Campaign Donations Show Letter Demanding Barr’s Resignation Comes From Leftist Hacks Pretending To Be ‘Bipartisan’

Had liberal outlets bothered to act like journalists, they would have quickly discovered evidence of a partisan bias underlying the letter calling for William Barr’s resignation.

“More than 1,100 former federal prosecutors and Justice Department officials called on Attorney General William P. Barr on Sunday to step down after he intervened last week to lower the Justice Department’s sentencing recommendation for President Trump’s longtime friend Roger J. Stone, Jr.,” The New York Times reported on Sunday—if you can call it reporting.

Not once in the 800-word article did the Times address the overwhelming evidence that the thousand-plus signatories were politically motivated critics of President Donald Trump. In fact, to the contrary, the Times claimed “the former Justice Department lawyers” “came from across the political spectrum” to sign the open letter that condemned “President Trump’s and Attorney General Barr’s interference in the fair administration of justice.” Those actions, the much-touted letter claimed, “require Mr. Barr to resign.”

The letter and the charge that Barr interfered “in the fair administration of justice” focused on the decision last week by senior Department of Justice officials to override the recommendation lower-level prosecutors had made for a nine-year prison sentence for Roger Stone. The AG’s office viewed a nine-year sentence recommendation as too severe for Stone’s non-violent offenses but did not make a specific recommendation for an appropriate prison sentence.

Barr denied politics played any role in the DOJ’s decision and the Justice Department stressed that no one had discussed the Stone case with anyone at the White House. And there is no evidence to the contrary. Nonetheless, several Democrats pounced, pushing for Barr to resign, or, as Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren threatened, be impeached.

Over the weekend and earlier this week, left-leaning media outlets coalesced on the latest anti-Trump conspiracy theory, using the letter of the former DOJ employees to bolster the appearance of impropriety. In addition to the Times, Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post pointed to the 1,100 signatories as evidence of Trump’s misconduct and Barr’s supposed acquiescence. (At least Rubin wrote under the opinion category, unlike the Times article.)

NPR likewise parroted the misleading claim that “the signatories on a letter have worked under both Republican and Democratic administrations,” when interviewing Julie Zebrak, one of the signatories and a former DOJ attorney of nearly 20 years. NPR did provide a tad of pushback, though, asking Zebrak what she would say to listeners who dismiss what she says as “partisanship.” Zebrak’s reply followed the same misdirection, noting that “if you look at the list, you’ll see that almost everyone on that list has served through multiple administrations, including Republican and Democrat.”

That may well be true, but as Peter Strzok and Lisa Page proved beyond doubt, you can be an extreme, left-leaning, hate-filled partisan and work in (and against) Republican administrations. Had the New York Times, the Washington Post, NPR, or any of the other liberal outlets bothered to act like journalists instead of the PR arms of Democratic and anti-Trump outfits, they would have quickly discovered evidence of a partisan bias underlying the letter calling for Barr’s resignation.

First, as The New York Times noted, “Protect Democracy, a nonprofit legal group, gathered the signatures from Justice Department alumni and said it would collect more.” Here’s what the Times and other outlets failed to report: Protect Democracy was founded in 2017 by Ian Bassin, who was the associate White House counsel for President Barack Obama from 2009-2011, and Justin Florence, who also served in the Office of the White House Counsel as a...

Why Everyone Should Cheer That Roger Stone’s Corrupt Prosecutors Resigned

The prosecutors who attempted to deceive the court and their DOJ superiors all resigned in a huff. Let’s hope the door hit each of them in the backside as they stormed out.

I spotted the young lady who later became my first college girlfriend as I rode my mountain bike across the University of Kansas campus. She offered me a brochure from her post behind a folding table. It featured the image of a candle with barbed wire.

Our first date, an Amnesty International meeting, began with a volunteer passing around profiles of political prisoners. We each chose a case that moved us and then wrote a letter to senior government officials who could address the injustice.

It was no small matter, the coordinator told me, for a foreign official to receive a letter from an American addressed to him personally. The mere fact that we could identify the persecuted by name might shame the official into reviewing the case.

In 2020, I find myself wondering whether a college student in a distant country at an Amnesty International meeting might select the profile of Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, or Michael Flynn. All of these committed the unspeakable crime of helping Trump win an election.

Flynn and Papadopoulos were guilty of nothing until FBI agents got them talking long enough to find a mismatch between secretly recorded conversations and their targets’ failing memories. Manafort’s tormentors use torture through solitary confinement, violating international human rights standards. Everyone knows politics motivated the viciousness with which U.S. prosecutors pursued these men.

If an international student were writing to seek justice for Stone, she would write the letter directly to Donald Trump, the president of the United States. The president has two constitutional powers that authorize his intercession to stop the persecution of a political dissident, which Stone absolutely is.

