New FBI McCabe Email dump reveals McCabe’s conflict review

 

This is about as close to a slam dunk on “outing” FBI McCabe as the political hack that he is and that now we will have the necessary proof. The documents are stunning. Better yet proof that “Comey had no issue with it.”  The outstanding question is why is Sessions so silent and remains seemingly disinterested in the obvious conflicts of interest. Anyone who saw the Hannity Program the other night in which the guest made the side comment that Sessions has much to explain as well regarding the Uranium deal. One wonders if the FBI informant’s documents may have the name Sessions somehow involved. How else to explain it. Here are snippets from Zero Hedge. Wander over for the full reveal:

 

Judicial Watch has just dumped a new treasure trove of FBI emails regarding Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s conflict check relative to the Clinton email investigation (for those who missed it, Zero Hedge reviewed all of McCabe’s many scandals here: “FBI Director McCabe Subject Of Three Separate Federal Inquiries Into Alleged Misconduct: Report“).   Ironically, this particular FOIA request was filed in October 2016 under the Obama administration but they apparently just “didn’t have time” to get to it.

Among other things, the new FOIA dump reveals a panicked FBI’s efforts to enlist the support of an army of lawyers and public relations personnel to deal with the original Wall Street Journal article (see: “Clinton Ally Aided Campaign of FBI Official’s Wife“) that first revealed McCabe’s ties to the Clintons and his simultaneous oversight of the Clinton email investigation.

But perhaps none of the newly revealed emails from Judicial Watch today are more important than the following one in which McCabe describes how FBI Director Comey was breifed on his ties to the Clintons just days before his wife announced her Senate bid (and subsequently received roughly $700,000 in political donations for Clinton-friendly PACs) and then confirmed that he “has no issue with it.”

An October 23, 2016, email shows McCabe running the response effort to a Wall Street Journal article that was published that day, titled “Clinton Ally Aided Campaign of FBI Official’s Wife.” McCabe provides Michael Kortan, the assistant director of Public Affairs, his version of a timeline of events surrounding the Clinton investigation and his wife’s campaign. McCabe said he contacted then-FBI Chief of Staff Chuck Roseburg about Jill McCabe’s candidacy and was told that “the D [Comey] has no issue with it.” (Judicial Watch earlier this month released documents showing that McCabe finally did recuse himself from the Clinton investigation only a week before last year’s presidential election.)

 

Internally, the Wall Street Journal article started a flurry of emails among Mrs. McCabe’s campaign, Kortan, Director McCabe, and the FBI’s General Counsel. Part of that exchange is an email from McCabe to someone in the General Counsel’s Office: “Sucks pretty much. Buckle in. It’s going to get rough.” The colleague responds, “I know. It’s awful. I shouldn’t be shocked by now, but I really am appalled.” McCabe also forwarded the article to Comey who responded, “Copy.”

 

On October 24, 2016, a memo was sent to all Special Agents in Charge, Assistant Directors, Executive Directors and the General Counsel’s Office regarding the Wall Street Journal article discussing campaign activities concerning Mrs. McCabe. Kortan suggested that questions could be referred to his office and he attached an “Overview of Deputy Director McCabe’s Recusal Related To Dr. McCabe’s Campaign for Political Office.” The Overview itself was previously reported by Judicial Watch.

 

Meanwhile, the documents also show repeated use of the official FBI email system in connection with Mrs. McCabe’s political campaign.

On March 13, 2015, Mrs. McCabe emails to her husband’s official FBI email account a draft press release announcing her run for state Senate.

In August 2015, McCabe uses his official FBI email account to advise a redacted recipient to visit his wife’s campaign website: “Jill has been busy as hell since she decided to run for VA state senate (long story). Check her out on Facebook as Dr. Jill McCabe for Senate.”

On November 2, 2015, Mrs. McCabe forwards an email to her husband – then the Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Office – that accuses her opponent of extorting local businessmen. The email was sent to her husband’s official FBI account.

In summarizing these latest revelations, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said “these new documents show that the FBI leadership was politicized and compromised in its handling of the Clinton email investigation…it’s well past time for a do-over on the Clinton emails that requires a new, honest criminal investigation of her misconduct.”

Full story over at  Zero Hedge

Advertisements

Why Robert Mueller was selected to be the Special Prosecutor

So who are the real bad guys? Iran or the Saudi’s? Who was really behind the Khobar Towers killings? And what did Comey and Mueller know and what have they done? Take a minute to look at a long and fascinating article which digs into the deepest bowels of the Deep State. My snippets don’t do the Author justice, but gives you a flavor. What do you think?

