DOJ Will Not Prosecute Comey for Leaking Classified Information

by Daveda Gruber:

The Conservative watchdog group, Judicial Watch, announced that it had obtained an FBI log about special agents arriving at former FBI Director James Comey’s home in June 2017 to retrieve his memos.

Comey handed over four of them and said that two of them, to the best of his recollection, were missing.

Still, it is now allegedly been decided that Comey will not face prosecution on this matter. The Department of Justice has declined to prosecute in this case.

During congressional testimony, Comey admitted that he had hand written notes of his meetings with President Trump in the days before he was fired. He took those notes and shared them with a friend who passed them to The New York Times.

That, folks, is called leaking information.

Two of the memos were classified by the FBI as “confidential,” but after the fact.

Comey became a critic of the president ever since he was fired from his position at the FBI.

Look what Comey tweeted:

Comey’s feelings towards Trump are not hidden. He holds hate for the president.

And Comey is not out of hot water just yet. He is a possible target of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s separate investigation into alleged Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse.
The former FBI director also signed three out of the four FISA applications targeting former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

Comey’s actions as an FBI Director will now probably be scrutinized in the “investigate the investigators,” which is a review of the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation that is being led by Attorney General William Barr and the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, John Durham.

It has been said that the bigger you are, the harder you fall. Comey is a tall man who stands 6 feet 8 inches tall. I predict that he falls hard.

Schiff Alleges Trump’s Policy Threatens National Security

by DavedaGruber:

On Friday the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, D-Calif., adamantly criticized the Trump administration for dangerously politicizing the Intelligence Community.

Schiff is requesting that the IC agencies provide more information about the president’s order which would allow them to declassify information related to the Russian probe.

Schiff has alleged that Trump’s policy threatened national security and he now wants the IC to provide all documents made available to Attorney General William Barr.

Schiff wants his committee, before any declassification, to provide an assessment on declassification’s harms to national security.  He also wants an in-person briefing on what the administration had requested to that point.

According to Schiff, Trump endangered national security by granting Barr the authority to declassify information without consulting with the IC.

Schiff wrote, in a letter to Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats, “President Trump’s May 23, 2019 directive to you and other heads of agencies to assist and produce information to Attorney General William P. Barr … represents a disturbing effort by the President and the Attorney General to politicize the Intelligence Community (“IC”) and law enforcement, and raises grave concerns about inappropriate and misleading disclosures of classified information and IC sources and methods for political ends.”

Schiff sent his letters to the directors of National Intelligence, Dan Coats; the FBI Director, Christopher Wray; CIA and National Security Agency, Director Gen. Paul Nakasone.
President Trump had imposed an order in an push to accelerate his Justice Department’s investigation into the Russia investigation’s origins.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller was unable to conclude the president’s 2016 campaign engaged in a conspiracy with Russia. This has brought up questions as to how the whole Russian probe began.

Schiff has suggested that the administration’s argument behind that investigation was a “conspiracy theory” and that it incorrectly mistrusted the validity of Mueller’s probe.

Schiff said, “The Special Counsel’s report definitively establishes that the counterintelligence investigation was properly initiated based on credible information from an intelligence partner. Yet the Attorney General has called into question, without evidence, the validity of the predication of what became the Special Counsel’s investigation.”

Schiff also said, “This approach threatens national security by subverting longstanding rules and practices that obligate you and other heads of IC agencies to safeguard sources and methods and prevent the politicization of intelligence and law enforcement.”

Former FBI Director James Comey, who led the Russia investigation during the 2016 presidential election, had basically expressed similar views when he said, “The FBI wasn’t out to get Donald Trump. It also wasn’t out to get Hillary Clinton. It was out to do its best to investigate serious matters while walking through a vicious political minefield.”

In an interview on Friday with CBS, Barr, he has vowed to get to the bottom of the investigation’s origins. He admitted that he faced difficulty in obtaining the answers he needed and said, “I assumed I’d get answers when I went in, and I have not gotten answers that are at all satisfactory.”

