[WSJ] A House subpoena, another missed deadline. What is the department hiding?
The feud that has simmered for months between Congress and the Justice Department erupted this week into a cage match. That’s because the House is homing in on the goods.
Until this week, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and fellow institutionalists at the department had fought Congress’s demands for information with the tools of banal bureaucracy‐resist, delay, ignore, negotiate. But Mr. Rosenstein took things to a new level on Tuesday, accusing House Republicans of "threats," extortion and wanting to "rummage" through department documents. A Wednesday New York Times story then dropped a new slur, claiming "Mr. Rosenstein and top FBI officials have come to suspect that some lawmakers were using their oversight authority to gain intelligence about [Special Counsel Bob Mueller’s ] investigation so that it could be shared with the White House."
Mr. Rosenstein isn’t worried about rummaging. That’s a diversion from the department’s opposite concern: that it is being asked to comply with very specific‐potentially very revealing‐demands. Two House sources confirm for me that the Justice Department was recently delivered first a classified House Intelligence Committee letter and then a subpoena (which arrived Monday) demanding documents related to a new line of inquiry about the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Trump investigation. The deadline for complying with the subpoena was Thursday afternoon, and the Justice Department flouted it. As the White House is undoubtedly monitoring any new congressional demands for information, it is likely that President Trump’s tweet Wednesday ripping the department for not turning over documents was in part a reference to this latest demand.
Republicans also demand the FBI drop any objections to declassifying a section of the recently issued House Intelligence Committee report that deals with a briefing former FBI Director James Comey provided about former national security adviser Mike Flynn. House Republicans say Mr. Comey told them his own agents did not believe Mr. Flynn lied to them. On his book tour, Mr. Comey has said that isn’t true. Someone isn’t being honest. Is the FBI more interested in protecting the reputations of two former directors (the other being Mr. Mueller, who dragged Mr. Flynn into court on lying grounds) than in telling the public the truth?
It’s hard to have any faith in the necessity of the more than 300 redactions in the House Intel report, most of which the Republican committee members insist are bogus and should be removed. On every occasion that Justice or the FBI has claimed material must be withheld for the sake of national security or continuing investigations, it has later come out that the only thing at stake were those institutions’ reputations. Think the Comey memos, which showed the former director had little basis for claiming obstruction. Or Sen. Chuck Grassley’s criminal referral of dossier author Christopher Steele, the FBI’s so-called reliable source, whom we now know it had to fire for talking to the press and possibly lying.
The Justice Department is laying all this at the feet of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which technically oversees redactions. But ODNI consults with the agency that "owns" the material, and the FBI is clearly doing the blocking. Again, many pieces of the House Intel report that are being hidden happen to relate to FBI conduct during the 2016 election.
The increasingly poisonous interaction between Congress and the Justice Department also stems from a growing list of questions Republicans have about leading Justice Department officials’ roles in the events Congress seeks to investigate. Mr. Rosenstein’s name was on at least one of the applications for a warrant on Carter Page to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Dana Boente’s name is on another, and he’s now serving as the FBI’s general counsel.
We can’t know the precise motivations behind the Justice Department’s and FBI’s refusal to make key information public. But whether it is out of real concern over declassification or a desire to protect the institutions from embarrassment, the current leadership is about 20 steps behind this narrative. Mr. Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe ‐they have already shattered the FBI’s reputation and public trust. There is nothing to be gained from pretending this is business as usual, or attempting to stem continued fallout by hiding further details.
This week’s events‐including more flat-out subpoena defiance‐put a luminous spotlight on Speaker Paul Ryan. The credibility of the House’s oversight authority is at stake. Mr. Ryan’s committee chairmen have done remarkable work exposing FBI behavior, and they deserve backup. The quickest way to get Justice and FBI to comply with these legitimate requests is for Mr. Ryan to state strongly and publicly that he has zero qualms about proceeding down the road of contempt or impeachment if House demands are not met. This is the people’s government, not the Justice Department’s.
[FOX] A federal judge on Friday harshly rebuked Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team during a hearing for ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort ‐ suggesting they lied about the scope of the investigation, are seeking "unfettered power" and are more interested in bringing down the president.
