Hat-Tip to POWERLINE
FBI
Mueller’s Investigation is Dead
Here is a partial of a DAILY CALLER article:
When Lying To The FBI Wasn’t A Crime
- A must read as well, WASHINGTON TIME’S ARTICLE on Mueller’s main investigator, Andrew Weissmann.
Here is a large excerpt of the article by Daniel Greenfield at FRONTPAGE MAGAZINE:
I predict Flynn will be exonerated from all this. And with Mueller’s teams past, other cases he has and will put forward may fall apart. NOT because he is wrong, but because of the tactics used (like with Enron and the like).
Probe Into Clinton’s “Uranium Deal” With Russians Opens
NEWSBUSTERS comments on the situation followed by the excellent legal reporting by Greg Jarrett:
From GATEWAY PUNDIT:
THE HILL writes about this story:
THE DAILY WIRE makes note of the political contributions:
Comey’s Double Jeapordy
The Democrat’s Selective Outrage On Intelligence
UPDATE! via THE DAILY CALLER and the NYTs:
Larry Elder discusses in the following clips some of the hypocritical positions the Democrats have in regard to accepting or rejecting intelligent agencies positions — selective outrage in other words. The above audio includes a partial interview with Ed Klein as well (interview begins at the 6:28 mark). Mr. Klein’s books and more can be found here: http://edwardklein.com/
I believe this line about 17-intelligence agencies saying the “Russians” did it is still the same evidence as when I posted this: “NO, 17-U.S. AGENCIES DID NOT SAY RUSSIA HACKED DEM E-MAILS.”
But many issues have still negated the narrative by the Democrats in this regard…see:
➤ CIA vs FBI – Russia and the U.S. Election
➤ The Hillary Campaign and the DNC Refused FBI Help
The bottom line is that even if the Russian’s have an involvement, it didn’t change the outcome of the election. Whatsoever. And the leaks from Podesta’s emails and the DNC were from insiders, not Russians.
Impeachment? Nah… Even Comey Responded “NO” To Obstruction
Comey Responded “NO” (Under Oath) To Obstruction — https://youtu.be/I-GkLXNZcDoLarry Elder takes us on a tour-de-force of Comey saying — prior to the “memo,” he was not asked to stop the investigation[s]. BTW, no one has seen this memo… even the reporter who wrote the article. This is mainly a quick upload to show that “impeachment” cannot be a level reached – legally. EVEN DENNIS KUCINICH is worried about the Democratic machine [i.e., the “deep state”] left in the administration that wants to undermine Trump:
➤ “ Well, you have a politicization of the agencies. That is resulting in leaks from anonymous unknown people and the intention is to take down a president. This is very dangerous to America. It is a threat to our republic. It constitutes a clear and present danger to our way of life. What is the motive of these people? Who’s putting these leaks out? Why isn’t somebody coming forward to make that charge and put their name and their reputation behind it instead of attacking through the media and not substantiating their position?”
Larry Elder discusses the non-evidence so far regarding Comey’s firing and the “obstruction” charge. Larry Elder includes audio from a debate between Jeffrey Toobin (a lawyer and liberal/progressive blogger as well as CNN legal analyst) and Jonathan Turley (lawyer, legal scholar, legal analyst in broadcast and print journalism, as well as currently a professor at George Washington University). Later in the segment “The Sage” includes some audio (I insert the video) of Peter King wondering why Comey stayed silent if he feared instruction.
- I also have a short explanation of “Why Now,” why Trump waited to fire Comey
- ALSO, the very beginning — Comey getting fired — is from SCHMOYOHO:
Larry Elder Ruminates On Trump, Comey, and Watergate
Here is the WASHINGTON POST article by Bill Clinton’s former Attorney General:
The Hillary Campaign and the DNC Refused FBI Help
SOOPERMEXICAN notes this about the CNN video that follows:
Apparently, this was the norm with them (from July):
CIA vs FBI – Russia and the U.S. Election
Here are some related articles… the first one in the list below is the one Dennis Prager is reading from:
YOUNG CONSERVATIVES have this clip from TOWNHALL:
More YOUNG CONS… “Here are the top 5 reasons why it isn’t accurate to definitively say Russia interfered in our election process. From Breitbart“
- There is actually no new information leading the CIA to its conclusion. The New York Timesreports: “The C.I.A.’s conclusion does not appear to be the product of specific new intelligence obtained since the election, several American officials, including some who had read the agency’s briefing, said on Sunday. Rather, it was an analysis of what many believe is overwhelming circumstantial evidence — evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome.” In other words, someone only decided after Trump won that the accusation was worth making.
- The “evidence” that the CIA has gathered is inconclusive. The FBI also disagrees with some of the CIA’s conclusions about Russia’s motives. “While lawmakers were seemingly united on the need to present a strong bipartisan response, the FBI and CIA gave lawmakers differing accounts on Russia’s motives, according to The Post,” The Hillreported on Sunday.
- Despite left-wing “fake news,” there is no evidence Russian hackers actually distorted the voting process.The most that the CIA is alleging is that the Russians may have helped hack of the Democratic National Committee emails, as well as (possibly) the emails of Hillary Clinton campaign chaiman John Podesta. There is zero evidence Russian hackers messed with voting. Ironically, Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s recount has eliminated any doubt about the integrity of the results.
- Julian Assange and Wikileaks have vigorously denied that the Russians were involved in Wikileaks’ disclosures. Of the Democratic National Committee emails, Assange said: “That is the circumstantial evidence that some Russian, or someone who wanted to make them look like a Russian, was involved, with these other media organisations. That is not the case for the material that we released.” Assange made similar denials about the Podesta email leaks later in the election.
- What would the consequences of allowing undue Russian influence in our elections be, exactly? Would we yield primacy in Eastern Europe to Vladimir Putin? Would we give up our plans for missile defense? Would we make deep unilateral cuts in our nuclear arsenal in exchange for flimsy concessions ? Would we tolerate a Russian land invasion of a friendly, pro-Western country? Would we cede the Middle East to Russian hegemony? Because Hillary Clinton and Obama already did that.
FBI 99% Certain 5 Foreign Agencies Hacked Into Hillary’s Server
Firstly — and foremost — FBI sources say indictment of Clinton Foundation is “likely.” Here are five points being made known today from the investigation:
- “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
Some Trey Gowdy Porn ~ v. Harry Reid
The full interview can be found HERE.