Authored by Eric Zuesse,

It all began with the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers apartment complex in the Saudi city of Khobar, which killed 19 U.S. military, who worked at the Dharan air base three miles away.

That incident became the lynchpin of the accusation by the Saudi royal family, the U.S. State Department, and the CIA, that Iran is the foremost state sponsor of terrorism.

Both Robert Mueller and his longtime ally James Comey (the latter of whose firing as the FBI chief, by U.S. President Trump, had sparked the appointment of Mueller to become the Special Counsel investigating the U.S. President) performed crucial roles in establishing that the Khobar Towers bombing had been a Hezbollah operation run by the Iranian Government – and, starting upon this basis, in helping to develop the case that Iran “is the foremost state sponsor of terrorism.”

However, as has been made clear by several great independent investigative journalists, on the basis of far more-solid documentation than the official account, the Khobar Towers bombing was instead entirely a fundamentalist-Sunni operation, specifically perpetrated by Al Qaeda, which hates Shia and which also hates America’s military presence in the Middle East. Osama bin Laden’s claim of the bombing’s having been done by Al Qaeda, was, in fact, entirely honest and accurate.

America’s “Deep State,” which extends to Saudi Arabia and to a number of other Governments – it’s an international network – is deeply committed to supporting the fundamentalist-Sunni war to conquer and destroy Shia Islam, and not merely to conquer the leading Shia nation, which is Iran. The U.S. Government has intensely taken a side in the Sunni-Shia religious war. That war is comparable in some respects to the 30 Years’ War (1618-1648) between Catholics and Protestants, which killed an estimated eight million Europeans; and, both the United States and Israel have clearly join with the fundamentalist-Sunni leaders, against Iran, and against Shia generally.

Snip…..

Both Mueller and Comey were high enough “at the top” so as to know what the people below them needed to hide in order to succeed in their careers.

The New York Times’s report, on 15 August 1996, quoted a leading Saudi dissident in London as asserting that, “As far as I know, Prince Nayef is keeping the Americans away from all the details at this point.” This report went on: “In a statement responding to the earlier reports of confessions, Prince Nayef said Saudi Arabia would make an announcement as soon as the investigation is completed. His comments were also viewed as refuting earlier suggestions by Secretary of Defense William J. Perry, who had said that Saudi investigations might point to an Iranian connection.” In other words, at that time (as of August 15th), the U.S. official was suggesting “an Iranian connection” but the Saudi official wasn’t — at least, not yet — and the expectation was that “confessions” would be providing the decisive ‘evidence’. However, these ‘confessions’, in Saudi cases are typically ‘information’ extracted under torture, and, where that fails to obtain the ‘information’ that’s desired by the Government, then threats to destroy the person’s immediate family are applied; so, the Sauds famously usually do get exactly the ‘information’ that they want (regardless of whether it’s true).

Snip….

In other words: the head of the FBI believed torture-extracted ‘confessions’ as if such would meet U.S. rules of evidence — which they don’t. And coaching of witnesses is likewise prohibited — under U.S. laws.

On 30 May 2013, The Washingtonian headlined “Forged Under Fire — Bob Mueller and Jim Comey’s Unusual Friendship” and Garrett M. Graff reported:

 Although they’d been aware of each other for years, sharing their similar orbits, Comey and Mueller were first brought together professionally by then-FBI director Louis Freeh in the opening days of the Bush administration. … As the Bush administration took office in 2001, Freeh asked Bob Mueller, who was acting as John Ashcroft’s deputy attorney general, to transfer the [Khobar] case to Comey.

When he finally did so, Mueller called Comey with a warning: “Wilma Lewis is going to be so pissed.” Indeed, Lewis blasted the decision, as well as both Freeh and Mueller personally, in a press release, saying the move was “ill-conceived and ill-considered.” But Freeh’s gambit paid off.

Within weeks, Comey had pulled together the indictment. During a National Security Council briefing at the White House, under the watchful gaze of Secretary of State Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Comey presented overwhelming evidence of Iran’s involvement.

On the eve of the expiration of the statute of limitations, fourteen individuals were indicted for the attack. Freeh, who stepped down the next day, said the indictment was “a major step.”

So, Comey and Mueller were brought in by Freeh because Freeh was about to retire and he wanted successors who would be committed to the theory of the case, that Freeh had gotten from Prince Bandar. If Comey and Mueller wouldn’t go along with that torture-extracted ‘testimony’ as ‘evidence’, then their ability to become appointed head the FBI would have been zero. Freeh, Comey, and Mueller are a team – a team that serves the Bushes and the Sauds. But not the American public.

