I have a question. Nader has issued a subpoena for the full unredacted document. By law certain information cannot be released. He is threatening to hold Barr in contempt if he does not comply. How can a subpoena compel someone to break the law? Wouldn't that make the suppoena illegal?

I was wondering the same thing when I heard it on the radio a little bit ago. Can they compel him to break the law? Pretty audacious.

Sen Graham sends a ltr to Robert Mueller

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...-to-testify-n2545830

Dear Mr. Mueller:

Thank you and your team very much for the professional and thorough manner in which you conducted your investigation. I appreciate the service you’ve provided the country now and throughout your entire life.

On the eve of Attorney General Barr’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, several news outlets broke a story alleging that you believed Attorney General Barr’s March 24, 2019, letter to this Committee “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of your investigation. Of course, Attorney General Barr has since released your report to the public, including your executive summaries, with redactions deemed necessary by both you and the Department of Justice, and testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In response to questions by Senator Blumenthal, the Attorney General testified in essence that you told him in a phone call that you did not challenge the accuracy of the Attorney General’s summary of your report’s principal conclusions, but rather you wanted more of the report, particularly the executive summaries concerning obstruction of justice, to be released promptly. In particular, Attorney General Barr testified that you believed media coverage of your investigation was unfair without the public release of those summaries.

Please inform the Committee if you would like to provide testimony regarding any misrepresentation by the Attorney General of the substance of that phone call.

Ah yes, the old "put up or shut-up" tactic...

Things are indeed moving fast

p65: NYT puts out an article that the FBI sent out an investigator posing as an academic researcher to trap Papadopoulos. (spying)

Lots of attention flares up to that article.

now today, NYT has a new article saying that is perfectly normal for the FBI.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/0...ing-fbi-russia-.html

The Truth About ‘Spying’ on the Trump Campaign

The counterintelligence methods used by the F.B.I. are common — and were a legitimate response to reports of Russian interference.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You can read the article but they are doing the magic trick. No big deal for the Obama administration to spy on the Trump campaign and set them up to look like they were coordinating/colluding w Russians.

No big deal. Nothing to see here. These aren't the droids you are looking for. Move along.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Dear Mr. Mueller:





Please inform the Committee if you would like to provide testimony regarding any misrepresentation by the Attorney General of the substance of that phone call.

BTW, this phone call was recorded for quality control and training purposes.

Obvious Question of the Day

Was the Russian Collusion merely a cover to allow the Democrats to spy on the Trump Campaign that would have quietly disappeared when Hillary won?

Now since she lost they must carry this as far as they can and even push impeachment to continue the cover and keep investigators tied up so the real conspiracy won't be revealed.

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
Obvious Question of the Day

Was the Russian Collusion merely a cover to allow the Democrats to spy on the Trump Campaign that would have quietly disappeared when Hillary won?

Obvious answer, yes.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
Obvious Question of the Day

Was the Russian Collusion merely a cover to allow the Democrats to spy on the Trump Campaign that would have quietly disappeared when Hillary won?

Obvious answer, yes.

NAILED IT! Come on Congress, catch up now

From the NYT article above, that came out today

quote:

The counterintelligence methods used by the F.B.I. are common — and were a legitimate response to reports of Russian interference

"legitimate response" to "reports of Russian interference"

AG Barr has said spying on the campaign did occur. The question is "was there a legitimate reason"

The NYT jumps in and assumes there was a legitimate reason.

So what was that reason?

Mueller report footnote 465 & the associated paragraph on pdf p97:

Papadopoulos suggested to a foreign representative that Trump campaign had rcvd indication that Russian govt could assist the Trump campaign through anonymous release of info damaging to Clinton.

The foreign govt conveyed this info to the U.S. govt on 26 July 2016. The FBI opened its investigation into potential coordination between Russia and Trump campaign a few days later based on this info.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

That is really important to establish. That is the official Mueller description of what started the counterintel operation that Mueller inherited on 17 May 2017.

So when one considers a "legitimate reason", is that background sufficient?

1. Papadopoulos says Joseph Mifsud told him the Russians had thousands of Clinton emails that could help Trump if released anonymously.