First, as I’ve written before, Trump is the head of the executive branch. The Department of Justice is not an independent branch of government. Nobody at the DOJ stands for an election. Only through the president can the voters reach and control the awesome power of the federal criminal prosecutor. Second, the president has the un-appealable constitutional power to cancel any federal prosecution—even before the trial.

On Feb. 10, holdovers from the lawless reign of terror known as the Robert Mueller probe filed a sentencing memorandum recommending nine years in prison for their political target, Stone. The memorandum contains one critical untruth:

Now Congressional Democrats Think They Can Get Bill Barr

The attorney general is scheduled to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on March 31. Let’s hope he can put an end to this partisan witch hunt before the Democrats lead the country into another time consuming, expensive, and baseless investigation.

After their impeachment fiasco miserably failed, Democrats wasted no time creating another alleged “impeachable” offense. This time, the alleged indiscretion involved Roger Stone, the president’s comments regarding his proposed sentence, and Attorney General Bill Barr’s decision to overrule his prosecutors and reduce Stone’s sentence. This effort, like the last one, should also fail.

Stone was convicted of witness tampering and lying to Congress in November. These crimes (often called “process crimes”) occurred during the investigation into alleged collusion between Russia and Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Federal prosecutors recommended that Stone serve a prison sentence of seven to nine years.

President Trump did not take kindly to this recommendation, calling it “terrible and unfair.” Shortly thereafter, the Justice Department announced that the recommended sentence was “shocking” and that it planned to amend its recommendation to the court and ask for a shorter sentence. That led all four prosecutors to withdraw from the case. The president subsequently congratulated Barr for the decision to seek a lighter sentence.

As the Daily Caller reported, a Justice Department source indicated that the decision to revise Stone’s recommended sentence was made before Trump published his tweets. Moreover, a senior Justice Department official told Fox News, “The department finds seven to nine years extreme, excessive and grossly disproportionate. The sentencing recommendation was not what had been briefed to the Department.”

Naturally, some on the Left called for Barr’s immediate resignation or possible impeachment. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) indicated that Barr had “no choice” but to resign. Presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) tweeted:

5 Times Obama Protected His Allies from Justice and Democrats Turned a Blind Eye

If you listen to Hillary Clinton and the Democrat aligned mainstream media, you will believe that “the rule of law and our democracy are in crisis” because the Justice Department retracted and rewrote Roger Stone’s excessive sentencing recommendation memo.

Once again, I find myself astonished by the short memories and sheer hypocrisy of Democrats.

Under Obama and his two radical attorneys general, Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, Obama’s allies were protected from justice in various ways by his administration and Democrats and the media simply didn’t care.

But before we get into that, it’s worth mentioning that the prosecution of Stone and, quite frankly, the sentencing, was excessive.

Per PJ Media: The prosecutors, many of whom were part of the Russian collusion hoax investigation team of Mueller, literally ordered a pre-dawn raid on Stone’s home in Florida, complete with a CNN detail ready to cover the event for the country to watch as it unfolded.

The recommendations for sentencing were completely absurd. Violent criminals, including rapists, get less time than what they were recommending for Stone.

In due time, I am sure that will become clear, but, once again, I feel compelled to bring to light that the Democrats’ outrage over this is just the latest example of their hypocrisy because for eight years under Barack Obama we saw actual corrupt manipulation of the justice system in favor of Barack Obama’s allies.

Under Obama and his radical attorneys general, Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, the Justice Department became a hotbed of political favoritism, pretty much from day one.

I have picked five examples of Obama’s allies being protected from justice in various ways by his administration that Democrats didn’t give a hoot about… and when you read them, you’ll understand why.

5. The New Black Panther Party

You may remember images and video from Election Day 2008, with members of the New Black Panther Party standing outside a Philadelphia polling place wearing military garb making racial remarks and discouraging people from voting. A voter intimidation case against the New Black Panthers began weeks before Obama took office. It was an open-and-shut case, and the New Black Panthers didn’t even show up in court to defend themselves, assuring the government’s victory in the case. Then in May 2009, the case was inexplicably dropped by Attorney General Eric Holder.

By the summer of 2010, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights declared there was evidence of “possible unequal administration of justice” by the Justice Department in the New Black Panther Party case. It was quite clear that under Obama and Holder, civil rights cases against minorities discriminating against whites were being systematically ignored. Holder still denied there was a racial motivation during a House Appropriations Subcommittee hearing in March 2011, justifying the decision not to prosecute the NBPP by bizarrely citing the roadblocks African Americans endured when trying to vote in the South during the era of Jim Crow laws.

4. Attorney General Eric Holder

Attorney General Eric Holder took part in a scandalous, incompetent gun-running project known as “Fast and Furious” from 2009 to 2011, and did everything in his power to protect his boss, Barack Obama, during that investigation. In return for his steadfast loyalty, Obama protected Holder, who was aggressively stonewalling the House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee investigation into Fast and Furious. Obama’s asserting of executive privilege was not only to protect himself but also to protect Holder ahead of the Oversight Committee’s vote to declare Holder in contempt of Congress for withholding documents from the committee. Ultimately it didn’t save Holder from being held in contempt of Congress by a bipartisan vote.

3. Senator Robert Menendez

In 2012, just days before the November election, ICE agents were ready to arrest an illegal immigrant and registered sex offender, but were ordered by the Department of Homeland Security to wait until after the election. Why? The suspect was a volunteer intern for Senator Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and there would be “significant interest” from Congress and news organizations about the arrest. Menendez was seen as vulnerable in the 2012 election, and the delay of the arrest saved him from a potentially politically damaging scandal on the eve of voting. All the while letting a sexual offender avoid justice for six weeks.

2. Sexual Predator Kevin Johnson

In 2009, Barack Obama illegally fired Gerald Walpin, the inspector general for the Corporation for National and Community Service. Walpin’s only crime was that he was investigating Obama’s friend and donor, Kevin Johnson. Johnson had misused federal grant money for AmeriCorps by funneling it to his personal nonprofit group, paying for political activity, and using it to pay hush money to underage girls he’d sexually...

Good Riddance to Mueller’s Monstrous Roger Stone Prosecutors

Recommending a seven- to nine-year prison term for a 67-year-old, non-violent first offender has finally revealed Robert Mueller’s prosecution team for the corrupt monsters they truly are.

Justice is supposed to be blind. That’s the cornerstone of our system. We don’t play favorites. We don’t persecute. We don’t judge people based on how much we like or dislike them, or how they vote. There are only three goals: 1) justice, 2) justice, 3) justice.

Regardless of your opinion of Stone, he was only found guilty of lying to Congress (which plenty of people have done without being prosecuted), interfering in the House investigation of the Russia Collusion Hoax, and tampering with a witness.

That “tampering with a witness” thing sounds pretty serious, but the “witness” in question, the person who was supposedly intimidated by Stone, talk radio host Randy Credico, is laughing the whole thing off. “I never in any way felt that Stone himself posed a direct physical threat to me or my dog,” he said.

Seven to nine years!

Seven to nine years for “obstructing” a witch hunt, for lying to Congress, something you never see prosecuted despite a multitude of transgressors, and for tampering with a witness who says he wasn’t really tampered with.

James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, lied under oath to Congress in front of the whole wide world. He was never prosecuted. He wasn’t even fired.

Hey, I’m no Roger Stone fan, and it actually sounds like he deserves some prison time, but there are murderers and rapists and child molesters who don’t serve seven to nine years.

This sentencing recommendation is not only outrageous, it’s a retaliatory and partisan abuse of power on behalf of four utterly corrupt and inhumane prosecutors.

Thank the Good Lord they have resigned.

Thank God they’re gone, because there are not many government positions that hold as much power as a prosecutor.

Prosecutors are handed an unbelievable amount of power, trust, and discretion — the power to destroy a reputation through suspicion, to bankrupt a person by way of an indictment, and strip them of their freedom and liberty through a...

Nunes: Departed Stone prosecutors are tip of iceberg, we’re about to ‘unpeel the onion’ of Mueller team’s web of lies

Congressman Devin Nunes says Americans will soon learn the alarming depths of deceit and corruption perpetrated by Obama holdovers on Robert Mueller’s team during the Russia collusion hoax.

Republican Devin Nunes warned that the layers of lies have unraveled in the putrid onion that was Robert Mueller’s investigation of the failed Russia-collusion hoax.

Congressman Nunes told Fox Business host Lou Dobbs that Americans will soon learn the disturbing depths of deceit and corruption perpetrated by the Mueller team to promote the Russia-collusion hoax.

“The lawyers that stepped aside today who made the seven-to-nine-year recommendation [against Roger Stone] — we believe that this is not going to be the only example,” Nunes said.

He continued: “There’s other examples of things they did during the Mueller investigation that the American people will be very interested to learn in the coming weeks, as we start to unpeel the onion of what the Mueller team was really doing.”

Congressman Nunes referenced the scandal surrounding the four federal prosecutors who abruptly withdrew from Roger Stone’s case on Tuesday amid public outrage over their excessive sentencing recommendation for Stone.

“Roger Stone should have never been investigated in the first place, because the dirty cops knew [beforehand]…that there was no collusion between the Russians and...

Year in Review: 20 Notable Spygate Developments of 2019

In the saga of “Spygate,” 2019 has shaped up to be the year the tables turned.

In the first days of January 2019, a federal judge extended the term of the grand jury in the special counsel investigation by Robert Mueller. Later that month, the FBI raided the home of veteran Republican strategist Roger Stone in front of CNN cameras.

The raid and indictment of Stone were symbolic of the spectacle that was the Russia investigation. Mueller charged Stone with process crimes; the indictment included no allegations related to the central theme of the Russia probe—whether anyone on the Trump 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Russia to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Meanwhile, the “Russiagate” media frenzy (sparked long before Mueller’s appointment) continued, with CNN treating the footage of the early-morning, guns-drawn raid as the late-stage operation in a takedown of a criminal empire.

Mueller’s final report would state that there was no evidence that any American colluded with Russia in the 2016 elections.

But the tables have turned as the year draws to a close.

Even before Mueller published his report on President Donald Trump, Attorney General William Barr sent shockwaves through the establishment by stating plainly that he believed spying did occur on the Trump campaign. As the year draws to a close, the Justice Department (DOJ) watchdog, Inspector General Michael Horowitz, has confirmed the long-running claims of significant errors in the applications to surveil Trump campaign associate Carter Page.

In 2020, the foundation laid by these developments will be a useful reference as U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation of the malfeasance continues. While not an exhaustive list, the 20 moments below are representative of the reversal and are helpful for viewing the events in the year ahead.

20. Senate Intelligence Committee Finds No Evidence of Trump–Russia Collusion

While the House Intelligence Committee had come to the same conclusion a year earlier, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s findings in February were significant because the committee has a track record for bipartisanship. At the time, both Democratic and Republican sources on the committee confirmed that the investigation didn’t turn up any evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

19. Rosenstein Removed McCabe From Russia Probe After Appointing Mueller

In mid-February, we learned that in May 2017, then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had removed then-FBI Acting Director Andrew McCabe from the Russia investigation shortly after appointing special counsel Robert Mueller to lead the probe. The revelation added to an emerging picture of the events surrounding Mueller’s appointment. The DOJ statement from which the news originated appeared to imply that Mueller’s appointment had something to do with actions taken by McCabe.

18. Trump Innocent of Collusion and Obstruction, DOJ Concludes

In late March, Attorney General William Barr released a summary of conclusions based on Mueller’s report. The special counsel concluded the investigation, finding no evidence that Trump or anyone on Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia. While Mueller didn’t make a call on whether Trump obstructed justice, Barr and Rosenstein reviewed the report and found insufficient evidence to bring charges.

17. Spying on Trump Campaign Did Occur, Barr Says

INVESTIGATIVE REPORT: Ukraine was the Origin of the Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax

My-oh-my, what a tangled web did the far-left weave when it comes to the now-infamous Trump-Russia collusion hoax and the now equally infamous anti-Trump / Ukraine impeachment clown show.

Here’s a bit of fact-finding carried out by Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D., a retired US Army Reserve colonel, an IT command and control and cybersecurity subject matter expert and a veteran of Afghanistan who does a fantastic job connecting the dots between Ukraine, the Obama-era State Department, (including the alleged Ukraine whistleblower) various Deep State officials like James Comey, the Clinton campaign, high-ranking Democrats, etc.

This is a must-read…

“December 2015 was a pivotal month in many respects.
During the first week of December 2015, Donald Trump began to establish a substantial lead over his Republican primary opponents.

Vice President Joseph Biden traveled to Ukraine to announce, on December 7th, a $190 million program to “fight corruption in law enforcement and reform the justice sector,” but behind the scenes explicitly linked a $1 billion loan guarantee to the firing of Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who had been investigating the energy company Burisma, which employed Biden’s son Hunter.
On December 9, 2015, the reported whistleblower Eric Ciaramella held a meeting in Room 236 of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building with Daria Kaleniuk, executive director of the Ukrainian Anti-Corruption Action Center, which was 59%-funded by Barack Obama’s State Department and the International Renaissance Foundation, a George Soros organization.

Also attending that meeting was Catherine Newcombe, attorney in the Criminal Division, Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, with the U.S. Department of Justice, where, among other duties, she oversaw the Department’s legal assistance programs to Ukraine.

By December 2015, Paul Manafort was undoubtedly considering approaching the Trump campaign to rejuvenate his U.S. political bona fides and mitigate the legal and financial difficulties he was experiencing at the time.

From the beginning of his association with the Trump campaign, Roger Stone, a longtime Manafort partner, made a strong case to Trump to bring in Manafort, who would officially connect to the campaign immediately after the February 1, 2016 Iowa caucuses.

Based on events occurring during the same period, were Obama Deep State operatives aware of Manafort’s intent and already intending to use his past questionable practices and links to Russia against Trump?

Such awareness of Manafort’s plans could have been obtained either through FBI surveillance, which began in 2014 and ended in early 2016, or through information provided by Manafort associates, for example, Ukrainian businessman Konstantin Kilimnik, who worked for Manafort and was a FBI and Department of State asset, not a Russian agent as later painted by the Mueller investigation.

According to White House visitor logs, on January 19, 2016, Eric Ciaramella chaired a meeting of FBI, Department of Justice and Department of State personnel, which had two main objectives:
To coerce the Ukrainians to drop the Burisma probe, which involved Vice President Joseph Biden’s son Hunter, and allow the FBI to take it over the investigation.

To reopen a closed 2014 FBI investigation that focused heavily on GOP lobbyist Paul Manafort, whose firm long had been tied to Trump through his partner and Trump pal, Roger Stone.
That is, contain the investigation of Biden’s son and ramp up the investigation of...

Fiona Hill Calls ‘Globalist’ Description “Anti-Semitic” Despite Writing For a Media Outlet Called ‘The Globalist’

Well, this is awkward.

During her testimony in the impeachment hearings this week, Fiona Hill dismissed charges she was a “globalist” by referring to the term as an “anti-Semitic” conspiracy theory, despite the fact that she writes for a publication literally called ‘The Globalist’.

Hill was responding to a question by Democratic Representative for Illinois Raja Krishnamoorthi, who quoted Hill’s earlier deposition in which she complained about Roger Stone labeling her “the globalist leftist [George] Soros insider.”

Hill claimed that “a conspiracy” had been launched against her and that ‘globalist’ was an anti-Semitic trope, while admitting that she was a “leftist maybe,” but implying she was not a globalist.

“This is the longest-running anti-Semitic trope that we have in history, and a trope against Mr Soros was also created for political purposes, and this is the new Protocols of The Elders of Zion,” Hill said.

This statement is somewhat at odds with Hill literally being a contributing writer for a publication called ‘The Globalist’.

Stone also previously asserted that Hill was was serving as George Soros’ “mole” under the supervision of...

Sebastian Gorka gives Trump brilliant idea involving Yovanovitch and Roger Stone

In a goofy tweet posted after former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testified before Congress on Friday, former Trump administration official Sebastian Gorka quipped that the president ought to replace her with Roger Stone.

“Shouldn’t @realDonaldTrump pardon Roger Stone and make him Ambassador to Ukraine?” he tweeted.

The tweet was posted after the conclusion of Yovanovitch’s testimony and after the conviction of former Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone, a lifelong political consultant who now faces 50 years in prison for veritable “process crimes.”

Sebastian Gorka DrG

✔@SebGorka

Shouldn’t @realDonaldTrump pardon Roger Stone and make him Ambassador to Ukraine?

5,582

4:01 PM - Nov 15, 2019

Twitter Ads info and privacy

2,080 people are talking about this

Either scenario is unlikely to ever play out.

For one, Yovanovitch has already been replaced by William Taylor, though President Donald Trump certainly isn’t a fan of that “human scum” diplomat.

And secondly, while the president has pardoned some individuals, none of his pardons have pertained to the Democrats’ ongoing efforts to remove him from office.

As a result, his former 2016 campaign chairman Paul Manafort still remains in prison on a 7-1/2-year prison sentence that’s tangentially tied to his work for him.

And former Trump administration National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is still fighting for his life as he awaits sentencing for allegedly lying to federal authorities during their unfruitful investigation into the since-debunked Russian collusion delusion...

Did Robert Mueller Defy A Court Order To Stop Lying About Russian Companies?

Nobody apparently reminded Robert Mueller that Judge Friedrich ordered his team to stop saying Concord and the Internet Research Agency work for the Russian government.

In case you haven’t been keeping up with every detail of the winding Donald Trump-Russia collusion investigation (don’t feel badlyre, Robert Mueller hasn’t either), a little review will help explain the importance of a bombshell that is about to go off.

You may remember a triumphant Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein holding a dramatic press conference in February 2018, in which he announced the indictment of 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies. These companies included Concord Management and the Internet Research Agency (IRA).

The indictment accused Concord and IRA of creating fake social media accounts to post “derogatory information” about a number of candidates, including “disparaging” Hillary Clinton. There are two of these “Russian interference cases.” The one involving Concord and IRA does not involve hacking or trafficking in stolen emails. The Concord/IRA case is sometimes referred to as the “Russian Troll Farm” case.

The indictment of Russian individuals and companies appeared, at first, to be a mere publicity stunt, as nobody believed the Russians would voluntarily appear in court to challenge the charges. But then one of them did. Concord hired an attorney to fight the indictment.

Both Mueller’s report and Attorney General William Barr’s April press conference releasing the report included statements strongly suggesting that Concord and IRA worked at the direction of the Russian government. Nobody bothered to notice that the original indictment did not charge Concord with being a tool of the Russian government until Concord filed a motion for a contempt citation against the government for making that allegation.

On July 1, 2019, Judge Dabney L. Friedrich issued an order (to which the government agreed) prohibiting further public statements by the government about the Concord and IRA case, particularly statements alleging that Concord and IRA worked on behalf of the Russian government. A more detailed discussion of this train wreck can be read here.

But Mueller Just Did It Again


This takes us to the Mueller testimony before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees last week. On live television in front of an audience of millions, former special counsel Robert Mueller carefully skirted speculating on the guilt or innocence of Roger Stone due to his ongoing criminal prosecution. But nobody apparently reminded Mueller that Judge Friedrich had ordered Mueller’s team to...

FBI Won’t Say Whether It’s Seen Un-Redacted Tech Documents to Draw Conclusions on DNC Hack

The FBI would not provide a comment when asked whether it saw the un-redacted sections of three reports from the private firm CrowdStrike that served as a basis for the Obama-era intelligence agencies’ conclusion that Russian agents hacked the servers of the Democratic National Committee.

“The FBI does not have a comment to provide,” a spokesperson for the FBI Office of Public Affairs wrote in response to a Breitbart News email request on the matter.

Yesterday, this reporter documented that, according to a U.S. government filing, the Obama-era intelligence community relied on three redacted CrowdStrike reports marked as drafts to reach the Russia hack conclusion.

The U.S. government further admitted in the same lawsuit that it does not possess the un-redacted CrowdStrike reports about what allegedly happened to the DNC servers and that it relied upon DNC lawyers to generally characterize what was in the redacted sections. The revelation prompted Breitbart News to request comment on whether the FBI ever saw the un-redacted sections of the reports at all.

The admissions about the CrowdStrike reports were contained in a U.S. government court response to a motion filed by attorneys for former Trump confidante Roger Stone, seeking to compel the government to release un-redacted CrowdStrike reports about the alleged hacks — reports the government says it doesn’t possess.

The DNC famously refused to allow the FBI to access its server to verify the allegation that Russia carried out a hack during the 2016 presidential campaign. Instead, the DNC reached an arrangement with the FBI in which a third party company, CrowdStrike, conducted forensics on the server and shared details with the FBI.

As Breitbart News previously documented, CrowdStrike was financed to the tune of $100 million via a funding drive by Google Capital.

Google Capital, which now goes by the name of CapitalG, is an arm of Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent company. Eric Schmidt, the chairman of Alphabet, has been a staunch and active supporter of Hillary Clinton and is a longtime donor to...

US Govt’s Entire Russia-DNC Hacking Narrative Based On Redacted Draft Of Crowdstrike Report

It’s been known for some time that the US Government based its conclusion that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) on a report by cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike, which the DNC paid over a million dollars to conduct forensic analysis and other work on servers they refused to hand over to the FBI.

CrowdStrike’s report made its way into a joint FBI/DHS report on an Russia’s “Grizzly Steppe“, which concluded Russia hacked the DNC’s servers. At the time, Crowdstrike’s claim drew much scrutiny from cybersecurity experts according to former Breitbart reporter Lee Stranahan.

Now, thanks to a new court filing by longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone requesting the full Crowdstrike analysis, we find out that the US government was given a redacted version of the report marked “Draft,” as reported by the Conservative Treehouse.

What makes the whole thing even more hokey is a footnote admitting that “counsel for the DNC and DCCC informed the government that they are the last version of the report produced.” 

So to be clear – the entire narrative that Russia hacked the DNC is based on a...

FBI Hides Email Records with CNN Related to Roger Stone Raid From Public

The FBI is denying an open records request for transparency regarding the controversial raid of Trump associate Roger Stone’s home

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is stonewalling the public regarding possible collusion with CNN reporters before pulling their jackbooted raid of Roger Stone’s home, arresting the elderly Trump associate with a show of force worthy of El Chapo.

The Federalist filed an open records request to witness all FBI emails addressed to and from CNN before the pre-dawn raid of Stone outside of his Fort Lauderdale, FL home. The FBI quickly denied the request.

“Please provide all e-mails sent to or received from any account with a ‘cnn.com’ domain from January 24, 2019 through January 25, 2019,” The Federalist wrote in their Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request.

While it was rumored that Stone’s home would be raided and he would be prosecuted for several months before it occurred, CNN reporters knew to get in position the day it did finally did happen. The raid looked as if it was a staged public relations event for Robert Mueller’s ‘Russian collusion’ probe.

In complete disregard for the intelligence of their audience, the CNN producer behind the coverage of Stone’s raid had the gall to claim it was “reporter’s instinct” that caused the display to be timed like a Hollywood production.

“It’s reporter’s instinct,” CNN producer David Shortell said after being asked about the suspicious display. “The whole Russia team thought maybe something was happening.”

“There was some unusual grand jury activity in Washington, D.C., yesterday,” Shortell said, continuing his rationale. “Robert Mueller’s grand jury typically meets on Fridays. Yesterday, Thursday, there was grand jury activity.”

“We also had some other signs that maybe something was going on this angle, the Roger Stone angle,” Shortell added. “So we showed up at his house this morning, we were the only ones there, and lo and behold...

Mueller's Chevauchée: Burn Everyone and Everything Trump Loves

Medieval English kings were not nice people. Edward III (1312–1377), in particular, used his son the Black Prince to wage a form of warfare called chevauchée, which consisted of killing and burning everyone and everything that could be reached by fast-moving raiders.

The object was twofold. One was to destroy an opponent's logistics base and discourage supporters. The other was to bait the opponent into leaving a good defensive position and coming out into the open, where he could be attacked; a noble needed strong nerves and a stony heart to stay behind walls while his subjects were slaughtered and his lands destroyed.

As many have noted during the past week, Robert Mueller and his legal sell-swords must have been aware for nigh onto two years, at least, that the accusation that Trump's campaign colluded with the Russians had no evidentiary support. Nonetheless, per the attorney general's summary letter to Congress, the investigation spent tens of millions of dollars, employed 19 lawyers and 40 other professional staff, issued 2,800 subpoenas, executed 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communications records, authorized almost 50 pen registers, made 13 document requests to foreign governments, and interviewed 500 witnesses.

Barr and Mueller seem to regard this recounting as cause for satisfaction, as evidence of great diligence by the Department of Justice. But each of these actions inflicted substantial expense and career damage on those unlucky enough to be caught up in it. Every one of those witnesses should have lawyered up, knowing the ruthlessness of prosecutors on the scent of a big-time case. The game is to find something on a lower-level person and threaten him with heavy penalties unless he gives the prosecutor a more tempting target. If no extortionary material can be found, the witness can be accused of lying to the FBI, with the proof consisting of notes taken by the interviewing FBI agents themselves, since the agency refuses to make recordings. Family members can be threatened.

Most of these witnesses have kept quiet about the experience, content to have escaped. Some are speaking out, such as Michael Caputo, who has written eloquently and repeatedly about the costs imposed on him and others.

Sundance, at Conservative Treehouse, concludes that none of this investigating was really directed at the collusion charge. It was all an effort to entrap Trump himself or at least some of his supporters into actions that could be branded as "obstruction of justice," with that term broadly interpreted to encompass almost any action he took.

When Trump said Michael Flynn was a "good guy," this was spun as "obstruction." When he wanted to release FISA memos, he was warned that this would be "obstruction." Any reaching out to witnesses would have been branded "obstruction." Any statement of sympathy for Paul Manafort or Roger Stone would have been obstruction gold.

In this view, which is persuasive, the collateral damage inflicted on those on the fringes of the investigation was not...

Roger Stone Files Motion: Alleges Special Counsel’s Office Released Unsealed Indictment To CNN

CNN obtained Roger Stone’s indictment from someone allegedly in the Special Counsel’s office hours before it had been unsealed by the court, thus allowing the news outlet to stage a camera crew outside his home and lie in wait until armed FBI agents arrested him, according to a motion filed by Stone’s lawyers Wednesday morning.

The evidence appears to rest on when the indictment was unsealed by the court.

According to the motion, the clerk’s office “informed counsel for Mr. Stone that the Indictment’s entry into the docket was made on January 25 at 8:55 a.m., more than two- and-a-half-hours after the news reporter sent the “draft” Indictment to counsel, and four hours after the news organization’s camera crew arrived at Mr. Stone’s house to film his arrest on the sealed Indictment.”

Stone could not be immediately reached for comment. Special Counsel’s office could not be immediately reached for comment.

Based on this new evidence, Stone’s attorney’s contend his arrest on Jan. 25, was staged for the CNN crew, which was ready to film the arrest and that someone in the Special Counsel’s office leaked the information.

“What is not par for the course is that a news crew knew the time and place of the arrest, and was “staked out” to watch the arrest unfold, having been provided an unfiled, draft copy of the indictment the Court had ordered sealed,” the motion states.

Timeline of Events in Motion To Show Cause

• On Jan. 25, armed FBI agents arrested Stone at 6:06 a.m.
• CNN was staking out the home hours earlier.
• Stone’s lawyers stated in their motion that at that time “the indictment remained subject to the Court’s Order sealing it from public disclosure.”
• However, by 4:58 a.m. the CNN news crew and truck arrived at “Mr. Stone’s residence and set up a camera on the street in front of Mr. Stone’s house, obviously awaiting his arrest. The FBI arrived while the camera crew was on the street.”
• By 6:11 a.m., “prior to Mr. or Mrs. Stone calling counsel, a reporter for the same news outlet as the camera crew called counsel and informed him that Mr. Stone had been arrested.”
• At 6:22 a.m., the same reporter sent counsel a text message attaching a draft copy of the still sealed indictment.” Stone’s lawyers referred the courts to Exhibit 1, showing the text messages from the reporter to the lawyers.
• Exhibit One

AAW?

“The copy of the unsigned indictment provided by the reporter appears to have come from the Special Counsel’s Office,” according to the motion. In the Exhibit 2 document the metadata shows the...

