 2017 Alabama special election.
Democratic operatives funded by left-wing tech billionaire Reid Hoffman ran a widespread campaign using misleading Facebook pages in the run-up to the 2018 midterm elections, The Daily Caller News Foundation has found.
American Engagement Technologies (AET), which was founded by former Obama administration official Mikey Dickerson, bought ads for two Facebook pages, "The Daily Real" and "Today's Nation," encouraging Republican voters to stay home in the midterm elections, Facebook's ad archives show.
Both pages appear to be designed to give the impression that they were operated by frustrated conservatives rather than by Democratic operatives.

Which was plausible, because the Pierre Omidyar-funded Bill Kristol and his other leftist-funded friends were doing the same thing.