Who supplied the part about the emails being released anonymously ? Papadopoulos did not say that in his testimony to congress. I do not remember him saying that in his book.

2. Alexander Downer (somehow) passed along that Papadopoulos knew the Russians had material on Clinton that would damage her campaign. He did not mention emails per se. That became the trigger.

3. Papadopoulos does not recall mentioning the Russians had damaging material on Clinton to Downer.

4. Joseph Mifsud denied to the FBI he had advance knowledge that Russia had damaging Clinton emails (Mueller report pdf p201). That was in an interview on 10 Feb 2017 in a hotel lobby.

5. Mifsud disappears.

So in the "legitimate reason" for the counterintal op,

Mifsud says he had no advanced info

Papadopoulos doesn't remember mentioning the damaging material to Downer

And that is the basis for the FBI opening a counterintel operation against the Republican candidate for President. That is why Mueller's investigation got started.

As far as we know, neither the FBI or Mueller got all of these inconsistencies resolved.

Joseph Mifsud is a good place to start.

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
Obvious Question of the Day

Was the Russian Collusion merely a cover to allow the Democrats to spy on the Trump Campaign that would have quietly disappeared when Hillary won?

Now since she lost they must carry this as far as they can and even push impeachment to continue the cover and keep investigators tied up so the real conspiracy won't be revealed.

Actually. Yes and no. It’s looking like lots of stuff that happened in late 2016 and after is chaff and counter measures to cover for the fact that that were illegally accessing the databases since 2012.

2 posts above: Joseph Mifsud

Now:

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...ipsters-moscow-links

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes is scrutinizing the findings in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report about Joseph Mifsud -- the mysterious professor from Malta who helped ignite the Russia probe in 2016 – and wants to know exactly who he was working for when he spoke with former Trump adviser George Papadopoulos.

It has long been suggested that Mifsud was connected to Russian intelligence. But Nunes, in a Friday letter obtained by Fox News, questions that assumption, saying Mueller’s report “omits any mention of a wide range of contacts Mifsud had with Western political institutions and individuals.”

Nunes’ letter is addressed to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Central Intelligence Agency Director Gina Haspel, National Security Agency Director Paul Nakasone and FBI Director Chris Wray. It asks them to hand over all information they have on Mifsud by May 10.

In his letter, Nunes presents photographic evidence of Mifsud in close proximity to influential Western political and government officials.

“If Mifsud has extensive, suspicious contacts among Russian officials as portrayed in the special counsel’s report, then an incredibly wide range of Western institutions and individuals may have been compromised by him, including our own State Department,” Nunes wrote.

He added: “In fact, this could entail a major scandal for U.S. and allied governments.”

Alternatively, Nunes wrote that if Mifsud isn’t a counterintelligence threat, as implied in the Mueller report, he could have done extensive damage to Western national security. The California Republican wrote that if that’s the case, it “would cast doubt on the Special Counsel’s fundamental depiction of him and his activities, and raise questions about the veracity of the Special Counsel’s statements and affirmations.”

Mifsud has vanished from public eye after his name began surfacing in news stories.



Joseph Mifsud

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

more from Conservative TreeHouse

https://theconservativetreehou...spygate/#more-163354

video of Nunes at link

good interview w Nunes

This is a "cheap shot" post over trivia, but it is something that has annoyed me.

Everyone keeps saying the Mueller report Vol II has 10 topics demonstrating "obstruction of justice". Even AG Barr said 10 items.

There are actually 11

1 The Campaign 's Response to Reports About Russian Support for Trump

2 The President's Conduct Concerning the Investigation of Michael Flynn

3 The President's Reaction to Public Confirmation of the FBI's Russia
Investigation

4 Events Leading Up To and Surrounding the Termination of FBI Director Comey

5 The President's Efforts to Remove the Special Counsel.

6 The President's Efforts to Curtail the Special Counsel Investigation

7 The President's Efforts to Prevent Disclosure of Emails About the June 9, 2016 Meeting Between Russians and Senior Campaign Officials

8 The President's Further Efforts to Have the Attorney General Take Over the Investigation

9 The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel

10 The President's Conduct Towards Flynn, Manafort

11 The President's Conduct Involving Michael Cohen

May 2018, SIGforum, The Steel dossier, Page 11, Joesph Mifsud

It’s like Groundhog Day.