"You don't really care about Mr. Manafort," U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III told Mueller’s team. "You really care about what information Mr. Manafort can give you to lead you to Mr. Trump and an impeachment, or whatever."
Further, Ellis demanded to see the unredacted "scope memo," a document outlining the scope of the special counsel’s Russia probe that congressional Republicans have also sought.
The hearing, where Manafort’s team fought to dismiss an 18-count indictment on tax and bank fraud-related charges, took a confrontational turn as it was revealed that at least some of the information in the investigation derived from an earlier Justice Department probe ‐ in the U.S. attorney’s office for the Eastern District of Virginia.
Manafort’s attorneys argue the special counsel does not have the power to indict him on the charges they have brought ‐ and seemed to find a sympathetic ear with Ellis.
The Reagan-appointed judge asked Mueller’s team where they got the authority to indict Manafort on alleged crimes dating as far back as 2005.
#2
Further, Ellis demanded to see the unredacted "scope memo," a document outlining the scope of the special counsel’s Russia probe that congressional Republicans have also sought.
[The Goldwater] The Office of the Inspector General via Michael Horowitz has a highly anticipated series of reports stemming from his investigation into the cover-up of crimes committed by Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Justice, the Obama Administration, and numerous other entities which is soon to drop and rattle the foundation of Washington, DC.
There are common misconceptions from people who are genuinely frustrated with the delays from the Department of Justice and Attorney General Jeff Sessions in bringing about charges for obvious criminals such as former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, former FBI Director James Comey, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; in assuming that there is inaction occurring within the DOJ.
No, that's incorrect. Yes, it's taking a long time. In most people's eyes, it's too long, but I assure you, the end result will be worth the wait. Those critiquing Sessions now have no idea what's in store in the near future.
You need to look no further than the vocal proponents of what Jeff Sessions, the DOJ, and the OIG are doing to understand the legitimacy of his plan.
First, consider that Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA) is the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and that he's NEVER offered criticisms directed at the Attorney General.
During the AG’s entire reign at the DOJ, he's been able to avoid allowing a single leak to the media, which is an astounding accomplishment all to itself.
In April, The Goldwater covered Devin Nunes announcing that "no official intelligence was used" in the Robert Mueller led-witch hunt against President Trump.
#3
But will it become public before it is too late to have any effect?
Let's just surmise that the Blue Wave actually happens and the Democrats win the HoR this November. If that happens I expect that they will begin impeachment proceedings by January and effectively take over the DoJ and stop the OIG somehow.
[The Goldwater] The endless cycle of corruption surrounding the Democratic Party has prolonged justice for those involved - in a widespread conspiracy of espionage, blackmail, arms-dealing, treason, drug-trafficking, and potentially supporting terrorism - all connect the likes of Barack Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Hezbollah, Iran, and Imran Awan - leading back to Uranium One.
Most Americans don't understand the full details of the crimes which have occurred in the United States of America's federal government and all across the nation.
As the world has witnessed, under the Obama Regime there were numerous violations of federal law that occurred inside the United States of America's government, through treasonous actors, and corrupt politicians, as well as terrorists; it all goes back to the Uranium One case.
The takedown, however, will begin with of the leading players in the criminal enterprise, Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) and Imran Awan.
Wasserman-Schultz has yet to be brought forth on charges for her assistance to known-terrorist Imran Awan, although Awan is now in federal custody and has since faced indictments.
Many members of Congress have vented their frustrations in what's perceived to have been a lack of investigation into the crimes of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, with most recently Representative Ron DeSantis (R-FL) venting his frustrations demanding federal agencies to investigate the Florida Democrat. Lengthy article continues.
#1
As the world has witnessed, under the Obama Regime there were numerous violations of federal law that occurred inside the United States of America's government Evidently the only ones to have not "witnessed" these "numerous violations" are those responsible for bringing justice.
DW-S has been rather quiet lately, hasn't she? And evidently she is still an upright member of the House (D-FL).
[Huffpoo] Federal investigators in New York City have conducted surveillance on the phone lines of President Donald Trump’s longtime personal attorney Michael Cohen, NBC News first reported Thursday.