Republicans see the situation differently. They have demanded accountability after the release of Mueller’s report. The main concern here is the controversial Steele dossier’s role in initiating the investigation.

One key witness who is expected to refuse to cooperate with the review is former British spy Christopher Steele who is the author of the controversial “dossier” about alleged Trump interactions with Russia.

Congressional Democrats are continuing to press the administration for more answers surrounding Mueller’s investigation.

The roadblocks are in place as the president invoked executive privilege to avoid complying with subpoenas.

Now, some Democrats have taken their party’s efforts further and are calling for impeachment proceedings against the president. They don’t have enough support from their own party to impeach and Republicans, except for Justin Amash, R-Mich., don’t want impeachment.

In my humble opinion, the Steele dossier is the key factor here. The FISA warrant was issued because the dossier’s allegations helped justify the FISA warrant to wiretap former Trump adviser Carter Page.

The dossier now serves as an exhibit for the defense rather than the prosecution.

The show is about to begin. Stay tuned; the trailers are running in my head and I’m excited to see what happens next.

Who’s Picking Up the Barr Bill?

by Daveda Gruber:

Friday night brought with it great displeasure for President Trump’s actions from two Democrats. Even though the reality that many Democrats are displeased with Trump at any given point, former CIA Director John Brennan and former DNI James Clapper showed special disdain for Trump leading to the weekend.

Brennan and Clapper came down on Trump for directing Attorney General William Barr to declassify documents related to the surveillance of his campaign during the 2016 election.

Brennan said to MSNBC host Chris Hayes, “I see it as a very, very serious and outrageous move on the part of Mr. Trump, once again, trampling on the statutory authorities of the Director of National Intelligence and the heads of the independent intelligence agencies. And it’s unclear to me what Mr. Barr is actually going to do. Is he investigating a crime? Well, what’s the predication of that crime? Or he is just going to be looking for information… that Mr. Trump can just give to his defenders on the right and cherry-pick information that could be taken out of context?”

Brennan, along with his concerns for exposing “sources and methods” as well as the intelligence of “partners abroad” said, “This is very serious and I know that my former colleagues in the intelligence agencies are looking upon this with great concern and worry.”

Along with his allegations of Trump’s decision being not to their liking, Brennan said he hopes that DNI Dan Coats and CIA Director Gina Haspel will “stand up” to President Trump’s “unprecedented act.”

A tweet by Trump may have brought on the extra anger. Trump had tweeted a political cartoon depicting the former CIA Director, former DNI Clapper, and former FBI Director James Comey. Brennan replied to the president’s tweet.

Here is the tweet and response:

Brennan was not alone in his negative verbiage. Clapper was spewing the same verbal garbage. Clapper told Anderson Cooper on CNN that the “bigger issue” is “what exactly is the scope” of the declassification, whether it involves all of Russia’s interference in the election or just the counter-intelligence probe.

Clapper expressed similar concerns as Brennan regarding sources and methods being exposed and putting “people’s lives at risk.”

Clapper is now a CNN analyst. He’s just what CNN needed; more ‘fake reporting’. He still insists that the infamous Steele dossier was not used as sourcing for the intelligence community assessment in January 2017.

I can only give my humble opinion here. Both Clapper and Brennan have never been fans of Trump. Their claims don’t sound kosher to me.

The elephant in the room is that James Comey is in the cartoon, as well. Comey is tweeting about the 2020 election and, of course, “spying” and “treason” were thrown into the mix.

Comey has this to say:

Consider the sources. Honestly, do you trust Brennan, Clapper or Comey? I’ll add; who would? I guess the Democrats love to hear the trash that they drum out.

Most Congressional Democrats have flipped sides on Barr. They used to like him before Trump appointed him. Now, all kinds of investing is happening on both sides of the aisle. The cost will be high but then the Mueller report has cost the American people over $25M so far.

To bring the actual criminals to justice, I’m certain that many would want to pick up this (bar bill) Barr Bill.

My popcorn is bought and ready for me to dig in. The show is about to begin and I’ll be watching closely.

What AG Rod Rosenstein Says is Bizarre

by Daveda Gruber:

Attorney General William Barr had an ally in Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein when Rosenstein told the Wall Street Journal that he believed it was strange to say the attorney general was misleading the public.

Rosenstein’s comment came as he defended Barr’s handling of the Robert Mueller report. Barr testified before a House appropriations subcommittee.

The highly anticipated Mueller report has caused a rather big stir in Washington D.C. among lawmakers since it was wrapped up.

Rosenstein appointed Mueller to serve as special counsel for the United States Department of Justice.

Rosenstein who is 54 years old, told the Wall Street Journal that he believed it was strange to say the attorney general was misleading the public.

Rosenstein said, “He’s being as forthcoming as he can, and so this notion that he’s trying to mislead people, I think is just completely bizarre.”

Rosenstein also said, “It would be one thing if you put out a letter and said, ‘I’m not going to give you the report. What he said is, ‘Look, it’s going to take a while to process the report. In the meantime, people really want to know what’s in it. I’m going to give you the top-line conclusions.’ That’s all he was trying to do.”

Rosenstein was not about to give up too much information but he did call on the public to have “tremendous confidence” in Barr.

Barr has defended his decision to send a letter to Congress detailing Mueller’s principal conclusions. This was done because the public would not have tolerated waiting weeks for information that took Mueller and his team nearly two years to put together.

Mueller’s investigation concluded in late March and since then Barr has received the nearly 400-page confidential report. Barr, in turn, sent his four-page summary letter to Congress two days later.

In that letter, Barr wrote that Mueller found no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion despite efforts by “Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

Also noted was that Mueller had not exonerated President Trump on the issue of obstruction of justice.

The Mueller report will be made public in a week but that version will be redacted.

Rosenstein stayed in his position at the Department of Justice “at Barr’s request” saying, “For me, it’s a real privilege.” He hopes to begin a new job toward the end of the summer.

In Capital Hill testimony, Barr said that “spying did occur” against the 2016 Trump campaign.

It’s very clear that Democrats on the Hill were notably disturbed by that claim. In fact, even former FBI Director James Comey made a claim that he had no idea what Barr was talking about when he said that “spying did occur” against the 2016 Trump campaign.

Comey said, “I have no idea what he’s talking about so it’s hard for me to comment. When I hear that kind of language used, it’s concerning because the FBI and the Department of Justice conduct court-ordered electronic surveillance. I have never thought of that as spying.”

So, if spying does not include electronic devices, why have people who were being spied on always thought that their phone was tapped? What are listening devices? When someone goes to a meeting with a wire to record the events or to have agents listening in real time, is it surveillance or spying? Or are the two, if not similar, the same thing?

The covering up has just begun. Not only do I want to see the Mueller report but I want to find out what or who Barr is investigating next.

Why Hillary Clinton Was Not Locked Up

by Daveda Gruber:

Whatever happened to locking up Hillary Clinton? We were waiting  patiently to see justice served and that day has not come. The FBI never gave Conservatives reason to feel that the guilty, no matter how far up the political chain, would be punished for the crimes they allegedly committed.

It appears that someone thought there was wrong doing. The FBI’s top lawyer in 2016 under ex-Director James Comey the FBI’s top lawyer thought that Hillary Clinton and her team should have immediately realized that they were mishandling “highly classified” information based on the obviously sensitive nature of the emails’ contents sent through Hillary’s private server.

According to a transcript of his closed-door testimony before congressional committees last October, former FBI general counsel James Baker believed she should have been prosecuted until “pretty late” in the investigation.

Baker said high-level officials at the bureau were “arguing about” whether to bring charges against Clinton. He originally thought that Clinton’s behavior was “alarming” and “appalling.”

Baker said, “So, I had that belief initially after reviewing, you know, a large binder of her emails that had classified information in them. And I discussed it internally with a number of different folks, and eventually became persuaded that charging her was not appropriate because we could not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that…we, the government, could not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that… she had the intent necessary to violate (the law).”

Baker told lawmakers that it was “the nature and scope of the classified information that, to me, initially, when I looked at it, I thought these folks should know that this stuff is classified, that it was alarming what they were talking about, especially some of the most highly classified stuff.”

Democrats clearly recall then candidate Donald Trump, while on the campaign trail, vowing to prosecute Mrs. Clinton if he won the election.

Brian Fallon, who was Mrs. Clinton’s campaign spokesman, said, “It was alarming enough to chant ‘lock her up’ at a campaign rally. It is another thing entirely to try to weaponize the Justice Department in order to actually carry it out.”

On the other hand, Conservatives said Mrs. Clinton should not be immune from scrutiny as a special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, investigates Russia’s interference in last year’s election and any connections to Mr. Trump’s campaign. They argued, for instance, that Mrs. Clinton was the one doing Russia’s bidding in the form of a uranium deal approved when she was Secretary of State.

A December letter by former House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy and former House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte said the decision not to prosecute Clinton was not unanimous.

Under questioning by Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, Baker spoke extensively about the back and forth arguments.

Here’s part of that discussion:

Ratcliffe: All right. Are you a reasonable prosecutor?

Baker: Not anymore. I’m not a prosecutor anymore. 

Then there is a quick exchange of questions and answers. Ratcliff pivots back to Baker’s decision to change his mind regarding Clinton.

Ratcliffe: You were persuaded, and stated as a basis, that ultimately you were persuaded there was a lack of evidence establishing knowledge or criminal intent, correct?

Baker: Yes.

Ratcliffe: When were you persuaded?

Baker: Sorry. Pretty late in the process, because we were arguing about it, I think, up until the end.

Ratcliffe: Yeah, So Jim Comey had reached the opposite conclusion as early as – or I guess as late as May the 2nd of 2017, as reflected in the memo that he created, correct?

Baker: I know there’s been a lot of public discussion about that – this way I experienced that interaction and other interactions with Jim Comey is he would throw things out like that to get people to start talking and thinking about it and test his conclusions against others and get them to push back. And so, it was – I believe it was in that process that I read these emails and we had these discussions and arguments.

Baker’s testimony was considered credible by those in the room.

In a televised interview on July 3, 2016, Clinton claimed that she had “never received nor sent any material that was marked classified” using her personal email system.

Later on she said she regretted using the setup after it emerged that her private servers contained classified materials from Special Access Programs, or SAP, which are considered some of the most closely held U.S. government secrets.

So, there you have it. Hillary was very close to being held accountable for her alleged negligent behavior. It appears that Comey’s influence stopped the investigation in its tracks.

#HillaryClintonIsGuilty

The Me Generation has struck again.

The Clintons, Obama, Loretta Lynch, and James Comey brazenly outlined, in a 72 hour period, that they can do anything they want and nothing will happen.

NOTHING.

Bill actually met with Loretta on a tarmac (I hang out on airplane parking lots all the time too) who then feigned ignorance while feeding the imbecilic a story about grand-children (Bill Clinton shouldn’t be allowed in the same State as any child).

Lynch weakly pushed the responsibility to FBI Director Comey (so much for Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity) who then stated quite clearly Hillary had broken many laws (felonies and misdemeanors).

His conclusion: No prosecution because she didn’t mean it.

She did it.

She broke the law but it doesn’t matter because her “intent” wasn’t to harm anyone.

Someone needs to remind him that isn’t his call to make (he isn’t the PROSECUTOR) never mind I didn’t know he could read minds.

James Comey…You are a stupid vile coward who just covered up for a woman who allowed hackers everywhere in the world to read TOP SECRET MATERIAL and many others we will never know about…as you admitted.

I guarantee those emails put human life in danger and the way this is being covered up I would venture someone was killed because of her behavior.

Of course “what difference does it make?”

The Democrats cheered, the Republicans cowered (as usual) while Lady Liberty prepared to put down her torch and pick up an AR-15.

Some have called this strike three for the Clintons.

Strike three?

This isn’t a game and if it were we passed balls and strikes a LONG time ago as the Progressives continue to strike at a Party of Republicans that behave like a bunch of Eunuchs.

Paul Ryan’s response was “we want to talk to the FBI Director.”

Comey’s response: Sure, I’ll be right down.  What are you going to do?  Send me away with my retirement like you did to Lois Lerner?

Ryan’s been harder on Trump (a man who hasn’t cast a vote on anything) than Clinton who we KNOW has broken laws.

How do we know this?

Comey just said so.

I just flashed back to a post written a few weeks ago about a friend who asked me what would happen after Orlando.

I said nothing and I was right.

What’s crazy right now is if I were to refer to Orlando 9 out of 10 would probably think I was talking about Disney World.

San Bernardino?

Where?

Boston?

Go Sawks!

Ladies and Gentlemen please pay attention.

I have an announcement.

The monkeys aren’t running the zoo.

The zoo was sacked a long time ago.

We are in the jungle.

Predators and Prey and if you aren’t sure which one you are…well…the Predators know.

The sheep have gotten fat and lazy and are content chewing their own cud while willing to embrace apathy, obesity, drugs, debt, and the wolves known as CAIR, La Raza, and Democratic Socialism.

There is a stench emitting from the Bubonic plague known as Progressivism.

It is contagious, deadly, and on the rise.

It’s time for the sheep dogs to take a walk and let the wolves thin the herd or better yet it’s time for the sheep dogs to create their own pack and discard the sheep altogether.

In medical terms the sheep have already accepted and approved of their frontal lobotomies.

This cannot be reversed and will only damage the rest of society by allowing the cancer known as Liberalism to survive.

Gangrene has set in and is pervasive in all forms of Government, specifically Washington D.C.

The rotten limb must be amputated lest it spread and devour the rest of us.

Mark Levin likes to say that we are living in a “post constitutional” time.

He is wrong.

This isn’t “post constitutional”.

This is Anti-Constitutional.

It’s Anti-Freedom.

It’s called oppression and just in case you still don’t understand, our biggest problem, isn’t Obama.

Believe it or not.

Our biggest oppressor(s) are the Central Banks around the world.

Free Will is a gift and as I’ve stated many times, Freedom isn’t Free.

The sheep are long gone passing their days in and out of a drunken stupor, inhaling clouds of medical marijuana, and gorging on genetically modified high fructose corn syrup.

Type-Two Diabetes, sobriety, and employment be damned.

The question now is how many Sheep Dogs will lose their lives in order to remain free.

How many good Americans will “get caught up in the switches?”

We need every Sheep Dog left and as this is now a jungle…it’s time to unleash the Lions.

The American Lion to be exact.

The Rule of Law no longer exists.

Stop pretending it does and refrain from verbiage like “civil disobedience”.

There is nothing civil about what is happening or going to happen and disobedience implies that we were obedient in the first place.

Americans aren’t obedient.

We are FREE.

We must return to the basics as we create the Post-Progressive America.

Love God.

Love one another.

Never again turn another cheek.

In God we Trust.

All others pay cash…or you can pay the wolf..but pay you will.

Freedom requires sacrifice.

The wolves can’t handle the Sheep dogs or the Lions.

The sheep can’t handle the wolves.

James Comey just sealed the fate of the sheep.

How many Sheep Dogs are lost depends upon us.

Gather your Pride.

All Lions to the front.

History tells us it won’t be too much longer.

Jason Kraus

www.aleadernotapolitician.com