The news has not changed in over a year.
We have known what happened for at least a year.

James Comey is still out there spinning his spin

https://theconservativetreehou...e-memos/#more-163374

Comey just gave a radio interview.

When questioned about the FBI using intelligence assets to engage with Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos, Comey replied:

“Really? What would you have the FBI do? We discover in the middle of June of 2016 that the Russians were engaged in a massive effort to mess with this democracy to interfere in the election. We’re focused on that and at the end of July we learn that a Trump campaign adviser — two months earlier, before any of this was public — had talked to a Russian representative about the fact that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton and wanted to arrange to share it with the Trump campaign.”

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

We'll have to wait to see what gets unclassified, but here are several major watch items that come from Comey's statement.

1. He claims that Mifsud gave Papadopoulos information on 26 Apr 2016 that was not made public until 2 months later.

????

Papadopoulos testimony to congress:

"He tells me that the Russians have thousands of Hillary Clinton emails. I never heard the word DNC."

As posted previously, Fox news from 9 to 11 May 2016 was running a story that the Russians had 20,000 of Clinton emails. It was being widely discussed in the news and internet. This wasn’t earth shattering news.

so what is Comey talking about "not known publicly"

Note Comey is trying to say the "Clinton emails" are the "DNC emails". Two diff things entirely

2. Haven't read anything where Papadopoulos said Mifsud wanted to share the emails. Papadopoulos didn't ask for them.

3. And the huge issue is Mifsud. Was he an FBI/CIA stooge? Was his info to Papadopoulos part of a plan to entrap the Trump campaign?

we will need to revisit Comey's words when we get some more questions answered.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

In the radio interview, Comey says the craziest idea is that the FBI was out to get Trump. He says, So Trump supporters, I and a very small number of people knew, that we were conducting a counterintelligence investigation of individuals close to the Trump campaign. If we were trying to hurt Donald Trump, why wouldn't we leak that ?

hmmm a small number of people including Fusion GPS and most of the major news media

What BS. Christopher Steele was spreading the story to many media outlets that law enforcement was investigating Trump campaign people for working w Russia. Steele was doing this while he was an FBI confidential human source.

As the questions mount on who Mifsud was working for,

there is another possible FBI plant getting attention. This one has been around for a while but it never got much attention. Looking much more likely now.

Mike Caputo was a Trump campaign worker.

He talked to a man named "Henry Greenberg" who said he had dirt on Clinton. Greenberg uses several names, such as Henry Oknyansky. Greenberg contacted Caputo in May 2016.

(see Mueller report pdf p69)

Caputo passed Greenberg off to Roger Stone. Greenberg wanted money for the info. Stone refused the offer, stating that Trump would not pay for opposition research.

An hour long audio podcast captures this:

https://ricochet.com/podcast/b...ussian-with-the-fbi/

very interesting. If you start listening, you will probably go to the end.

At one time I thought Caputo was a phony. Not any more.


Mueller prosecutors interviewed Caputo. When asked if any Russian offered Caputo info about Clinton emails, Caputo said yes. He said he had a 2 minute phone conversation w someone named Henry Greenberg.

The prosecutor, Aaron Zelinsky, got upset. Caputo thought Zelinsky expected Caputo to deny the call. (Then he would have been charged w lying)

Zelinsky knew the exact day that Greenberg had called Caputo.

Lots more to the story, but Caputo believes Greenberg was an FBI plant.

Just like Mifsud might have been an FBI plant against Papadopoulos.

Just like the Russian lawyer at the June 2016 Trump Tower mtg was a Fusion GPS plant.

Just like Christopher Steele in June 2016 wrote that Russian Intel Services had "compromising material" on Hillary Clinton.

Just like Stefan Halper worked against Papadopoulos and Carter Page.

Multiple attempts to ensnare multiple Trump campaign personnel.