Our continuing war against Iran is due entirely to their crucial assistance. The Deep State appoints such individuals.

Keep reading over at  Zero Hedge

This might be of interest:

Here is the real James Comey – Let’s take a look

Bombshell – Russia, FBI, Uranium and Clinton Bribery Plot

 

Why this isn’t a headline on Drudge beats me. Hannity promised a big reveal, and last night he followed up on the story broken by “The Hill.” This should land Hillary in jail for selling out our Uranium. I started posting about this in 2010 and glad this finally has seen the light of day. Better yet, Eric Holder, Muller and Rosenstein, the very fine fellows who are investigating Trump and Russia knew about the bribery and did nothing. That’s right… they all should be in jail. Grassley is holding a hearing this morning.

UPDATE AT BOTTOM OF POST!

Earlier posts of mine:

Clintons and the give away of U.S. Uranium mines

Now the latest today from The Hill:

Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.

Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.

Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continued investigating the matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions.

The first decision occurred in October 2010, when the State Department and government agencies on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States unanimously approved the partial sale of Canadian mining company Uranium One to the Russian nuclear giant Rosatom, giving Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America’s uranium supply.

Snip…

That’s when conservative author Peter Schweitzer and The New York Times documented how Bill Clinton collected hundreds of thousands of dollars in Russian speaking fees and his charitable foundation collected millions in donations from parties interested in the deal while Hillary Clinton presided on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Full story at  The Hill

On Wednesday Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) asked Attorney General Sessions if Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein will be allowed to investigate himself regarding new information on the Hillary Clinton Uranium One scandal.
Attorney General Sessions said it was up to him.

NSA experts say DNC ‘hack’ was an inside leak job, not the Russians

Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.

No less than William H. Binney, the master-mind behind all of that nasty stuff that the NSA does to Americans including storing every keystroke out in the Utah storage center, is on board with this story. Anyone who has been around my blog knows I am a big fan of his. An inside job. Now what does Mueller do with this information? How about Debbie dearest and her BFF the Awans? What are their part?

Four members of VIPS are currently concentrating on the task at hand. They are: (1) William Binney, the NSA’s former technical leader who also designed many of the programs now in use by the agency; (2) Kirk Wiebe, a former senior analyst with the NSA’s SIGINT Automation Research Center; (3) Edward Loomis, the former technical director at the NSA’s Office of Signal Processing; and (4) Ray McGovern, former chief of the CIA’s Soviet Foreign Policy Branch.

But let’s get to it. In a LONG windy post put out by uber liberal THE NATION, we learn this:

…Lost in a year that often appeared to veer into our peculiarly American kind of hysteria is the absence of any credible evidence of what happened last year and who was responsible for it. It is tiresome to note, but none has been made available. Instead, we are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception. These officials profess “high confidence” in their “assessment” as to what happened in the spring and summer of last year—this standing as their authoritative judgment. Few have noticed since these evasive terms first appeared that an assessment is an opinion, nothing more, and to express high confidence is an upside-down way of admitting the absence of certain knowledge. This is how officials avoid putting their names on the assertions we are so strongly urged to accept—as the record shows many of them have done…….

“The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second. These statistics are matters of record and essential to disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed.”

What is the top possible speed? Somewhere around 16 megabytes per second. According to Skip Folden, a former IBM program manager and independent analyst, 22.7 megabytes per second is beyond unlikely under the circumstances–unless you’re downloading the files directly using a storage device like a USB drive. He said:

“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, especially if we are talking about a transoceanic data transfer. Transfer rates of 23 MB/s are not just highly unlikely, but effectively impossible to accomplish when communicating over the Internet at any significant distance. Further, local copy speeds are measured, demonstrating that 23 MB/s is a typical transfer rate when using a USB–2 flash device (thumb drive).”

As to the report’s second contention–that the Guccifer 2.0 documents were tainted to cast curious eyes toward Russia–Folden notes that a simple peeling away of the documents’ top layer of metadata shows the sloppy and intentional misattribution.  More at The Nation Abbreviated opinion at Law Newz

For anyone who hasn’t seen the Binney interview, I will include it.

Trump digging up dirt on Mueller’s 15 Attorneys, new offensive

Finally it looks like Trump is getting the dogs out and going after Mueller. Where is Sessions and his going after Comey and Hillary? Gateway Pundit has a look at the 15 Attorneys that Mueller has put together at the Gateway link below:

As TGP previously reported, The Washington Post claimed that President Trump’s legal team are exploring ways to “scale back” Mueller’s investigation. This is great news, considering many believe Mueller is not an independent arbiter of the investigation and is abusing his power by investigating trivial business transactions.

