Bret Baier

Bret Baier’s Interview of James Comey (plus more)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Former FBI Director James Comey on decision-making process in the Hillary Clinton email investigation, origins of the anti-Trump dossier, memos of conversations with President Trump and new book ‘A Higher Loyalty.’

‘Special Report’ host Bret Baier sat down with the former FBI director; Baier reacts to Comey’s responses on ‘The Story.’

S.C. congressman reacts to fired FBI Director James Comey’s comments in interview with ‘Special Report’ anchor and the potential legal implications.

The ‘Special Report’ All-Stars react to Bret Baier’s interview with the former FBI director James Comey.

Fired FBI director James Comey sat down with Bret Baier for an interview on Fox News; former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski reacts to this and more on ‘The Story.’

Jim Comey’s book tour did not work out as planned.

Something Smells in D.C. | Timelines and Unmaskings

Published by Papa Giorgio

SOOPERMEXICAN has this video and commentary on this new detail to the uncovering of information regarding some private — legal mind you — conversations in the Trump administration:

…What it comes down to is this – Comey had a memo talking about how he was thinking of not charging Hillary, but that was before he had interviewed two dozen witnesses, including Hillary herself. Gowdy says he wants to straighten this out, and that might include making Comey testify again and explain the order of events…

POWERLINE has a good short post on the subject as well:

It has been reported that Samantha Power, while serving as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, requested or initiated a request for more than 260 unmaskings of Americans whose conversations were picked up during surveillance. But today, according to Rep. Trey Gowdy,Power denied making anything close to that number of unmasking requests.

Here is what Gowdy told Fox News’ Bret Baier:

BAIER: You are also looking, and have talked to the former Ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power. We reported that she requested or her officer requested 260 plus efforts to unmask, in other words, get who was talking about picked up in surveillance. How did she answer that question? Why so many?

GOWDY: Well, I’ll tell you broadly, Bret, I think if she was on your show, she would say those attempt to unmask may have been attributed to her. But they greatly exceed, by an exponential factor, the number of requests that she actually made.

I assume Gowdy is accurately characterizing Power’s testimony. I don’t assume Power is telling the truth, but she may be.

If she is, I agree with Gowdy who also told Baier, “We’ve got to get to the bottom of that.”….

 

The Fallout From Comey Releasing His Prepared Remarks

Published by Papa Giorgio

See previous statements by Left leaning legal scholars ALAN DERSHOWITZ and JONATHAN TURLEY.

Comey’s written testimony clearly shows the former, not the latter.

I find it difficult to understand how legal experts can read former FBI director James Comey’s submitted testimony and conclude that it makes out a case of felony obstruction of an FBI investigation. That contention was ill-conceived before we saw Comey’s testimony (see, e.g., here, here, and here), and it is even weaker now.

Finally, it bears emphasizing that it is not the decision Trump made. He told Comey what he hoped would happen, and why. But he did not order Comey to halt the investigation. Plus, Comey did not halt the investigation; it is continuing to this day. Moreover, Comey acknowledges that Trump was speaking narrowly about Flynn. The president did not ask him to shut down the broader “Russia investigation” — meaning the president was not pretextually lobbying for Flynn in an attempt to make his own potential problems disappear.

You can disagree with Trump’s reasoning. You can conclude that browbeating Comey in this fashion was inappropriate. But this clearly was not obstruction — which is no doubt why then-director Comey did not resign or otherwise treat the matter as if he’d just witnessed a crime.

(NATIONAL REVIEW)

FBI 99% Certain 5 Foreign Agencies Hacked Into Hillary’s Server

Published by Papa Giorgio

Firstly — and foremost — FBI sources say indictment of Clinton Foundation is “likely.” Here are five points being made known today from the investigation:

1. The Clinton Foundation investigation is far more expansive than anybody has reported so far and has been going on for more than a year.
2. The laptops of Clinton aides Cherryl Mills and Heather Samuelson have not been destroyed, and agents are currently combing through them. The investigation has interviewed several people twice, and plans to interview some for a third time.
3. Agents have found emails believed to have originated on Hillary Clinton’s secret server on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. They say the emails are not duplicates and could potentially be classified in nature.
4. Sources within the FBI have told him that an indictment is “likely” in the case of pay-for-play at the Clinton Foundation, “barring some obstruction in some way” from the Justice Department.
5. FBI sources say with 99% accuracy that Hillary Clinton’s server has been hacked by at least five foreign intelligence agencies, and that information had been taken from it.

(GATEWAY PUNDIT)

  • “Investigators are now, as I said to you at the outset, 99% sure that as many as five foreign intelligence agencies were able to hack into the Clinton email server” ~ Lou Dobbs

Kirsten Powers’ Full Comments In Regards to Administration`s Failure w/ Libya and the Legacy Media`s Complicit Behavior

Published by Papa Giorgio

From video description:

I came across some video of Kirsten Powers being rationally honest, a trait she exhibits well from time-to-time even though a liberal Democrat. (Posted by: Religio-Political Talk) The original video can be found at The Right Scoop, but I wanted more, and found it. So here is her full comment on the issue of Libya and how the administration tried to package the narrative a couple of weeks ago via Susan Rice, the United States Ambassador to the United Nations.

It is now widely known that the administration knew it was a terrorist planned attack within 24-hours, and for the full week afterwards the media (still — in actuality) seems to have covered for the administration as well. This is what Miss Powers is commenting on, honestly, and truthfully. It comes from Special Report Online… where the panel on Special Report continues frank discussion after the main show. Here is Right Scoop’s comments:

Kirsten Powers believes that media bias has gotten out of control on the issue of the Benghazi attack and the subsequent lies from the Obama administration on what happened. There are so many questions that need answering and she says that the media could possibly be complicit in another terrorist attack on America if they don’t get to the bottom of what is happening here. She cites the attacks on our embassies pre-9/11 as warnings back then, and says Al-Qaeda is not dead and the media should be asking what this really means.

Kirstin Powers actually has a great column on this topic as well:

★ Write About Terrorism? Nah, Let’s All Bash Mitt Romney Instead!

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney Embarrassed by 414-to-0 Rejection of His Bosses Budget ~ Obfuscation

Published by Papa Giorgio

HotAir:

To cleanse the palate, a simple question: Since only 51 votes are needed to pass a budget in the Senate and there are 53 Democratic and left-leaning independent senators, why doesn’t smilin’ Harry Reid ram through O’s latest spending blowout? The White House gets awfully fidgety when the media presses them on this, to the point where even former OMB director Jack Lew was forced to play dumb about how many votes are needed for Democrats to pass this thing. Any theories? Any hypotheses for why The One might be nervous about vulnerable red-state Democrats like Claire McCaskill and Jon Tester taking a vote on a budget that calls for another $1.3 trillion deficit this year and a cool $901 billion deficit next year? Leave your informed speculation in the comments.