The suspicious events keep stacking up.

^^^^
Absolutely amazing.

I heard a talking head say something yesterday that made me chuckle. "Mueller time is over. Now it's time to pay the Barr bill."

Man I hope that comes true.

Damn, Nunes is good.

Interview w Maria Bartiromo

seen at:

https://theconservativetreehou...dossier/#more-163400

Maria Bartiromo and Devin Nunes Discuss Predicate of “Spygate” and Mueller Dossier…


video:

https://youtu.be/D8EyqAq1Q3k

Article makes it clear just how crucial it is that the traitors be punished.

"We as Americans need to fully comprehend the seriousness of this matter. If this DC cabal could do this to a duly elected president of the United States, what could they do to you or me? How dangerous can rogue actors within a corrupt government become when they have unfettered access to highly sophisticated surveillance tools? What happens when deceitful men in power weaponize these tools for political purposes? Do we all wish to exist in a society where unelected government bureaucrats and heavily biased leftist "journalists" take it upon themselves to have a desired effect upon a presidential election and overrun the will of the American people? Were these people so arrogant and brazen to surmise they knew better than the American people?"

https://www.americanthinker.co...the_deep_state_.html

PETER STRZOK SUSPECTED CIA WAS BEHIND INACCURATE MEDIA LEAKS

https://dailycaller.com/2019/0...zok-cia-leaks-email/

Peter Strzok suspected CIA employees were behind inaccurate leaks to the press regarding possible Trump campaign contacts with Russia, according to an email the former FBI counterintelligence official sent to colleagues in April 2017.

“ I’m beginning to think the agency got info a lot earlier than we thought and hasn’t shared it completely with us. Might explain all these weird/seemingly incorrect leads all these media folks have. Would also highlight agency as source of some of the leaks,” Strzok wrote in an email to FBI colleagues on April 13, 2017 .

The email is highlighted in a letter that two Republican senators sent Monday to Michael K. Atkinson, the inspector general of the intelligence community.

In the letter, Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin asked Atkinson if he has investigated whether the CIA or other intelligence community agencies leaked information to the press.

They pointed to a Dec. 15, 2016 text message that Strzok, the lead investigator on the Trump-Russia probe, sent to then-FBI attorney Lisa Page.

“ Think our sisters have begun leaking like mad . Scorned and worried and political, they’re kicking in to overdrive ,” Strzok wrote Page.

DoJ / FBI has had these texts since 2017. And they never told the public

Strzok did not identify a specific leak, but a day earlier, NBC News broke a bombshell story that Russian President Vladimir Putin was personally involved in the U.S. election hacks. The story was sourced to “senior U.S. intelligence officials.”

Strzok’s email several months later referred to another bombshell report, this one published by The Guardian.

Entitled “British spies were first to spot Trump team’s links with Russia,” the 2017 story claimed that British intelligence provided their American counterparts with information about possible Trump campaign contacts and Russians in late 2015.

In his email to colleagues, Strzok did not dispute The Guardian’s report. But the article appears to have raised his suspicion that the CIA, which is referred to in government circles as “the agency,” had intelligence that had not been shared with the FBI. Strzok believed some of that intelligence had been leaked to the media, even though it was inaccurate.

Strzok was removed from the special counsel’s investigation in July 2017, after the messages were discovered as part of an inspector general’s investigation into the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe. He was fired on Aug. 13, 2018.

Strzok, who was having an affair with Page, was a lead investigator on both the email investigation and the Trump-Russia inquiry.

“These texts and emails raise a number of serious questions and concerns,” Grassley and Johnson wrote in their letter to Atkinson.

They are asking Atkinson to provide more information about the “sisters” and why they would have started leaking.

The Justice Department’s inspector general is investigating the FBI and Justice Department’s handling of the Russia probe. Attorney General William Barr said on May 1 that the agency has “multiple” criminal leak investigations ongoing. He has also formed a task force to investigate the origins of the Trump investigation.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


It is certainly possible they could blow this thing wide open just by releasing all of Strzok/Lisa Page texts

"Scorned and worried and political" that would be John Brennan