It’s unclear how long ago the wiretapping was authorized, according to NBC News, but sources told the outlet that Cohen was "wiretapped in the weeks leading up to the search warrant that occurred several weeks ago," referring to federal authorities raiding his home, hotel room and office in April. ABC News later confirmed that federal investigators had tapped Cohen’s phones ahead of the raid.
Cohen has been embroiled in a legal battle stemming from a $130,000 "hush money" payment he made to silence Stormy Daniels, the porn star who allegedly had an affair with Trump.
According to NBC, one of the phone calls intercepted was "between the White House and one of the phone lines associated with Michael Cohen."
Trump’s new lawyer overseeing matters in the Russia investigation, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, could not confirm the report, but was "furious" about it, according to The Washington Post’s Robert Costa.
Giuliani told The Daily Beast on Thursday that he and the other lawyers on Trump’s legal team don’t believe Cohen was wiretapped.
"We think it’s going to turn out to be untrue because it would be totally illegal," Giuliani said. "You can’t wiretap a lawyer, you certainly can’t wiretap his client who’s not involved in the investigation. No one has suggested that Trump was involved in that investigation. So they’re going to wiretap the lawyer, his client, and his client, the president of the United States? I don’t think so, not if they want to stay out of jail. Emphasis added.
#2
A misrepresentation by the state controlled media, either through stupidity or a willful act of subterfuge.
Label everything a "wiretap" (term used in Tweet and statements by Trump following the Trump Tower campaign incident), and everything labeled "wiretap" is discredited.
Tom R says:
May 4, 2018 at 1:25 am
The Trump administration freely turned over 1.4 million pages of documents from the campaign to Mueller several months ago. Those are the documents Caputo was almost certainly referring to. How would Mueller be able to successfully spy on Trump using the original Carter Page FISA warrant while Trump is the sitting President of the United States? That would require the assistance of the NSA and we already know ADM Rogers is the one who likely informed Trump that Obama was spying on him back in November 2016.
Reply
#3
Corrections issued: NBC, ABC Correct Story That Cohen's Phone Was Wiretapped
NBC and ABC News both issued corrections Thursday evening after reporting earlier in the day that President Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen had his phone wiretapped by federal investigators. The networks clarified that Cohen had not been wiretapped.
#4
I wouldn't be surprised in the future, it is discovered that there really was a wiretap. Such behavior would be consistent with previous abuse of power.
#6
It probably was a pen register serving as the fig leaf for the illegal wire tap.
They wouldn't have to actually use anything gained from the wiretap in any sort of legal proceeding. They would "just" learn all the possible hooks on which to hang their made up stories that could be used in proceedings.
[PRESSTV] If war criminals like Henry Kissinger and Barack Obama I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody... could get the Nobel Peace Prize, then Donald Trump ...New York real estate developer, described by Dems as illiterate, racist, misogynistic, and what ever other unpleasant descriptions they can think of, elected by the rest of us as 45th President of the United States... could also be awarded it, says an American political analyst and activist.
Myles Hoenig, a former Green Party candidate for Congress, made the remarks while commenting to Press TV on Thursday, after President Trump's closest Republican allies in Congress nominated him for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, giving him credit for pressuring North Korea into accepting a possible denuclearization.
Led by Indiana Representative Luke Messer, 18 of Trump’s most ardent supporters in the House of Representatives wrote a letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee on Wednesday, recommending the Republican head of state for his work to bring peace to the Korean Peninsula.
"It’s not that unusual that his cadre of Republican sycophants would nominate President Trump for a Nobel Prize. To them, Trump is delivering on the undeliverable. Whether he has earned it or not is not relevant. Since Trump is trying to reverse everything that Obama attempted to do, it’s no surprise that they feel if Obama should have received the Nobel, why not the Donald?" Hoenig asked.
"And why not? Look at the Nobel committee’s history. First, they did give it to a war mongering president before he was even a war monger, President Obama. Yet even before his first bombs dropped on innocent villagers or droned individuals, he was already silent about the massive war crimes being committed by Israel during the Siege of Gazoo when he was only President-elect. His argument for his silence was that foreign policy should be left to the sitting president, George Bush. However, corruption finds a dozen alibis for its evil deeds... he was quick to condemn and verbalize his outrage over the Mumbai massacre during this same time," he stated.
"The Nobel committee sure has had second thoughts now that Obama’s term is over and he had extended Bush’s wars and added a few of his own. You would think they would think twice about making such a blunder," the analyst noted.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/04/2018 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran Proxies
#2
Remind me again , "What exactly did Obama DO to get the Nobel Prize?' Perhaps I missed it. Was it his speech in Cairo, perhaps? No?
Was it his smile in Paris? His Vacations in Hawaii? His Golf scores?
His deep bows to The Emperor of Japan and Saudi Arabia, then ?
No? Hmmm.
( I've GOT it ) His wonderful Obamacare program and his compassion for the sick people everywhere, and their high insurance premiums ? That must be it.
The fact that he was black and the smartest man in the room? That He was the Messiah and shot a thrill up everybody's leg ? Well, at least a mild thrill.anyway. NBC vowed that it was more like an electric shock from their little toe all the way to an ecstatic whack in the gonads... or was that TIME magazine?
Besides he DESERVED it because he was Black ( well, half black anyway.
#7
The thing about the Obama prize was how blatant it was. Typically they'd have waited and then overblown some action as deserving but they didn't want to wait to virtue signal. He got the award before he had a chance to do anything. Nobel is worthless after that.
#8
Yasser Arafat (Palestinian terrorist) got the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994. Obummer got it before he did anything (Come to think of it, did he ever do anything?).
[FOX via Huffpoo] Fox News host Neil Cavuto had some harsh words for Donald Trump on Thursday: Mr. President, you stink.
The host listed some of Trump’s worst lies and misstatements, including claiming there was widespread voter fraud in the 2016 election and the recent revelation that he repaid his personal lawyer Michael Cohen for $130,000 in hush money given to porn star Stephanie Clifford, known as Stormy Daniels, after he’d repeatedly denied knowing about the situation.
"How can you drain the swamp if you’re the one that keeps muddying the water?" Cavuto asked. "You didn’t know about that $130,000 payment to a porn star until you did."
Cavuto, one of the few hosts on Fox News who calls out the president, said Trump cannot criticize the press for reporting "fake news" when he repeatedly makes false statements without correction.
"Your base probably might not care," Cavuto added. "But you should. I guess you’re too busy draining the swamp to ever stop and smell the stink you’re creating. That’s your doing. That’s your stink. Mr. President, that’s your swamp."
#11
Move on, Please.
He is touted as a "host" but he is the epitome of the "not host". He has "guests" who he interrupts and talks over. I tuned in because I want to hear what your guest says, not what you say.
[DailyBeast] President Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani said on Thursday he doubted the veracity of a bombshell NBC News report from earlier in the day that federal authorities wiretapped the president’s longtime counsel, Michael Cohen.
"Us lawyers have talked about it, we don’t believe it’s true," Giuliani told The Daily Beast. "We think it’s going to turn out to be untrue because it would be totally illegal. You can’t wiretap a lawyer, you certainly can’t wiretap his client who’s not involved in the investigation. No one has suggested that Trump was involved in that investigation. So they’re going to wiretap the lawyer, his client, and his client the president of the United States? I don’t think so, not if they want to stay out of jail. Disclosing a wiretap is a federal felony. I never took ’em home when I was a U.S. attorney."
Giuliani said that he found out about the wiretap news from NBC News’ report, which cited "two people with knowledge of the legal proceedings," and not from Cohen himself. He believed someone in the Justice Department was behind the leak.
"Nobody else would know about it," Giuliani said. "Cohen didn’t know about it, so it has to be the FBI, the independent counsel, or the Justice Department."
"Anybody who says that I’m exaggerating when I say that this is an out-of-control investigation and they’re acting like storm troopers‐‐give me a break, baby! They prove it every day."
Feds Are Treating Michael Cohen Like a Mob Lawyer
Michael Cohen’s Mystery Client Is Sean Hannity
"That sort of thing happens all the time if you’re doing mob wiretaps," he said. "That would be the classic type of scenario, when they’re calling their lawyer or their fixer or whatever. But there’s not an absolute prohibition on wiretapping a lawyer."
"Right now, the odds are against it," he said. "Look at all of the bad faith we’re seeing here. And whether this wiretap story is true or not true, it’s bad faith to leak it. We should find out about this with a notification from the Justice Department, they’re wiretapping the President of the United States, they’re wiretapping a man talking to his lawyer and then they want us to cooperate? We’re not suckers."
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
05/04/2018 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
"We think it’s going to turn out to be untrue because it would be totally illegal."
Rudy, there's been a great deal of criminality by the Deep State cabal already. Unfortunately, much of it has gone unprosecuted. Meanwhile, Mueller goes after ginned-up, phony process minutia. Very frustrating.
#3
"We think it’s going to turn out to be untrue because it would be totally illegal."
NBC was quick to correct their reporting (who told them about 'Pen Registers?). Too quick, in my mind, based on their previous news 'coverage' of other issues.
Rudy may be setting the scene for something here, too. Shaping the message as it were, so when wiretapping of the sort is actually verified (which JQC alludes to), no one can question the legalities.
Well, some will of course.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
05/04/2018 9:04 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I do remember that, when this story first broke, there was reporting of 'information' gathered that could be incriminating.
Seems beyond the info a mere pen register could gather.
But, as Giuliani says, that would be 'totally illegal'.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
05/04/2018 13:47 Comments ||
Top||
#5
It probably was true, just not supposed to be admitted.
NBC Exclusive: Feds set up wiretap on Trump lawyer's phones weeks before FBI raid.
Spokespeople for the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI in New York declined comment.
After the raid, members of Trump's legal team advised the president not to speak to Cohen, according to a person familiar with the discussion.
Two sources close to Trump's newest attorney, Rudolph Giuliani, say he learned that days after the raid the president had made a call to Cohen, and told Trump never to call again out of concern the call was being recorded by prosecutors.
Giuliani told Fox News Wednesday night that Trump repaid Cohen the $130,000 he used to keep the adult film star, Stormy Daniels, from going public with allegations about her affair with Trump.
Giuliani is also described as having warned Trump that Cohen is likely to flip on him, something Trump pushed back on, telling Giuliani that he has known Cohen for years and expects him to be loyal, according to two sources with direct knowledge of the conversations.
Giuliani and a lawyer for Cohen, Steve Ryan, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The White House referred NBC News to outside counsel.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
05/04/2018 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
[Time via Hot Air] Both Democrats and Republicans have taken turns criticizing the FBI over the past two years, but of late the former have been criticizing the latter for attacking the law-enforcement agency’s leadership and performance. Democrats complain that the GOP wants to weaken the FBI as part of their efforts to defend Donald Trump and are sacrificing the credibility of the organization. Rep. Jim Himes preached to a CNN congregation last month that those "besmirching" the integrity of James Comey would "rot in Hell."
Don’t repent too quickly, Time Magazine’s Eric Lichtblau reports today. Politics aside, the FBI finds itself in a serious crisis of credibility, and not just on the news shows. Juries have begun discounting testimony from FBI agents, and James Comey may be one of the problems, Hell notwithstanding:
#3
Time mag is just now acknowedging that the FBI leadership was tainted? I wonder when they will catch on to HRC being a criminal psychopath? When did they find about Ted Bundy and Charles Manson?
#4
This is nothing more than the establishment media trying to recover what little credibility they have left as the facts of what really happened at the FBI, DOJ, etc, during the 2016 election (and beyond) start to see the light of day.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Huffpoo] Federal investigators in New York City have conducted surveillance on the phone lines of President Donald Trump’s longtime personal attorney Michael Cohen, NBC News first reported Thursday.
North Korea
[Time via Hot Air] Both Democrats and Republicans have taken turns criticizing the FBI over the past two years, but of late the former have been criticizing the latter for attacking the law-enforcement agency’s leadership and performance. Democrats complain that the GOP wants to weaken the FBI as part of their efforts to defend Donald Trump and are sacrificing the credibility of the organization. Rep. Jim Himes preached to a CNN congregation last month that those "besmirching" the integrity of James Comey would "rot in Hell."