Apple Gives Deep State Access To Roger Stone’s iCloud Account, After Refusing To Violate Privacy of San Bernardino Jihad Terrorists

Traitors and totalitarians. We know that the social media giants have been at war with those who oppose jihad for quite some time, and are actively committed to banning and blocking counter-jihad accounts and imposing sharia blasphemy restrictions. But this is a step even farther. After stouting defending the privacy rights of the San Bernardino jihad mass murderers, Apple turned on a dime and handed over access to all of Roger Stone’s data. This shows what they think is a worse crime: not jihad mass murder, but dissenting from the left’s agenda and supporting President Trump. Apple is evil.

Three years after Apple refused to give the federal government access to the devices used by the San Bernadino terrorists who killed and injured dozens in a mass shooting event, the company has given the office of the Special Counsel complete access to Trump advisor Roger Stone’s iCloud account, reports Apple Insider.

According to the Washington Post, Apple objected to giving the federal government backdoor access to the shooters iPhones, claiming it would “set a dangerous precedent.”...

A Message From Roger Stone...

Corrupt Obama Judge Preps Gag Order for Stone; No One Is Allowed to Expose Mueller Tyranny

Roger Stone has long feared he would be slapped with a gag order if he got indicted — and he’s readied a plan to make sure he won’t have to stay silent.

The federal judge in Stone’s case, Amy Berman Jackson, has already hushed a coterie of others caught in special counsel Robert Mueller’s dragnet, including Paul Manafort, Rick Gates and their attorneys. They were quieted after one of the lawyers told reporters that Mueller’s case was “ridiculous.”

Jackson will have a much longer record of public commentary from Stone to work with when the longtime Donald Trump associate appears Friday afternoon for his first status hearing tied to the special counsel’s charges that he lied to Congress and obstructed the House investigation into Russian election meddling.

If Stone is gagged, his contingency plan is already in place. He’s got a well-known First Amendment attorney on his legal team who represented the rap group 2 Live Crew against obscenity charges in the early 1990s. And Stone has designated a pair of close friends as spokesmen in the event he and his lawyers are told to stop talking.

Until then, Stone won’t stop chattering.

Since his arrest last Friday, Stone has been on a media blitz. He gave his first interview to the conspiracy theory website InfoWars and then addressed reporters outside the federal courthouse in Fort Lauderdale. He’s discussed his legal defense plans during a series of interviews with the major television and cable networks, as well as inimpromptu press conferences outside his South Florida home. Anyone on Stone’s email list got a message Monday with the subject line “Let’s talk about my arrest” and a plea for “emergency” contributions to help pay his mounting legal bills.

On Instagram, Stone as of Tuesday night had posted 30 times about the indictment, including a mock-up photograph of the special counsel in a waiter outfit holding up a tray topped with an empty hamburger bun. “Here’s what Mueller has on me #nothingburger” Stone wrote.

“It’s always been Roger’s intention to maintain his First Amendment rights throughout the process,” said Michael Caputo, a longtime Stone associate and one of the people who is in position to step up as a spokesman if Stone gets gagged.

During Stone’s arraignment hearing on Tuesday, magistrate judge Deborah Robinson opened with a warning that he’d be wise to not speak about the charges in the indictment. “Any statements you make may be used against you,” she said.

But Grant Smith, one of Stone’s attorneys, said in an interview that Robinson’s comments appeared to him to be pro forma. And on social media, Stone acted as though he is still free to...

Watch As FBI Arrives To Roger Stone’s House In Massive Show of Force

CNN videotaped a massive show of force at the house of Roger Stone and aired that video on Friday.

In what is one of the most massive PR stunts in the history of law enforcement the FBI arrived in riot gear at Stone’s home.

It looked like they were about to arrest one of the world’s most wanted terrorists.

“CNN Exclusive Video: Longtime Donald Trump associate Roger Stone has been indicted by a grand jury on charges brought by special counsel Robert Mueller. He was arrested by the FBI Friday morning at his home in Florida, his lawyer tells CNN,” CNN wrote.

CNN Exclusive Video: Longtime Donald Trump associate Roger Stone has been indicted by a grand jury on charges brought by special counsel Robert Mueller. He was arrested by the FBI Friday morning at his home in Florida, his lawyer tells CNN. https://t.co/vDRIgDfXdi pic.twitter.com/wKHdEku22e

— CNN (@CNN) January 25, 2019

How did CNN have advanced knowledge of the arrest to have cameras there?

The arrest came around 6 a.m. when an FBI agent pounded on his door and yelled “FBI. Open the door,” CNN reported.

It was the result of a months long investigation that seemed to target Stone as he anticipated and predicted his indictment.

Was this show of force necessary?Yes No

Completing this poll entitles you to our news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The New York Times also reported on the story.

Roger J. Stone Jr., a longtime informal adviser to President Trump who has spent decades plying the dark arts of scandal-mongering and dirty tricks to help influence American political campaigns, was indicted Friday in the special counsel investigation.

Mr. Stone was charged with seven counts, including...