Not only is Trump asking his advisers about his power to pardon family members and even himself in connection with the probe, The New York Times is reporting that President Trump is also going on the offensive. FINALLY!

Trump’s aides are seeking leverage as they investigate Mueller’s investigators.

Per The New York Times:

 President Trump’s lawyers and aides are scouring the professional and political backgrounds of investigators hired by the special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, looking for conflicts of interest they could use to discredit the investigation — or even build a case to fire Mr. Mueller or get some members of his team recused, according to three people with knowledge of the research effort.

The search for potential conflicts is wide-ranging. It includes scrutinizing donations to Democratic candidates, investigators’ past clients and Mr. Mueller’s relationship with James B. Comey, whose firing as F.B.I. director is part of the special counsel’s investigation.

  More at Gateway Pundit

Hillary Clinton has Mueller transfer Uranium to Russia on a tarmac

What is it with the relationship with Mueller and Hillary Clinton? I would want to ask Mueller what was he doing out on a tarmac transferring Uranium to Russia? What is it with Uranium Russia and Clinton? What is it with tarmacs?

But possible even more shocking is the fact that the State Department wanted the transfer of the HEU to take place on an “airport tarmac” which is rather reminisce of the infamous Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton meeting which occurred on a Phoenix, Arizona, tarmac back in June of 2016.

(INTELLIHUB) — Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated the transfer a highly enriched uranium (HEU) previously confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices,” a newly leaked classified cable shows.

The secret “action request,” dated Aug. 17, 2009, was sent out by Secretary of State Clinton and was addressed to the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilisi, the Russian Embassy, and Ambassador John Beyrle. It proposed that FBI Director Robert Mueller be the one that personally conduct the transfer a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in the early fall of 2009.

Paragraph number 6 of the leaked cable confirms Dir. Mueller’s Sept. 21 flight to Moscow.

“(S/Rel Russia) Action request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives to Moscow on September 21. Post is requested to convey information in paragraph 5 with regard to chain of custody, and to request details on Russian Federation’s plan for picking up the material. Embassy is also requested to reconfirm the April 16 understanding from the FSB verbally that we will have no problem with the Russian Ministry of Aviation concerning Mueller’s September 21 flight clearance.”

Past dealings with the Russians were also mentioned in the cable, signifying that previous deals have taken place.

As Peter comments:

If I were a liberal wacko I would take from this story the following: Well this helps make sense of Trump’s collusion with the Russians. Ten years before he defeats Hillary she meets Trump’s Russian friends clandestinely on a tarmac as a favor to him. And now Mueller who is secretly Donald’s uranium co-conspirator will pretend to investigate him. Let’s draw up those letters of impeachment in Maxine Water’s office.

FBI Special Counsel Mueller: ‘I Have to Check to See If Obama Has the Right to Kill Americans On U S Soil’

While we once again will hear how another “White Knight” comes before us in the form of Mueller to dig about the swamp, looking for some heads to claim, I suggest he is anything but that very special person. You can read elsewhere how he and Comey saved our Constitution at a hospital bedside. This is the real Mueller, another political hack. You see, Obama had a kill list. He had a peculiar taste for it.

It’s been well reported that Obama and his top minions have a so-called “kill list” of which he takes a particular interest. The question is where does it start and where does it stop? The issue of his killing Americans abroad brought a fire storm, and does he have the authority to kill Americans. Here. On U.S. soil?

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder’s “three criteria” for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

“Due process and judicial process are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process,” Holder said.

But Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, wrote in Foreign Policy magazine on Wednesday that Holder’s remarks not only would be seen by the framers of the Constitution as “the very definition of authoritarian power,” but were met “not with outcry but muted applause.”

“Holder’s new definition of ‘due process’ was perfectly Orwellian,” Turley wrote. “What Holder is describing is a model of an imperial presidency that would have made Richard Nixon blush. …

“Where due process once resided, Holder offered only an assurance that the president would kill citizens with care. While that certainly relieved any concern that Obama would hunt citizens for sport, Holder offered no assurances on how this power would be used in the future beyond the now all-too-familiar ‘trust us’ approach to civil liberties of this administration,” he wrote.

Full story at Fox News back in 2012 by Catherine Herridge. Does the name Seth Rich come to mind for anyone else?

%d bloggers like this: