President’s trump card is FISA declassification

Last night’s breaking news post of the President using the declassification of the FISA documents as a “trump card” against any backlash from the Democrats came as a disappointment.

Trump told The New York Post in an exclusive interview that it was his insurance policy for his family and staff should Democrats attack his daughter Ivanka or son-in-law Jared especially.

The President also told The Post it might be better to hold off the news until the 2020 campaign begins. “I think that would help my campaign. If they want to play tough, I will do it. They will see how devastating those pages are.”

“It’s much more powerful if I do it then,” Trump said, “because if we had done it already, it would already be yesterday’s news,” Trump continued.

Trump could be using this opportunity to alert the New York City left know he has the goods on them and will use it when the time is right for the biggest impact.

I guess the biggest take away we can assume from these latest comments is that the FISA evidence will not come out as a result of the Mueller investigation.

Advertisements

FISA release ends Mueller’s witch hunt

So why on Monday afternoon did special counsel Robert Mueller announce that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort violate his plea deal by lying to the feds.

Just as a refresher Mueller’s team have a Manafort conviction on 8 counts of financial fraud that occurred prior to his involvement with the Trump campaign. He also took a plea agreement n September admitting to fraud and tax evasion over his lobbying work for a pro-Russian political party and politician in Ukraine. Again before being involved in the Trump campaign.

Part of the court filing from Monday stated: “After signing the plea agreement, Manafort committed federal crimes by lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Special Counsel’s Office on a variety of subject matters, which constitute breaches of the agreement,” Mueller’s team wrote in a 3-page filing.

No further information on what he lied about. The filing only stated that the lies would be revealed on a later date.

I’m not here to defend Manafort, who is a career political fixer and influencer, but I do question the timing of the filing.

It comes on the heels that Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker is about to release the FISA documents and ex-AG Loretta Lynch and ex-FBI chief James Comey are going to be brought in front of Congress to testify on actions pertaining to FISA court abuses. Only to be followed up by Federal prosecutor John Huber’s update to Congress on his probe into the Clinton Foundation.

These events scheduled for the beginning of next week should poke huge holes into Mueller’s working premise that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians during the 2016 presidential election cycle.

What we can surmise from reports on the unredacted FISA documents is that the Democratic National Committee along with perhaps the Clinton Foundation provided funds to produce a report written by Christopher Steele with research help from Nellie Ohr (wife of DOJ staffer Bruce Ohr) and contributions from the British, Australian and New Zealand spy agencies (part of the Five Eyes program) to dupe the FISA court to get a warrant to spy on Trump campaign staffers and the Trump Tower offices.

Remember the first time the DOJ went before the court with Steele’s report the surveillance application was turned down. Only after the Obama Administration leaked the report to New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman and used her clippings as evidence that something was going on in the second application did the court issue the warrant.

So out of all this falsehood (and believe me I have only scratched the surface of this topic here) Robert Mueller is named special counsel by Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein in early 2017. And is it any wonder why we only see indictments and plea deals for actions that have occurred prior to the presidential campaign?

Between Whitaker and Huber we need to get the FISA documents out in the open for all to see and understand who the real colluders were. And it had nothing to do with the Russians, but everything to do with the Obama White House in cahoots with our “allies” to take down the Trump presidency.

Will Dec. 5th become new day of infamy?

So Dec. 5th has come out in the drops as a pivotal day. We have seen these pronouncements before.

As I wrote last week, ex-FBI Director under President Obama James Comey and his Justice Dept boss Loretta Lynch are scheduled to testify before the House Judiciary Committee headed by outgoing Congressman Bob Goodlatte on Dec 3rd and 4th.

The question raised is will the declassified FISA documents be released before or after the testimony since all the sign offs for the release of the FISA warrant applications have already been secured and therefore the administration can use Obama’s Executive Order 13526, Sec 1.7 reads:

“Classification Prohibitions and Limitations. (a) In no case shall information be classified, continue to be maintained as classified, or fail to be declassified in order to:
(1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
(2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
(3) restrain competition; or
(4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security.”

On Dec 5th US Attorney John Huber is scheduled to give the House Oversight subcommittee chaired by Republican Mark Meadows an update on the probe into the Clinton Foundation. This probe is part of the investigation Huber his heading with Justice Department personnel. Huber was appointed by ex-Attorney General Jeff Sessions in late 2017.

So the questioned posed is does the FISA docs inform the committee of the nefarious operations of the Obama White House during the 2016 presidential election or does it refute the testimony after the fact?

Huber’s testimony on the day after Comey and Lynch finish up their questioning could go to the Clinton Foundation’s funding of the Christopher Steele report, which was used to trick the FISA court into issuing a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. That could be the time to release the documents to refute the prior testimony in front of Goodlatte’s committee.

My thought based on Comey’s comments last week about him wanted an open hearing, which could not raise classified information, that the release of the documents will happen prior. Damn the perjury charges.

Comey, Lynch to face judiciary committee questioning

I hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving with friends and family.

It was revealed Thursday that the House Judiciary committee has subpoenaed ex-FBI  Director James Comey and President Obama’s  Attorney General Loretta Lynch to testify early next month

It was confirmed that Rep. Bob Goodlatte, the outgoing Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee  will have Comey and Lynch testifying before the committee on Dec. 3 and Dec 4 respectfully. Lynch had no response to the subpoena news.

Lynch will be asked how her office approved the spying of a presidential candidate and president-elect using dubious partisan evidence presented to the FISA court. She could also be grilled on her “surprise” tarmac meeting in Phoenix with former President Bill Clinton.

Comey, who was fired by President Trump in May 2017 took an interesting tack on Tweeter on Thursday:

Happy Thanksgiving. Got a subpoena from House Republicans. I’m still happy to sit in the light and answer all questions. But I will resist a “closed door” thing because I’ve seen enough of their selective leaking and distortion. Let’s have a hearing and invite everyone to see.

The ex-FBI chief knows that if he “resists a closed-door” hearing, the questioning will be far more pedestrian since investigators will not be able to cite classified information in the hearing. Comey’s lawyer said he would sue if compelled to testify behind close doors.

It has little to do with “sitting in the light” and everything to do with keeping secrets in the dark.

“Dark to light” is what all these investigations are about, so it’s very interesting Comey would use that imagery.

Is Mueller’s footdragging a good thing for Trump Administration?

So we are almost two weeks after the midterm elections and Special Counsel Robert Mueller has still not released any of his findings into the alleged Russian Collusion.

It was understood that Mueller’s team had kept a quiet period in the 60 days leading up to the midterm elections per Justice Department protocols so as to not interfere with elections. That said, we are 18 months into this probe and all we really have is pleas from people for crimes committed prior to Trump announcing his presidential candidacy.

Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker — a vocal critic of Mueller prior to be named to the post — has now said the probe will continue as he now oversees Mueller’s probe from Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

Why would you name Whitaker, who in the past has said he would choke off funding the special counsel probe, and then have him flip after being read in to where the probe was headed.

Let’s recall Mueller was named special counsel after a Democratic oppositional research paper written by ex-British spy Christopher Steele was used in the FISA secret court to get warrants to spy on American citizens — including a sitting President.

So what happens if Mueller comes back with no indictments against the administration for collusion, but cites Democratic collusion to pervert the FISA court and the Constitution?

As an aside, is this the reason General Michael Flynn cannot be sentenced for his guilty plea to a single felony count of “willfully and knowingly” making “false, fictitious and fraudulent statements” to the FBI? Because his statement will turn out to be true?

What would that do to this country? Is this the reason for the foot-dragging on the part of Mueller? Is he seeing how former colleagues in the FBI and Justice Department broke the law in order to get Hillary Clinton elected?

Can this even be considered for announcement? A stronger Republican-controlled Senate will take these matters up in the next Congress, since they would have the obligation to investigate such matters — not the House.

I would think 18-months would be enough time to get to the bottom of the investigation on Trump campaign officials and their alleged dealings with Russian operators. But if the case flipped so now you had to probe Democrats and their involvement in creating the narrative originally investigated, well that could take a lot longer I suppose.