From The Alpha and the Omega - Chapter Eight
by Jim A. Cornwell, Copyright © 1995, all rights reserved
"FISA - Under Surveillance 2019 October-December"

FISA - Under Surveillance 2019 October-December
THE CORRUPTION OF THE DEMOCRATS HAS GONE TO THE EXTREMES AS THEY KNOW THE TRUTH IS COMING OUT ON INVESTIGATIONS
OF THE VIOLATIONS FROM FISA WARRANTS IN THE COMING MONTHS AND ARE BECOMING DESPERATE AS THEIR ACTIONS LETS YOU KNOW THAT CLEARLY
To return to FISA- Under Surveillance in 2019 July-September

10/1/2019 GOP lawmaker digs up audio of Schiff telling prank callers he would accept Trump dirt from Ukraine by Tyler Olson, Fox News
Rep. Schiff says agreement reached for whistleblower to testify
Rep. Trey Hollingsworth provides insight on whistleblower questions
    Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz has dug up a nearly two-year-old prank call in which House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff told two Russian radio hosts posing as a Ukranian politician that he would be willing to accept damaging anti-Trump information.
    Gaetz on Sunday tweeted an edited clip from the eight-minute-long phone call.    It comes as Republicans are pushing back at the House Democratic impeachment inquiry over allegations President Trump pressured the Ukranian president into investigating the family of 2020 rival Joe Biden.
    In the clip, Schiff, D-Calif., tells the Russian shock-jocks, who were posing as Andriy Parubiy, the former speaker of Ukraine's parliament, that he would be willing to accept dirt on Trump from the Ukranian.
    Rep. Schiff says agreement reached for whistleblower to testify
    Rep. Trey Hollingsworth provides insight on whistleblower questions
    "So, you have recordings of both [Russian journalist Ksenia] Sobchak and [Russian model and singer Olga] Buzova where they're discussing the compromising material on Mr. Trump?" Schiff asked the callers posing as Parubiy.
    "Absolutely," one of the pranksters responded.
    "Well obviously we would welcome a chance to get copies of those recordings," Schiff said later in the call after he and the fake "Parubiy" go on to discuss more details of the bogus allegations.
    The Russian radio hosts, Vladimir "Vovan" Kuznetzov and Alexey "Lexus" Stolyarov, who have close ties to the Kremlin, told Schiff that the Kremlin had naked photos of Trump and that "Parubiy" could provide audio of Sobchak and Buzova discussing the photos.    They also told Schiff that former Trump national security advisor Michael Flynn had met with another Russian to talk about how to prevent the photos from going public.
    Gaetz accused Schiff of hypocrisy for appearing willing to accept information from the Ukranian government as his committee investigates Trump for advocating that Ukraine pursue an investigation that would have likely been politically beneficial to the president's reelection campaign.
    This comes as Schiff and the House Intelligence Committee take center stage in the impeachment fight as the committee is set to question intelligence community Inspector General Mike Atkinson on Friday.    The committee also reached a deal for testimony from the whistleblower whose complaint set off scrutiny on Trump's call with Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelensky, shortly before which he put a hold on $400 million in military aid to Ukraine.    Democrats have said the combination of the withheld aid and the requests for an investigation into the Biden family amounted to a proposed quid-pro-quo by Trump.
    It's unclear when the committee will hear from the whistleblower.
    While Schiff does not appear to question the veracity of the prank callers' assumed identity on the January 2018 call, his office said they did not simply take the pranksters at their word.
    "Before agreeing to take the call, and immediately following it, the committee informed appropriate law enforcement and security personnel of the conversation, and of our belief that it was probably bogus," a Schiff spokesman told The Atlantic.
    Fox News' Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this report.

    The following found at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/us/politics/adam-schiff-whistleblower.html
[EVEN TRUMP WAS AMUSED THAT THE NEW YORK TIMES DID THE FOLLOWING NEWS ARTICLE WHICH PROMOTES THAT
ADAM SCHIFF KNEW ABOUT THE WHISTLEBLOWER BEFORE GOING TO THE IG TO REPORT IT SO THINGS SMELL FISHY NOW
.].
10/2/2019 Schiff, House Intel Chairman, Got Early Account of Whistle-Blower’s Accusations by Julian E. Barnes, Michael S. Schmidt and Matthew Rosenberg, New York Times
Representative Adam B. Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, knew some details of the allegations against
Mr. Trump before the C.I.A. officer filed a whistle-blower complaint.CreditCreditErin Schaff/The New York Times
    WASHINGTON — The Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistle-blower complaint, according to a spokesman and current and former American officials.
    The early account by the future whistle-blower shows how determined he was to make known his allegations that Mr. Trump asked Ukraine’s government to interfere on his behalf in the 2020 election.    It also explains how Mr. Schiff knew to press for the complaint when the Trump administration initially blocked lawmakers from seeing it.
    The C.I.A. officer approached a House Intelligence Committee aide with his concerns about Mr. Trump only after he had had a colleague first convey them to the C.I.A.’s top lawyer.    Concerned about how that initial avenue for airing his allegations through the C.I.A. was unfolding, the officer then approached the House aide.    In both cases, the original accusation was vague.
    The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the officer find a lawyer to advise him and file a whistle-blower complaint.    The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff.    The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff, an official said.
    “Like other whistle-blowers have done before and since under Republican and Democratic-controlled committees, the whistle-blower contacted the committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the intelligence community,” said Patrick Boland, a spokesman for Mr. Schiff.
    In his whistle-blower complaint, the officer said Mr. Trump pressured the Ukrainian government to investigate a host of issues that could benefit him politically, including one connected to the son of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
    A reconstituted transcript released by the White House of a call between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine backed up the whistle-blower’s account, which was itself based on information from a half dozen American officials and deemed credible by the inspector general for the intelligence community.
    Mr. Trump has focused his ire on Mr. Schiff amid the burgeoning Ukraine scandal, even suggesting he could be arrested for treason.    The president, who has also made thinly veiled threats against the whistle-blower and accused him of being partisan, is likely to use the revelation that the C.I.A. officer first approached the committee to try to undermine the complaint and suggest it was part of a Democratic plot against him.
    The whistle-blower’s decision to offer what amounted to an early warning to the intelligence committee’s Democrats is also sure to thrust Mr. Schiff even more forcefully into the center of the controversy.
    On Wednesday, Mr. Trump said Mr. Schiff should be forced to resign for reading a parody of the Ukraine call at a hearing, an act Mr. Trump has called treasonous and criminal.
    “We don’t call him shifty Schiff for nothing,” said Mr. Trump.    “He’s a shifty dishonest guy.”
    Mr. Schiff’s aides followed procedures involving the C.I.A. officer’s accusations, Mr. Boland said.    They referred the C.I.A. officer to an inspector general and advised him to seek legal counsel.
    Mr. Schiff never saw any part of the complaint or knew precisely what the whistle-blower would deliver, Mr. Boland said.
    “At no point did the committee review or receive the complaint in advance,” he said.    He said the committee received the complaint the night before releasing it publicly last week and noted that came three weeks after the administration was legally mandated to turn it over to Congress.    The director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, acting on the advice of his top lawyer and the Justice Department, had blocked the inspector general for the intelligence community, Michael Atkinson, from turning over the complaint sooner.
The C.I.A. officer expressed concerns that Mr. Trump had abused his power during a call
with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine.Credit Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press
    The future whistle-blower went to Mr. Schiff’s committee after he grew concerned about the first investigation he had touched off.
    The C.I.A. officer first had a colleague take his concerns — in vague form — to the C.I.A.’s general counsel, Courtney Simmons Elwood, who began a preliminary inquiry by contacting a deputy White House counsel, alerting the White House that complaints were coming from the C.I.A.
    As C.I.A. and White House lawyers began following up on the complaint, the C.I.A. officer became nervous, according to a person familiar with the matter.    He learned that John Eisenberg, a deputy White House counsel and the legal adviser to the national security adviser, was among those scrutinizing his initial allegation.
    Contacts in the National Security Council had also told the C.I.A. officer that the White House lawyers had authorized records of Mr. Trump’s call with Mr. Zelensky to be put in a highly classified computer system, meaning that the lawyers who were now helping the C.I.A. investigate the officer’s allegations were the same ones implicated in them.    The officer has alleged that White House aides’ decision to store the call records more restrictively was itself an abuse of the system.
    The C.I.A. officer decided the complaint he had brought to Ms. Elwood was at risk of being swept aside, prompting him to go to the lawmakers who conduct oversight of the intelligence agencies.
    He followed the advice of Mr. Schiff’s aide and filed his complaint to Mr. Atkinson.    And though Mr. Maguire blocked him from forwarding it to Congress, he did allow Mr. Atkinson to notify lawmakers of its existence.
    The complaint was filed in consultation with a lawyer, officials said.    “The intelligence community whistle-blower followed the advice of legal counsel from the beginning,” said Andrew Bakaj, the lead counsel for the whistle-blower.    “The laws and processes have been followed.”
    Filing a complaint with Mr. Atkinson gave the whistle-blower added protections against reprisals and also allowed him to legally report on classified information.    While House Intelligence Committee members are allowed to receive classified whistle-blower complaints, they are not allowed to make such complaints public, according to a former official.    A complaint forwarded to the committee by the inspector general gives it more latitude over what it can publicize.
    By the time the whistle-blower filed his complaint, Mr. Schiff and his staff knew at least vaguely what it contained.
    Mr. Schiff, after a private letter and phone call to Mr. Maguire, publicly released a letter seeking the complaint and suggested it could involve Mr. Trump or others in his administration.    Mr. Schiff followed up by subpoenaing Mr. Maguire to testify before the intelligence committee.
    Mr. Schiff’s intense push took Mr. Maguire and his aides by surprise, current and former intelligence officials said.    In other cases of lawmakers seeking classified material that the intelligence agencies were reluctant to share, including whistle-blower complaints, both sides usually tried to resolve the matter by holding quiet discussions.
    Officials in Mr. Maguire’s office, who did not know the details of the complaint, were puzzled why Mr. Schiff went public right away, eschewing the usual closed-door negotiations.
    Congressional officials insisted that Mr. Schiff and his aides followed the rules.    Whistle-blowers regularly approach the committee, given its role in conducting oversight of the intelligence agencies, Mr. Boland said.
    “The committee expects that they will be fully protected, despite the president’s threats,” Mr. Boland said, referring to the whistle-blower without identifying his gender.    “Only through their courage did these facts about the president’s abuse of power come to light.”
Nicholas Fandos contributed reporting.

10/2/2019 Report: Whistleblower approached House Intel Committee aide before filing complaint by OAN Newsroom
    President Trump Trump has suggested Adam Schiff helped write the whistleblower complaint.    This comes as a new report shows the CIA officer behind it approached the House Intelligence Committee before formally filing the complaint.
    On Wednesday, the New York Times revealed that before going to Congress the unknown CIA officer had a colleague convey the accusations to the agency’s top lawyer.    Concerned that nothing was happening, the whistleblower himself then approached a House Intelligence Committee aide.
    The aide, following the committee’s procedures, suggested finding a lawyer to advise on filing the complaint and also shared his findings to Schiff. Chairman Schiff reportedly does not know the identity of the whistleblower.    The Intelligence Committee responded to the report, saying it did not review the official complaint before it was filed.
    Meanwhile, President Trump continued to slam Democrats as well as the credibility of the whistleblower, while meeting with his Finnish counterpart at the White House.    He told reporters in the Oval Office Wednesday that while the whistleblower complaint was inaccurate and dishonest, he believes they should be protected if they are legitimate.
President Donald Trump speaks during news conference with Finnish President Sauli Niinisto
in the East Room of the White House, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
    The president went on to specifically slam House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff for his continued misinterpretation of the July phone call and his continued efforts to push impeachment.
    “He made it up, every word of it, made up and read to Congress as though I said it,” said President Trump.    “And I’ll tell you what, he should be forced to resign from Congress, Adam Schiff, he’s a low life…he should be forced to resign.”
    The president said Democrats should focus on American issues such as infrastructure and drug prices instead of coming up with stories in an effort to remove him from office.

10/2/2019 Snowden will make first major appearance since U.S. lawsuit at conference next month
FILE PHOTO: Edward Snowden speaks via video link during a news conference in
New York City, U.S. September 14, 2016. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid
    NEW YORK (Reuters) – Fugitive U.S. intelligence whistleblower Edward Snowden will speak next month by video at Web Summit in Lisbon, billed by the organizers as the world’s largest annual tech conference.
    Organizers of Web Summit said it would be Snowden’s largest live audience to date and his first before a major audience since the release last month of his memoir.
    The conference said Snowden would take questions from a moderator onstage about his work for the NSA, from which he leaked a vast trove of classified secrets in 2013, resetting the world’s view of tech-enabled spying.
    Web Summit said it welcomed talks by security and privacy experts.
    Snowden, who had revealed details of secret surveillance programs by U.S. intelligence agencies, had been granted asylum by Russia and has been living there since 2013. He cannot travel to the West for fear of arrest in countries that have extradition treaties with the United States.
    Many civil rights activists see him as a hero, but at home in the United States authorities want him to stand trial for espionage.
    The United States has sued to prevent Snowden profiting from his book because he did not seek intelligence agency review of its contents.
    The conference, which organizers say is the largest in the world in terms of attendance, expects to draw 70,000 people in person.    Snowden’s appearance will also be streamed to the public.
(This story corrects headline and 2nd paragraph to say the appearance is Snowden’s first before a large audience since the release of his memoir)
(Reporting by Joseph Menn; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)

10/3/2019 GOP House Intel Committee members speak out against chairman Adam Schiff by OAN Newsroom
    The Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee are not holding back after it was revealed chairman Adam Schiff may have gone over their heads with the whistleblower complaint.
    Congressman Devin Nunes, who serves as the ranking member, vented his frustrations Wednesday.    He said, “in light of this news, its hard to view impeachment as anything aside from an orchestrated farce.”
    His concerns were echoed by fellow Republican member Elise Stefanik, who accused Schiff of “manipulating the information” and “playing partisan political games” with it.    She also voiced her support for a growing movement to have Schiff resign from his position as chair.
Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., questions Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire as he testifies before
the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2019. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
    The bombshell revelation in question came via the New York Times on Wednesday.    The newspaper claimed the whistleblower may have first shared his concerns with a House Intelligence aide, who then tipped off Schiff.
    Keep in mind that just two weeks ago, Schiff claimed his team did not have direct contact with that individual.     “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower,” he claimed.    “We would like to.”
    Former White House deputy assistant Fred Fleitz took to Twitter to break down the possible legal repercussions of this report.    He noted that Schiff may be in violation of committee rules as any “classified information received from outside sources must be shared with both sides.”
    However Fleitz, who has previous experience with both the CIA and the House Intelligence Committee, was already suspicious about Schiff’s possible role in the complaint even before the report dropped.    He was attacked by the mainstream media for his stance.
    “When I saw this one, I thought it was very unusual…not just that it was extremely well written, but it had legal references and footnotes,” he explained.    “That was a little bit unusual, but I compared that with the fact that Adam Schiff was talking about the subject matter of this complaint throughout the month of August.”
    Of course, the response by the whistleblower’s legal team and Schiff’s office was swift.    They denied the individual had help from anyone else, but his lawyer in writing the complaint.    However, the jury is still out on what Schiff knew and when, and if he exerted any influence over the situation before the complaint came to light.
    “Well, I think that its a scandal that he knew before.    I’d go a step further, I think he probably helped write it.” — President Trump
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., listens at a news conference with Speaker of the House
Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

10/3/2019 President Trump calls on China to look into Biden business deals in Beijing by OAN Newsroom
    President Trump recently touched on the criticism over Joe Biden’s shady business deals during his time in the Obama administration.    While speaking to reporters on the South Lawn Thursday, the president suggested China open an investigation into Joe Biden’s son Hunter.
    Reports this week drew fresh scrutiny over the Biden family regarding their trip to China in 2013.    Joe Biden has been accused of using the trip to set up a meeting with a prominent banker in order to land his son a spot on the board of a Chinese equity fund.
    President Trump also suggested Biden’s deals in China are the reason why Beijing has been taking advantage of the U.S. on trade
.
    “China should start an investigation into the Bidens because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine,” said the president.
President Donald Trump speaks to the media on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 3, 2019, before
boarding Marine One for a short trip to Andrews Air Force Base, Md., and then on to Florida. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
    “I’m sure that President Xi does not like being under that kind of scrutiny where billions of dollars are taken out of his country by a guy that just got kicked out of the Navy…you know what they call that?” he asked reporters.    “They call that a payoff.”
    Biden’s campaign responded in a statement after the president’s remarks, accusing the president of “clutching to conspiracy theories that have been debunked by credible news organizations.”
[Even when Biden is caught on video doing his own "Quid Pro Quo" Joe stating he got the prosecutor fired or he would hold the 1 billion dollars from Ukraine he will deny it and many of the Fake News stations have not shown the public the video, which should tell all where the corruption in the U.S. is.].

10/3/2019 Judicial Watch releases documents on Rosenstein, Mueller communications by OAN Newsroom
    The Judicial Watch is working to expose possible corruption in the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.    On Thursday, the government watchdog released 145 pages of former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s communications from 2017.    The communications included several “off the record” conversations and one email that read, “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions.”
    The timing of these communications is critical because it overlaps with President Trump’s dismissal of James Comey and his appointment of Robert Mueller.
    Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said this explains why the left is fighting to stop President Trump from looking into the Russia probe.
    “You notice this with the Ukraine argument — they don’t want the president to investigate what went on,” reiterated Fitton.    “They want to criminalize investigations of this activity.”
    The documents also showed Rosenstein’s off the record communications with left-wing media outlets, who praised him for appointing Mueller.
    “I appreciate your support,” Rosenstein wrote.    “This was supposed to be a low-profile job.”

10/4/2019 Ukraine must investigate Joe Biden’s son, says ex-Ukrainian PM by Anton Zverev and Ilya Zhegulev
Former U.S. Vice President and Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden makes a statement during
an event in Wilmington, Delaware, U.S., September 24, 2019. REUTERS/Bastiaan Slabbers
    MOSCOW/KIEV (Reuters) – Ukraine must investigate the activities of U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son to establish whether his role in a Ukrainian gas company complied with the country’s laws, Mykola Azarov, Ukraine’s former prime minister, said in an interview.
    Azarov did not specify to which Ukrainian laws he was referring.
    Hunter Biden’s role in the company, Burisma Holdings Limited, is in focus after the White House released a memo showing U.S. President Donald Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in a July phone call to get prosecutors to look into his activities.    Zelenskiy agreed.
    “It’s a fact (his directorship and fees) and not made up.    It should be investigated so that the ‘i’s can be dotted and the ‘t’s crossed,” Azarov told Reuters.
    A spokesperson for Joe Biden’s campaign declined to comment on Azarov’s investigation call and none of Hunter Biden’s critics have provided any evidence that he broke Ukrainian law.
    Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau has said it is investigating activity at Burisma between 2010-2012, but that it is not looking into changes to its board in 2014, when Hunter Biden joined.
    Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives are pursuing an impeachment inquiry against Trump, a Republican, after a whistleblower complained about his call with Zelenskiy.
    Lawmakers are looking into whether Trump’s actions jeopardized national security and the integrity of U.S. elections, saying he appeared to be soliciting a political favor from a foreign leader to get re-elected.
    Azarov lives in Moscow, but says he remains well-connected with parts of Ukraine’s political establishment, adding he would like to return one day.
    Hunter Biden was a director on Burisma’s board from 2014 until at least 2018, according to documents filed by the company in Cyprus, where it is registered.
INTERPOL
    Azarov, who was prime minister from 2010-2014, is himself wanted by Ukrainian authorities.    An Interpol red notice issued in 2015 at the request of Ukrainian authorities cited accusations, including embezzlement and misappropriation.
    Interpol canceled that red notice in 2017 after Azarov successfully challenged it, according to an Interpol document viewed by Reuters.    Interpol said it did not comment on individual cases.
    Azarov has denied any wrongdoing.
    Reuters cannot determine whether there is any active investigation into Azarov in Ukraine.    A spokesman for Azarov said he was no longer regarded as a suspect by Ukrainian authorities, though a notice on the Ukrainian Interior Ministry’s website updated on Friday said he was still wanted by the country’s security service.
    Azarov said he was not aware of any evidence suggesting wrongdoing on Hunter Biden’s part, but said it was in the Ukrainian public interest to ascertain the legality of his activities.
    In particular, he said it was important to investigate what Biden had done for Burisma to justify his remuneration from Burisma.
    The younger Biden has said he consulted for Burisma, but critics have suggested he was not doing actual work in return for his compensation, an allegation he denies.
    “I think it’s essential (he’s investigated),” Azarov told Reuters in Moscow, where he fled after street protests toppled Russia-friendly President Viktor Yanukovich in 2014.
    “If, using his knowledge, he played an active role then there’s nothing scandalous about it,” Azarov said.    “But if he was simply on the books and getting money, then that could be seen as a violation of the law.”
    Burisma was not available for comment.
    Ukrainian prosecutors have said they are not investigating Hunter Biden, but are looking into the legality of Burisma’s activities before Biden joined its board.    Burisma, which denies any wrongdoing, has faced allegations of dodging taxes and of improperly securing licenses for gas deposits.
    Azarov said that he believed allegations from Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and others that Joe Biden had gotten Ukraine’s prosecutor general fired to protect his son Hunter were “absolute nonsense” but must also be investigated.
.     He did not provide the basis for his views.
    The former U.S. vice president has denied using his influence in 2016 to get Ukraine’s then-prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin, fired to prevent him investigating his son’s involvement and has said he and his son have done nothing wrong.
(Additional reporting by Maria Tsvetkova and Matthias Williams in Kiev; Writing by Andrew Osborn; Editing by Alistair Bell, Dan Grebler and Gareth Jones)

10/4/2019 Ukraine prosecutor general reopens cases involving Hunter Biden company by OAN Newsroom
Ruslan Ryaboshapka speaks to the media in Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, Oct. 4, 2019. (Ukrainian Presidential Press Office via AP)
    Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Ruslan Ryaboshapka announced Friday that his office plans to reopen several cases tied to Hunter Biden’s business dealings in the country. He said and his team are set to audit all high profile cases closed or reviewed by his predecessors.
    Recent reports said at least 15 of the cases are disputes involving the energy company where Joe Biden’s son previously served as a board member.    The top prosecutor said his office is seeking “to make a decision on cases…where illegal procedural decisions were taken.”
    “From the proceedings we have reviewed, there are over 15 proceedings where Burisma, (Hunter) Biden or other Burisma founders might be involved,” Ryaboshapka said.    “We will let you know as soon as we have an understanding of the situation.”
    The prosecutor general adamantly denied that the president or any Ukraine officials pressured him to reopen the cases.    His words follow the transcript of a July phone call, which revealed President Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate Biden’s actions.
    “No foreign and domestic politicians, officials, or other people ever called me and tried to influence my decisions on any particular criminal proceedings,” Ryaboshapka emphasized.
    The prosecutor also stated he is thus far unaware of any evidence suggesting Biden’s son committed wrongdoing.

10/5/2019 Ukraine must investigate Joe Biden’s son, says ex-Ukrainian PM by Anton Zverev and Ilya Zhegulev
Former U.S. Vice President and Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden makes a statement during
an event in Wilmington, Delaware, U.S., September 24, 2019. REUTERS/Bastiaan Slabbers
    MOSCOW/KIEV (Reuters) – Ukraine must investigate the activities of U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son to establish whether his role in a Ukrainian gas company complied with the country’s laws, Mykola Azarov, Ukraine’s former prime minister, said in an interview.
    Azarov did not specify to which Ukrainian laws he was referring.
    Hunter Biden’s role in the company, Burisma Holdings Limited, is in focus after the White House released a memo showing U.S. President Donald Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in a July phone call to get prosecutors to look into his activities.    Zelenskiy agreed.
    “It’s a fact (his directorship and fees) and not made up.    It should be investigated so that the ‘i’s can be dotted and the ‘t’s crossed,” Azarov told Reuters.
    A spokesperson for Joe Biden’s campaign declined to comment on Azarov’s investigation call and none of Hunter Biden’s critics have provided any evidence that he broke Ukrainian law.
    Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau has said it is investigating activity at Burisma between 2010-2012, but that it is not looking into changes to its board in 2014, when Hunter Biden joined.
    Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives are pursuing an impeachment inquiry against Trump, a Republican, after a whistleblower complained about his call with Zelenskiy.
    Lawmakers are looking into whether Trump’s actions jeopardized national security and the integrity of U.S. elections, saying he appeared to be soliciting a political favor from a foreign leader to get re-elected.
    Azarov lives in Moscow, but says he remains well-connected with parts of Ukraine’s political establishment, adding he would like to return one day.
    Hunter Biden was a director on Burisma’s board from 2014 until at least 2018, according to documents filed by the company in Cyprus, where it is registered.
INTERPOL
    Azarov, who was prime minister from 2010-2014, is himself wanted by Ukrainian authorities.    An Interpol red notice issued in 2015 at the request of Ukrainian authorities cited accusations, including embezzlement and misappropriation.
    Interpol canceled that red notice in 2017 after Azarov successfully challenged it, according to an Interpol document viewed by Reuters.     Interpol said it did not comment on individual cases.
    Azarov has denied any wrongdoing.
    Reuters cannot determine whether there is any active investigation into Azarov in Ukraine.    A spokesman for Azarov said he was no longer regarded as a suspect by Ukrainian authorities, though a notice on the Ukrainian Interior Ministry’s website updated on Friday said he was still wanted by the country’s security service.
    Azarov said he was not aware of any evidence suggesting wrongdoing on Hunter Biden’s part, but said it was in the Ukrainian public interest to ascertain the legality of his activities.
    In particular, he said it was important to investigate what Biden had done for Burisma to justify his remuneration from Burisma.
    The younger Biden has said he consulted for Burisma, but critics have suggested he was not doing actual work in return for his compensation, an allegation he denies.
    “I think it’s essential (he’s investigated),” Azarov told Reuters in Moscow, where he fled after street protests toppled Russia-friendly President Viktor Yanukovich in 2014.
    “If, using his knowledge, he played an active role then there’s nothing scandalous about it,” Azarov said.    “But if he was simply on the books and getting money, then that could be seen as a violation of the law.”
    Burisma was not available for comment.
    Ukrainian prosecutors have said they are not investigating Hunter Biden, but are looking into the legality of Burisma’s activities before Biden joined its board.    Burisma, which denies any wrongdoing, has faced allegations of dodging taxes and of improperly securing licenses for gas deposits.
    Azarov said that he believed allegations from Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and others that Joe Biden had gotten Ukraine’s prosecutor general fired to protect his son Hunter were “absolute nonsense” but must also be investigated.
    He did not provide the basis for his views.
    The former U.S. vice president has denied using his influence in 2016 to get Ukraine’s then-prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin, fired to prevent him investigating his son’s involvement and has said he and his son have done nothing wrong.
(Additional reporting by Maria Tsvetkova and Matthias Williams in Kiev; Writing by Andrew Osborn; Editing by Alistair Bell, Dan Grebler and Gareth Jones)

10/4/2019 Son of House Speaker Pelosi made money in Ukraine, used her in ads by OAN Newsroom
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., speaks during a news conference and with local officials about
Venezuelan democracy efforts on Thursday, Oct. 3, 2019, in Weston, Fla. (AP Photo/Brynn Anderson)
    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may soon be facing similar allegations to Joe Biden.    A recent report suggested Pelosi’s son Paul may have used her position to benefit financially. A promotional video from 2013 resurfaced on Thursday, brought to public attention by journalist Patrick Howley.
    The video shows Nancy Pelosi speaking about her efforts in office to push for clean energy.    Her message is followed by a promotional statement from her son Paul, who was a board member of Viscoil and an executive at its related company NRGLab.
    “My name is Paul Pelosi…and Viscoil is here today to talk about accelerating the future,” said Pelosi Jr.    “That’s what Viscoil does — it uses technology to maximize the use of natural resources, like oil and other resources.”
    Pelosi’s son traveled to Ukraine in 2017 on behalf of the Corporate Governance Initiative, where he now serves as executive director.    The official reason given for his visit was to discuss a youth soccer partnership program with the Ukrainian government, but clips of that trip have reportedly been removed from online.
    One of those clips was saved by The American Mirror on Twitter.
    Hunter Biden faces similar allegations, which claim he used his father’s position to make lucrative business deals in Ukraine and China.

10/4/2019 President Trump: Far-left maniacs control Democrat Party, seek to destroy America by OAN Newsroom
    President Trump jokingly dismissed the Democrat push for impeachment by saying he could stay in office for another 16 years.    While speaking in central Florida Thursday, the president said Democrats have started the inquiry because they can’t win next year’s elections fairly.
    “Anyway, but if you wanna drive them (Democrats) crazy, just say 8 more years or 12 more years…16 would do it good,” joked President Trump.
    He went on to stress that the Democrat Party is controlled by far-left “maniacs,” whose policies could “destroy America.”
In this Sept. 30, 2019 photo, Vice President Mike Pence and President Donald Trump participate in an Armed Forces welcome ceremony
for the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, at Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, Va. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
    “One of these people gets in — your 401Ks are going to hell, the stock market is going to hell,” warned the president.    “Frankly I think, and I hate to say it, the country’s going to go to hell…they’re consumed by rage and radicalism and insatiable lust for power.”
    President Trump said another four years of his administration would boost economic growth and prosperity, and improve America’s standing in international affairs.

    The following found at https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1178857213445758976.html
Fargan Bastage@SaMoHtLaErEhT 10/1/2019 Adam Schiffty Schiff sent a staffer to Ukraine.    The question is whether former Hunter Biden employer Burisma paid Thomas Eager to attend the Atlantic Council in Eurasia.    The list of donors to AC is interesting including HRC 2016 donor Pinchuk (10mill) atlanticcouncil.org/support-the-co… [
    Victor Pinchuk is a Ukrainian businessman and oligarch and as of January 2016, Forbes ranked him as 1250th on the list of wealthiest people in the world, with a fortune of US$1.44 billion.]
    Thomas Eager is a fellow of the Atlantic Council of which Hunter Biden's former employer Burisma is a donor.
    Pinchuk is tied to Crowdstrike, the US based IT Co who was hired by DNC who found Russia hacked the servers.    None of these connections look odd at all.    Especially since Schiff sent Eager prior to the whistle blower complaint.

    The following found at https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/30/ukraine-mystery-schiff-staffer-made-august-visit-for-think-tank-backed-by-hunter-bidens-old-employer/
9/30/2019 Ukraine Mystery: Schiff Staffer Made August Visit for Think Tank Backed by Hunter Biden’s Old Employer by Aaron Klein
A staffer for Rep. Adam Schiff’s House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence took a trip to Ukraine last month sponsored and organized by the Atlantic Council think tank.
    The Atlantic Council is funded by and routinely works in partnership with Burisma, the natural gas company at the center of allegations regarding Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
    The Schiff staffer, Thomas Eager, is also currently one of 19 fellows at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Congressional Fellowship, a bipartisan program that says it “educates congressional staff on current events in the Eurasia region.”
    Eager’s trip to Ukraine last month was part of the fellowship program and included nine other House employees.    The bi-partisan visit, from August 24 to August 31, was billed as a “Ukraine Study Trip,” and culminated in a meeting with former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.
    The dates of the pre-planned trip are instructive.    Eager’s visit to Ukraine sponsored by the Burisma-funded Atlantic Council began 12 days after the so-called whistleblower officially filed his August 12 complaint about President Donald Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
    Schiff’s House Intelligence Committee reportedly reached a tentative agreement in recent days for the so-called whistleblower to testify.
    The complaint surrounds Trump’s request for Ukrainian assistance in investigating possible corruption related to the Burisma company and Joe and Hunter Biden.
    Also mentioned by Trump during the phone call with Zelensky are questions about CrowdStrike, the outside firm utilized to conclude that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee’s servers since the DNC would not allow the U.S. government to inspect the servers.
    CrowdStrike founder Dmitri Alperovitch is a nonresident senior fellow of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council.
    Eager did not immediately return Breitbart phone and email requests for comment.
    The email request inquired whether Eager, during his trip sponsored by the Atlantic Council, personally held any meetings in Ukraine related to the whistle blower complaint filed about two weeks before the visit.
    Besides funding from Burisma, the Atlantic Council is also financed by Google Capital, billionaire activist George Soros’s Open Society Foundations as well as the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Inc. and the U.S. State Department.
    As Breitbart News reported last week, Google, Soros’s Open Society Foundations, the Rockefeller Fund and an agency of the State Department each also finance a self-described investigative journalism organization repeatedly referenced as a source of information in the so-called whistleblower’s complaint alleging Trump was “using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country” in the 2020 presidential race.
Schiff signed form
    Schiff’s signature appears on the required post-travel disclosure form filed with the House Committee on Ethics documenting the visit to Ukraine.    The form signed by Schiff says that Eager’s trip to Ukraine was paid for by the “Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.”
The form bearing Schiff’s signature (above) describes the visit thusly:
    Series of meetings and visits with gov’t officials, party officials, civil society and private sector reps in Ukraine to learn about ongoing political and military issues, including conflict in the East.
    The costs for Eager’s visit listed on the form are $2202.91 for transportation, $985.50 for lodging, and $630.15 for meal expenses.
    Geysha Gonzalez is the Atlantic Council officer listed on the form.    She is deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.
    Speaking to Breitbart News, Gonzalez confirmed that Eager started his one-year fellowship with the organization in January and that Eager is still a fellow.
    Gonzalez said the pre-planned trip was part of the fellowship program, which also includes a full year of round tables and other educational events.    She said it was not within her portfolio to comment on issues of funding from Burisma or other donors.
    The itinerary of the trip shows a meeting with Poroshenko as well as discussions with local activists, politicians and residents.
    Besides Eager, nine other Congressional staffers were listed as participating in the visit. Republicans were represented by Laura Detter, legislative assistant to Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA), Zachery Laven, legislative assistant to Rep. David Schweikert (R-AZ), Michael McCabe, legislative assistant to Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Sarah Miller, legislative assistant to Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL).
McCain adviser and dossier
    The Atlantic Council’s Gonzalez is also one of eleven members of the rapid response team for the Ukrainian Election Task Force, which says it is working to expose “foreign interference in Ukraine’s democracy.”
    Another member of the team is David J. Kramer, a long-time adviser to late Senator John McCain who served at the McCain Institute for International Leadership as senior director for human rights and democracy.
    Kramer revealed in testimony that he held a meeting about the anti-Trump dossier with a reporter from BuzzFeed News who he says snapped photos of the controversial document without Kramer’s permission when he left the room to go to the bathroom.    That meeting was held at the McCain Institute office in Washington, Kramer stated.
    BuzzFeed infamously published the Christopher Steele dossier on January 10, 2017 setting off a firestorm of news media coverage about the document.
    The Washington Post reported last February that Kramer received the dossier directly from Fusion GPS after McCain expressed interest in it.
    In a deposition taken on Dec. 13, 2017 and posted online earlier this year, Kramer revealed that he met with two Obama administration officials to inquire about whether the anti-Trump dossier was being taken seriously.
    In one case, Kramer said that he personally provided a copy of the dossier to Obama National Security Council official Celeste Wallander [My comment: Celeste Ann Wallander, an American international relations authority with a focus on Russia and Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Russia and Eurasia on the National Security Council.    Another question was John McCain in on this conspiracy?].
    In the deposition, Kramer said that McCain specifically asked him in early December 2016 to meet about the dossier with Wallander and Victoria Nuland, a senior official in John Kerry’s State Department.
Burisma and Atlantic Council
    Besides funding the Atlantic Council, Burisma also routinely partners with the think tank.
    Only four months ago, the company co-hosted the Council’s second Annual Kharkiv Security Conference.
    Burisma further co-hosted a U.S.-Ukraine Business Council event with the Council last year in Washington, DC.    David Kramer of the dossier episode is a senior adviser to the Business Council.
    Busirma and the Atlantic Council also signed a cooperative agreement to develop transatlantic programs with Burisma’s financial support reportedly to focus “on European and international energy security.”
    Burisma advertises that it committed itself to “15 key principles of rule of law and economic policy in Ukraine developed by the Atlantic Council.”
Common Funding Themes
    There are common threads that run through an organization repeatedly relied upon in the so-called whistleblower’s complaint about Trump and CrowdStrike.
    One of several themes is financing tied to Google, whose Google Capital led a $100 million funding drive that financed Crowdstrike.     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 the Democratic Party.
    CrowdStrike was mentioned by Trump in his call with Zelensky.    Perkins Coie, the law firm that represented the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, reportedly helped draft CrowdStrike to aid with the DNC’s allegedly hacked server.
    On behalf of the DNC and Clinton’s campaign, Perkins Coie also paid the controversial Fusion GPS firm to produce the infamous, largely-discredited anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele.
    CrowdStrike founder Alperovitch is a nonresident senior fellow of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council, which takes a hawkish approach toward Russia.    The Council in turn is financed by Google Inc. and Burisma.
    Besides Google and Burisma funding, the Council is also financed by billionaire activist George Soros’s Open Society Foundations as well as the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Inc. and the U.S. State Department.
    Google, Soros’s Open Society Foundations, the Rockefeller Fund and an agency of the State Department each also finance a self-described investigative journalism organization repeatedly referenced as a source of information in the so-called whistleblower’s complaint alleging Trump was “using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country” in the 2020 presidential race.
    The charges in the July 22 report referenced in the whistleblower’s document and released by the Google and Soros-funded organization, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), seem to be the public precursors for a lot of the so-called whistleblower’s own claims, as Breitbart News documented.
    One key section of the so-called whistleblower’s document claims that “multiple U.S. officials told me that Mr. Giuliani had reportedly privately reached out to a variety of other Zelensky advisers, including Chief of Staff Andriy Bohdan and Acting Chairman of the Security Service of Ukraine Ivan Bakanov.”
    This was allegedly to follow up on Trump’s call with Zelensky in order to discuss the “cases” mentioned in that call, according to the so-called whistleblower’s narrative.    The complainer was clearly referencing Trump’s request for Ukraine to investigate the Biden corruption allegations.
    Even though the statement was written in first person – “multiple U.S. officials told me” – it contains a footnote referencing a report by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP).
    That footnote reads:
    In a report published by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) on 22 July, two associates of Mr. Giuliani reportedly traveled to Kyiv in May 2019 and met with Mr. Bakanov and another close Zelensky adviser, Mr. Serhiy Shefir.
    The so-called whistleblower’s account goes on to rely upon that same OCCRP report on three more occasions.    It does so to:     The OCCRP report repeatedly referenced is actually a “joint investigation by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and BuzzFeed News, based on interviews and court and business records in the United States and Ukraine.”
    BuzzFeed infamously also first published the full anti-Trump dossier alleging unsubstantiated collusion between Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia.    The dossier was paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee and was produced by the Fusion GPS opposition dirt outfit.
    The OCCRP and BuzzFeed “joint investigation” resulted in both OCCRP and BuzzFeed publishing similar lengthy pieces on July 22 claiming that Giuliani was attempting to use connections to have Ukraine investigate Trump’s political rivals.
    The so-called whistleblower’s document, however, only mentions the largely unknown OCCRP and does not reference BuzzFeed, which has faced scrutiny over its reporting on the Russia collusion claims.
    Another listed OCCRP funder is the Omidyar Network, which is the nonprofit for liberal billionaire eBay founder Pierre Omidyar.
    Together with Soros’s Open Society, Omidyar also funds the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, which hosts the International Fact-Checking Network that partnered with Facebook to help determine whether news stories are “disputed.”
    Like OCCRP, the Poynter Institute’s so-called news fact-checking project is openly funded by not only Soros’ Open Society Foundations but also Google and the National Endowment for Democracy.
CrowdStrike and DNC servers
    CrowdStrike, meanwhile, was brought up by Trump in his phone call with Zelensky.
    According to the transcript, Trump told Zelensky, “I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say CrowdStrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people…The server, they say Ukraine has it.”
    In his extensive report, Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller notes that his investigative team did not “obtain or examine” the servers of the DNC in determining whether those servers were hacked by Russia.
    The DNC famously refused to allow the FBI to access its servers 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 CrowdStrike conducted forensics on the server and shared details with the FBI.
    In testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee in January 2017, then-FBI Director James Comey confirmed that the FBI registered “multiple requests at different levels,” to review the DNC’s hacked servers.    Ultimately, the DNC and FBI came to an agreement in which a “highly respected private company” — a reference to CrowdStrike—would carry out forensics on the servers and share any information that it discovered with the FBI; Comey testified.
    A senior law enforcement official stressed the importance of the FBI gaining direct access to the servers, a request that was denied by the DNC.
    “The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated,” the official was quoted by the news media as saying.
    “This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information.    These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier,” the official continued.
Biden, Ukraine and Burisma
    Ukraine in 2016 removed a key prosecutor probing alleged corruption involving Burisma, the same firm paying Hunter Biden.    Joe Biden two years later admitted to personally threatening to withhold loan guarantees from Ukraine unless the prosecutor in question, Viktor Shokin, was removed.
    Biden publicly boasted about his role in the removal of Shokin during a panel discussion sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018.
    “I remember going over (to Ukraine), convincing our team … that we should be providing for loan guarantees. … And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee.    And I had gotten a commitment from (then Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko) and from (then-Prime Minister Arseniy) Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor (Shokin).    And they didn’t…” Biden said.
    “They were walking out to a press conference.    I said, nah, … we’re not going to give you the billion dollars.    They said, ‘You have no authority.    You’re not the president.’ … I said, call him.    I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars.    I said, you’re not getting the billion. … I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours.    If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’    Well, son of a bitch.    He got fired.    And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”
    After it was revealed that Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma Holdings in 2014, ethics experts were quoted by the news media as raising questions about potential conflicts of interest.
    Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter.    He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.”    Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow.    Follow him on Facebook.
    Joshua Klein contributed research to this article.
[I first heard of the above information on 10/5/2019 from Pierson Sharpe of the One America Newsroom while he hosted “The Daily Ledger” about Adam Shiff’s ties to Ukraine, and Thomas Eager, Atlantic Council, Burisma, Porshenko, David Kramer and John McCain, Buzzfeed, CrowdStrike founder Alperovitch, DNC connections to FBI, CIA, NSA, Google Alphabet chairman Eric Schmidt connection to Burisma, Hillary Clinton, and the OCCRP (Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project) of George Soros who added information into the Whistleblowers report and Sharpe defined the same information that you read in the above articles.].
    The Atlantic Council is an American Atlanticist think tank in the field of international affairs, founded in 1961, provides a forum for international political, business, and intellectual leaders, and manages ten regional centers and functional programs related to international security and global economic prosperity and headquartered in Washington, D.C., and is a member of the Atlantic Treaty Association.
    On February 22, 2019, the Atlantic Council released its Declaration of Principles at the Munich Security Conference, outlining common values that all western liberal democracies should adhere to.    Produced in response to a perceived movement toward more authoritarianism by western democracies, the declaration was signed by scores of former government officials and other experts.
    In July 2019 Russia said the activities of the Atlantic Council "pose a threat to the fundamentals of the constitutional system and the security of the Russian Federation."    Russia added the Atlantic Council to its list of “undesirable” organizations, preventing it from operating within Russia.

    David J. Kramer in 2018, he was on a list of Americans to be questioned by the Russian government.    David Kramer, the then-Sen. John McCain aide who leaked the Christopher Steele dossier on President Trump, testified in a libel case that he spread the unsubstantiated anti-Trump material all over Washington during the presidential transition.    Kramer was identified as the source of the dossier in a recently unsealed deposition related to the libel case brought by Russian businessman Aleksej Gubarev against Buzzfeed.

    Burisma is a group of energy exploration and production companies based in Kyiv, Ukraine.    The holding company of the group, Burisma Holdings Limited, is registered in Limassol, Cyprus.    Burisma has operated in the Ukrainian gas market since 2002.    It is the largest private natural gas producer in Ukraine.    It is owned by Mykola Zlochevsky through Brociti Investments Limited.
    In February 2016, Burisma acquired a 70% stake in KUB-Gas LLC, a developer of gas fields in Luhansk region.    In 2017, it bought a majority stake in Diloretio Holdings Limited, a company which owned three gas companies in Ukraine.    In April 2019, Burisma acquired Astroinvest-Ukraine, a natural gas trader.
    Burisma is focused to the operations in Ukraine with additional activities in Germany, Mexico, Italy, and Kazakhstan.    It holds 35 gas production licenses in Ukraine in Dnipro-Donets, Carpathian and Azov-Kuban basins.    In addition to the natural gas exploration and production, Burisma provides also gas well services, including hydraulic fracturing.    In Kharkiv, Burisma plans to build an LPG plant with a capacity of 50,000 tonnes per year.
    In 2016, Burisma Group was the second largest privately-owned gas producer in Ukraine after DTEK.    It accounted 26% of all-natural gas produced by privately owned gas producers and more than 5% of total annual gas production in Ukraine.    According to the company, it produced 1.3 billion cubic metres (4.6×1010 cubic feet) of natural gas in Ukraine in 2018.
    In Kazakhstan, the company has provided drilling services to KazMunaiGas and its subsidiaries, including at the Urikhtau gas field.    In Italy, Burisma develops a geothermal power project.
    Burisma's subsidiaries include Esko–Pivnich, Pari, First Ukrainian Oil and Gas Company, Naftogaz Garant, KUB–Gas and Astroinvest–Ukraine.

    Aleksander Kwasniewski, former President of the Republic of Poland, was appointed to the board in January 2014.    CEO of the company is Taras Burdeinyi[1] and chairman of the board is Alan Apter.    A number of non-Ukrainian directors were appointed in 2014, including Aleksander Kwasniewski, former President of the Republic of Poland, appointed in January 2014.    In February 2016, Joseph Cofer Black, the Director of the American CIA’s Counterterrorist Center (CTC) (1999–2002) in the George W. Bush administration and Ambassador at Large for counter-terrorism (2002–2004) joined Burisma’s Board of Directors.    Also Karina Zlochevska, daughter of Mykola Zlochevskiy, is a member of the board.    Other members of the board are Christina Sofocleous, Riginos Charalampous, and Marina Pericleous.
    On 18 April 2014, Hunter Biden, the son of then-US vice president Joe Biden, was appointed to the board of Burisma Holdings.    He left the company in April 2019.    At the same time, one of the board members was Devon Archer, a former senior adviser to John Kerry 2004 presidential campaign.
    Burisma Holdings is owned by Brociti Investments Limited, a Cyprus based company owned by Ukrainian businessman Mykola Zlochevsky, who was minister of natural resources under Viktor Yanukovych.    Brociti acquired Burisma in 2011.    According to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission filings by Sunrise Energy Resources, a company which was controlled by Burisma, before acquisition by Brociti, Burisma was equally owned by Mykola Zlochevsky and Mykola Lisin, an Ukrainian politician who died in a traffic accident in 2011.

    CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. is a cybersecurity technology company based in Sunnyvale, California. It provides endpoint security, threat intelligence, and cyberattack response services.    The company has been involved in investigations of several high profile cyber-attacks, including the Sony Pictures hack, the 2016 Democratic National Committee email leak, and the Democratic National Committee cyber attacks.
    CrowdStrike released research in 2017 showing that 66 percent of the attacks to which the company responded that year were fileless or malware-free.    The company also compiled data on the average time needed to detect an attack and the percentage of attacks detected by organizations themselves.
    In February 2018, CrowdStrike reported that in November and December 2017 it had observed a credential harvesting operation in the international sporting sector, with possible links to the cyber attack on the opening ceremonies of the Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang.    That same month, Crowdstrike released research showing that 39 percent of all attacks observed by the company were malware-free intrusions. The company also named which industries attackers most frequently targeted.    That March, the company released a version of its Falcon product for mobile devices and launched the CrowdStrike store, which opens the Falcon platform to third-party applications.
    In January 2019, CrowdStrike published research reporting that Ryuk ransomware, used by cyber actor Grim Spider to target businesses, had accumulated more than $3.7 million in cryptocurrency payments since it first appeared in August.
    Also in 2019, CrowdStrike released its 2018 Global Threat Report, which ranked cybercriminals in order of fastest actors to operate within a network, with Russia coming in first.    The company also revealed that it tracked 81 named state-sponsored actors in 2018, and at least 28 were conducting active operations throughout the year.    The research showed that of the sophisticated attacks that the company attributed to nation-states, China was responsible for the plurality: more than 25 percent.
    CrowdStrike helped investigate the Democratic National Committee cyber attacks and connected those attacks to Russian intelligence services.    On March 20, 2017, during testimony before congress, James Comey stated "CrowdStrike, Mandiant, and ThreatConnect review[ed] the evidence of the hack and conclude[d] with high certainty that it was the work of APT 28 and APT 29 who are known to be Russian intelligence services."
    In December 2016, CrowdStrike released a report stating that Russian government-affiliated group Fancy Bear had hacked a Ukrainian artillery app.    They concluded that Russia had used the hack to cause large losses to Ukrainian artillery units.    The app (called ArtOS) is installed on tablet PCs and used for fire-control.    The earliest version of the app (supported until 2015) was called POPR-D30 and installed on Android phones and tablets.    CrowdStrike found a hacked variation of POPR-D30 being distributed on Ukrainian military forums that utilized an X-Agent implant.
    The International Institute for Strategic Studies rejected CrowdStrike's assessment of hacking causing losses to Ukrainian artillery units, saying that their data on Ukrainian D30 howitzer losses was misused by CrowdStrike in their report.    The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense also rejected the CrowdStrike report, stating that actual artillery losses were much smaller than what was reported by [CrowdStrike] and were not associated with [Russian hacking].
    Cybersecurity firm SecureWorks discovered a list of email addresses targeted by Fancy Bear in phishing attacks.    The list included the email address of Yaroslav Sherstyuk, the developer of ArtOS.    Additional Associated Press research supports CrowdStrike's conclusions about Fancy Bear.    Radio Free Europe notes that the AP report "lends some credence to the original CrowdStrike report, showing that the app had, in fact, been targeted."
    Following CrowdStrike's investigation of the 2016 Democratic National Committee hacks, journalist Yasha Levine questioned CrowdStrike's methodology, citing it as "forensics in reverse."
    In the Trump–Ukraine controversy, a transcript of a conversation between Donald Trump, the president of the United States, and Volodymyr Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, Trump asked Zelensky to look into CrowdStrike's activities in Ukraine.
Eric Emerson Schmidt is an American businessman and software engineer.    He is known for being the CEO of Google from 2001 to 2011, Executive chairman of Google from 2011 to 2015 and executive chairman of Alphabet Inc. from 2015 to 2017.

    George Soros, in 1997, Soros closed his foundation in Belarus after it was fined $3 million by the government for "tax and currency violations."    According to The New York Times, the Belarusian president Alexander Lukashenko has been widely criticized in the West and in Russia for his efforts to control the Belarus Soros Foundation and other independent NGOs and to suppress civil and human rights.    Soros called the fines part of a campaign to "destroy independent society."
    In June 2009, Soros donated $100 million to Central Europe and Eastern Europe to counter the impact of the economic crisis on the poor, voluntary groups and non-government organisations.
    Since 2012 the Hungarian Fidesz government labelled George Soros as enemy of the state due to his humanitarian and political involvement in the European refugee crisis.    The government has attacked OSF, the international civil support foundation created by George Soros, and tried to revoke the license of Central European University (Budapest) (which failed mostly due to significant public outrage).    In response Soros called the government "a mafia state."
    As the 2018 election period started the government introduced public posters with the photo of Soros, to create hostility in the general public towards him, using statements such as "Soros wants millions of migrants to live in Hungary," and "Soros wants to dismantle the border fence."    The government also prepared a three-part law plan called "Stop Soros package" (which followed other various law changes in the same year which hindered workings of several international NGOs in Hungary), which would include various steps against NGOs doing volunteer work related to the refugee crisis.    Soros left most of these attacks without comments apart from a few short statements about the invalidity of the accusations.
    Anti George Soros sentiment graffiti in Resen, Macedonia (2018).    It reads: #Stop Soros #I will profit.
    In March 2017, six US senators sent a letter to then Secretary of State Rex Tillerson asking that he look into several grants the State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) have given to groups funded by "left-wing" Soros.    According to the Heritage Foundation, the letter expressed specific concern about Soros' influence on Macedonian politics, a concern which has also been expressed by members of the conservative Macedonian government.    In the same context, Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of State and USAID compelling them to release records regarding $5 million transferred from USAID to Soros' Open Society branch in Macedonia.    The suit alleges that the money was deliberately used to destabilize the Macedonian government.
    In January 2017, the "Stop Operation Soros" (SOS) initiative was launched in Macedonia.    SOS seeks to present "questions and answers about the way Soros operates worldwide" and invites citizens to contribute to the research.    In a press conference held during the same month, Nenad Mircevski, one of the founders of the initiative, stated that SOS would work towards the "de-Soros-ization" of Macedonia.
    On May 16, 2018, Soros' Open Society Foundations announced they will move its office from Budapest to Berlin, blaming the move on an "increasingly repressive" environment in Hungary.

10/5/2019 Joe Biden becomes heated over question regarding Ukraine by OAN Newsroom
    Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden snapped at a reporter on Friday over a question regarding Ukraine.    The 2020 hopeful became heated after he was asked whether his son’s work in Ukraine could be a conflict of interest.
    The former vice president quickly fired back at the accusation.
    “There’s been no indication of any conflict of interest from Ukraine or anywhere else,” said Biden.    “I’m not going to respond to that.”
    He became increasingly agitated and attempted to shift focus over to President Trump’s alleged involvement with Ukraine.
    “Let’s focus on the problem,” said Biden.    “Focus on this man (and) what he’s doing that no president has ever done.”
    The president responded to the candidate’s comments in a Saturday morning Twitter post.
    Hunter Biden reportedly served on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma while his father was steering U.S. policy in the region.    Misconduct accusations allege that the former vice president pressured Ukraine to act in a way that would directly benefit his son.    No evidence of wrongdoing has surfaced thus far.

10/9/2019 Explainer: Barr investigates the investigators of Russian meddling by Andy Sullivan, Mark Hosenball and Sarah N. Lynch
FILE PHOTO: U.S. Attorney General William Barr delivers remarks at the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) Criminal
Coordination Conference at the Securities and Exchange Commission building in Washington, U.S., October 3, 2019. REUTERS/Tom Brenner
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Attorney General William Barr has been traveling internationally to help investigate President Donald Trump’s complaints that his campaign was improperly targeted by U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies during the 2016 presidential election.
    Democrats and some former law-enforcement officials say he is using the Justice Department to chase unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that could benefit Trump politically and undermine Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
    Mueller’s investigation found that Moscow interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump, and led to criminal convictions of several former campaign aides.    But Mueller concluded that he did not have enough evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy with Russia.
    Some potential witnesses say they will not cooperate voluntarily with the Barr probe, which was announced after several congressional committees, the Justice Department’s internal watchdog and another U.S. prosecutor launched their own reviews.
    That could pose problems for John Durham, the prosecutor tapped by Barr to lead the effort.
WHAT IS BEING INVESTIGATED?
    Durham is examining whether U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies acted properly when they examined possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia, which ultimately led to Mueller’s investigation.     Trump and some of his political allies say U.S. officials launched the probe to undermine his chances of winning the White House, though they have provided no evidence.
    The effort began in July 2016, when the Australian government alerted U.S. officials that a Trump foreign policy adviser, George Papadopoulos, had boasted to an Australian diplomat that the Russian government had material that could be damaging to Trump’s opponent, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
    Several months later, the FBI secured a court order to monitor Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser who had traveled to Russia.
    Papadopoulos was later prosecuted by Mueller’s office and pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.    Page has not been charged.
WHAT IS THE FOCUS OF THE INVESTIGATION?
    Barr has reached out to foreign governments for cooperation.
    According to a source familiar with the matter, Barr and Durham traveled to Rome in September to meet with Italian intelligence officials about Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese university professor who, according to Mueller’s report, had contacts with Russian intelligence officials and told Papadopoulos that Russia had potentially damaging Clinton-related emails.
    Papadopoulos has claimed that Mifsud was working for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and accused the Italian prime minister at the time, Matteo Renzi, of trying to undermine Trump’s 2016 campaign.    Renzi said he plans to sue for defamation.
    Barr has also reached out to Australia, which has pledged to cooperate.    He met with security agencies and government officials in the United Kingdom in July, according to sources familiar with the matter.
    People in Ukraine have also been sharing information, according to the Justice Department, but as of two weeks ago, Barr had not spoken with government officials there.
    Several former Justice Department officials say Barr’s involvement is inappropriate.
    A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment about the investigation.
    Durham’s probe seems to be moving at a more deliberate pace in Washington.
    While the FBI says it has been cooperating, senior figures involved in the 2016 investigation have not yet heard from Durham’s team, according to sources familiar with the matter.
    Among them: former FBI general counsel James A. Baker; former CIA Director John Brennan; former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper; former FBI agent Peter Strzok; and David Laufman, a former senior Justice Department official.
    “There are no indications that this is an actual investigation,” said Shawn Turner, a spokesman for Clapper.
    Carter Page, the initial target of the surveillance, also told Reuters he had not heard from Durham’s team, but said he had been providing the Justice Department with unsolicited information.    Papadopoulos declined to comment.
    Other key figures may not be willing to cooperate with the investigation.
    Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence officer whose research linking Trump to Russia helped fuel the FBI’s initial investigation, does not intend to cooperate with Durham’s probe if asked, according to a source familiar with his views.
    Current and former officials at the State Department also are unwilling to participate voluntarily, according to a congressional source.
    That could create a hurdle for Durham, who according to the New York Times, was not given the authority to subpoena witnesses.
HOW DOES IT DIFFER FROM THE OTHER TWO INVESTIGATIONS?
    The Justice Department’s internal watchdog, Inspector General Michael Horowitz, has completed a separate, related investigation. His office is going through the process of removing classified information before it releases its findings to the public.
    That probe, launched in 2018, focuses on whether the FBI followed proper procedures when it asked the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for permission to monitor Page, the Trump adviser, in 2016.
    Separately, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in 2017 assigned Utah’s top federal prosecutor, John Huber, to review a wide range of issues that Republicans had raised, including the FBI’s conduct during investigations related to Clinton and Trump.
    Huber has ceded some portions of his probe to Durham and is waiting for Horowitz to finish his review.
(This story has been corrected to fix characterization of emails)
(Additional reporting by Brad Heath and Giselda Vagnoni; Editing by Dan Grebler)

10/9/2019 FISA: FBI misused surveillance data, violated constitutional rights by OAN Newsroom
    The United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has ruled that the FBI previously violated Americans’ privacy rights by conducting unreasonable searches.    The FISA Court opinion disclosed Tuesday revealed that the FBI violated constitutional rights and federal law through their warrant-less internet surveillance program.
    A 2018 review revealed the bureau used their raw intelligence database in 2017 and 2018 to administer tens of thousands of searches on private U.S. citizens.    The searches were conducted on some occasions to screen FBI personnel and sources, involving emails and phone numbers.    In one instance, the court stated that an FBI contractor searched his family, staff members and himself on the database.
    Federal law requires the database only be used to gather evidence of a crime or foreign intelligence information.    According to the ruling, the FBI violated the law authorizing the program as well as the Fourth Amendment, which bars the government from conducting unreasonable searches.
    Following the court’s decision, the FBI said it would apply new procedures as to how the database is used in order to better protect personal privacy.
    The Foreign Intelligence Service Act has been under scrutiny for some time.    Former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page has argued the Obama-era FBI may have used its FISA authority unlawfully against him.
[The Obama-era and Democrat abuse has now been busted for their 8 years and plus abuse of this system and thank God it is in the hands of the Republicans to get this straightened out.    Can you image if Hillary Clinton had won the presidency of all the corruption that would have continued through 2020.].

10/9/2019 Explainer: The missing Maltese academic at the heart of Washington intrigue by Giselda Vagnoni and Angelo Amante
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump and U.S. Attorney General William Barr attend the 38th Annual National Peace
Officers Memorial Service on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., May 15, 2019. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo
    ROME (Reuters) – In recent weeks, U.S. Attorney General William Barr, with backing from President Donald Trump, has stepped up an inquiry into the origins of an FBI investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
    Trump has complained his campaign was improperly targeted by U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies to hamper his chances of winning.    An investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded that Moscow interfered in the election to help Trump, but said there was not enough evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy with Russia.
    As part of his inquiry, Barr has asked Australian and British justice officials for assistance and visited Italy twice, meeting intelligence agents in Rome on Aug. 15 and Sept. 27 to learn more about people mentioned in Mueller’s report.
    A central figure is Joseph Mifsud, a 59-year-old Maltese academic involved in law and diplomacy education programs in London and Rome, who also had contacts with Russian officials and met with George Papadopoulos, a former foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, on several occasions.
    Following are some key questions about Mifsud, an obscure professor who has not been seen in public for nearly two years and who remains a focus of attention in Washington.
WHY IS MIFSUD SO IMPORTANT?
    The Mueller report describes a series of meetings between Mifsud, then a professor at the now-defunct London Academy of Diplomacy, and Papadopoulos in the spring of 2016.
    They first met in mid-March at Link Campus, a private university in Rome to which Mifsud was affiliated.    Papadopoulos, then 28, was visiting Link to meet officials as part of his role at the London Centre for International Law Practice, a quasi-think-tank based in London that he had recently joined and which Mifsud was also affiliated to.
    Mueller’s report says Mifsud, who was living in London at the time and had established a number of Russian contacts, became more interested in Papadopoulos after the American mentioned that he had been hired to join the Trump campaign as an adviser specializing in energy policy.
    Over the next month, Mifsud and Papadopoulos held a series of meetings and had regular phone and email contact, with Mifsud offering to introduce Papadopoulos to European leaders and officials with connections in the Russian government.
    The critical meeting came on April 26, the day after Mifsud had returned to London following a 10-day visit to Moscow.
    According to the Mueller report, Mifsud told Papadopoulos he had met with high-level Russian government officials during his trip and learned that the Russians had obtained “dirt” on Trump’s election rival Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.”
    That would make him the original source of one of the key allegations against the Trump campaign investigated by Mueller.
    In a meeting with a Western diplomat 10 days later, Papadopoulos suggested the Russian government could help the Trump campaign via the anonymous release of information that would be damaging to Clinton, the report says.
WHERE IS MIFSUD NOW?
    Mifsud hasn’t been seen in public since November 2017, when he was spotted at Link Campus and spoke briefly to a reporter from Italy’s la Repubblica newspaper.    In the interview he denied telling Papadopoulos anything about Russian “dirt” on Clinton and dismissed his Russian contacts as meaningless.
    Another Italian newspaper, Il Foglio, reported in April that he was holed up in an apartment in Rome – equidistant between the U.S. and the Russian embassies – for seven months during 2017-2018, with the rent paid by Link.    But the contract expired in July or August last year and he hasn’t been seen since.
    The same newspaper published a picture earlier this month of Mifsud sitting in his former lawyer’s office in Zurich, holding a copy of the Zurichsee-Zeitung newspaper.    Il Foglio said the photo was taken on May 21, 2018.
    The lawyer, Stephan Roh, told Reuters he had not had any contact with Mifsud for a while, and said a London-based law firm was now representing him.    That firm declined to comment.
    Former associates of Mifsud’s said they had had no contact with him since late 2017.    His daughter is said to be still living in London, while his ex-wife lives in Malta.
WAS HE WORKING FOR AN INTELLIGENCE AGENCY?
    In an op-ed in the Washington Post in May, former FBI director James Comey referred to Mifsud as a “Russian agent,” although he did not say why he believed that to be the case.    Mueller’s report does not directly make the same allegation.    For his part, Papadopoulos has repeatedly suggested, without presenting any evidence, that Mifsud was working for Western intelligence agencies in an effort to tarnish Trump.
    Gianni Pitella, a former member of the European Parliament and an Italian senator for the center-left Democratic Party, attended the same conference in Rome where Mifsud and Papadopoulos first met in 2016.    He described Mifsud as sociable and well-connected, but not someone you would expect to find at the heart of international intrigue.
    “Mifsud is a kind-mannered person with a vast culture.    He is a great storyteller, one who has relationships with academic authorities,” he told Reuters. “My impression is that he was very good at weaving together relationships, but had nothing to do with people involved in espionage.”
    A senior Maltese official who worked with Mifsud earlier in his career said he found Mifsud hard to believe, while another Maltese associate described him as a “bluffer.”
    “I simply do not believe he had Russian contacts, especially at a high level.    He was personally a nice guy to talk to, I would even say he was a good connector, but nothing high-level,” the official said.    “He was also disorganized, he would start one thing, then move to another before completing the first.    I laugh when I read what is said about him.”
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
    Barr and his associate, veteran U.S. prosecutor John Durham, last visited Rome on Sept. 27 and met Italian intelligence officials to learn more about Mifsud and his connections, an intelligence source told Reuters.
    The source said it was possible Barr or Durham might return to Italy to pursue inquiries further, suggesting the Mifsud trail is not dead.    The U.S. Justice Department has not confirmed the Italian visits and has not said if Barr is planning a trip to Italy in the future.
    Barr has also contacted authorities in Britain and Australia to seek assistance.    Australia is relevant because the foreign diplomat Papadopoulos met in London and told about the Russian “dirt” was then-ambassador Alexander Downer.
    “The Australian government will use its best endeavors to support your efforts in this matter,” the Australian ambassador to Washington wrote to Barr on May 28, 2019.
    “While Australia’s former High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, the Hon. Alexander Downer, is no longer employed by the government, we stand ready to provide you with all relevant information to support your inquiries.”
    British authorities have been more circumspect.    A spokesman for the government said: “Investigations in the United States are a matter for U.S. authorities.    We won’t comment on the ongoing investigations.”
(Additional reporting by Mark Hosenball, Crispian Balmer and Luke Baker; Writing by Luke Baker; Editing by Alex Richardson)
   
Mifsud ---------------------- Downer

10/10/2019 Intel analyst arrested in leak to reporters - Justice Department says it’s cracking down by Kristine Phillips and Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – A 30-year-old counterterrorism analyst for the Defense Intelligence Agency was arrested Wednesday on charges that he disclosed classified information to two journalists, one of whom he was dating, federal prosecutors said.
    Henry Kyle Frese, of Alexandria, Virginia, was charged with two counts of willful transmission of national defense information, each carrying a maximum of 10 years imprisonment
.    The arrest comes as the Justice Department vows to continue ramping up its efforts to crack down on the unauthorized release of classified information.
    “Frese was caught red-handed disclosing sensitive national security information for personal gain,” Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Demers said in a statement.    “Frese betrayed the trust placed in him by the American people – a betrayal that risked harming the national security of this country.”
    Federal prosecutors say Frese, whose government security clearance allowed him access to top secret and sensitive information, researched multiple classified intelligence reports – some of which were unrelated to his job duties – and leaked information about a foreign country’s weapons systems to a journalist.    Prosecutors alleged that Frese, who worked as both a contractor and a full-time employee for DIA, was in a relationship with that journalist and sought to advance the reporter’s career.
    The unauthorized disclosures happened in 2018 and 2019. From August 2017 to August 2018, Frese and the reporter lived together, authorities say.
    Court records say Frese accessed an intelligence report in about April to May 2018. Frese later received a message on Twitter from the reporter, who asked if he would be willing to talk to a second journalist – a colleague at an affiliated but different news outlet.    Frese said he was “down” to help the second reporter.
    In the same Twitter exchange with Frese, the reporter talked about a story she was working on.    Shortly after, Frese searched a classified government computer system and searched for topics related tothe story the reporter was working on, court records say.    In the next hours, Frese talked to both journalists by phone.    The reporter believed to be romantically involved with Frese published an article that contained information from the report Frese accessed, court records say.
    As recently as last month, Frese accessed two more classified intelligence reports, court records say.    Around this time, the FBI had begun court-authorized surveillance of Frese’s calls and found that he leaked national defense information from the reports to the second reporter, court records say.
    The journalist linked romantically to Frese published at least eight stories containing classified information provided by the analyst, officials say.    Prosecutors asserted that Frese compromised at least five intelligence reports.
    Authorities did not name the two journalists involved and did not identify their news organizations, though court records say the second journalist described herself as a national security correspondent on Twitter.    Both journalists wrote about the same topics, though the second journalist is more senior, court records say.
    Authorities declined to say if the disclosures resulted in harm in national security or which foreign countries’ defense systems were involved.
    “Frese betrayed the trust placed in him by the American people – a betrayal that risked harming the national security of this country,” John Demers, Assistant Attorney General for National Security.
[So hopefully they will start arresting the ones who are leaking information to the Democrats.].

10/10/2019 Ukraine president says Trump didn’t seek to blackmail him
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy holds a press-marathon at a food market in Kiev, Ukraine October 10, 2019. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich
    KIEV (Reuters) – Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Thursday that U.S. President Donald Trump did not seek to blackmail him during a phone call in July or a meeting in September.
    Zelenskiy said he had not known that U.S. military aid to Ukraine had been blocked at the time of the call.    Having been made aware of this by his defense minister later, he raised the issue during a separate meeting in September in Poland with Vice President Mike Pence.
    The U.S. House of Representatives has launched an impeachment inquiry against Trump, focused on whether he used congressionally approved aid to Ukraine as leverage to pressure Zelenskiy to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, one of Trump’s main Democratic rivals as he seeks re-election in 2020.
    Trump has made allegations, without evidence, that Biden engaged in improper dealings in Ukraine.    Biden’s son Hunter was on the board of Ukrainian gas company Burisma.
    Zelenskiy told reporters that his aim in having a phone call with Trump was to arrange a subsequent meeting and that he had asked the White House to change its rhetoric on Ukraine.
    “There was no blackmail.    This was not the subject of our conversation,” Zelenskiy said.
    Zelenskiy said there were no conditions attached to him meeting Trump, including whether he should investigate the activities of Hunter at Burisma.
    The White House published its summary of the call between Zelenskiy and Trump in September.    Asked whether the Ukrainian version matched up to the U.S. one, Zelenskiy said: “I didn’t even check, but I think that it matches completely.”
(Reporting by Pavel Polityuk, Natalia Zinets, Maria Tsvetkova and Matthias Williams, editing by John Stonestreet)

10/10/2019 Explainer: How Trump used the U.S. government to chase conspiracy theories by Brad Heath, Jonathan Landay and Mark Hosenball
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump, flanked by California State Senator Andreas Borgeas (R-Modesto)
and U.S. Representative Mark Meadows (R-NC), speaks to reporters after signing executive orders on
federal regulation at the White House in Washington, U.S. October 9, 2019. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Donald Trump has enlisted parts of the U.S. government and key allies in the pursuit of unproven or disproven conspiracy theories, some incubated in the dark and anonymous corners of the internet.
    Text messages between U.S. diplomats, a whistleblower complaint and a series of public statements by Trump and other officials in recent days offer the clearest view yet of the extent to which the president has used the government to chase accusations that secret forces have been plotting against him.
    Much of that evidence has surfaced because of an impeachment inquiry led by Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives.
    Some of the evidence that has emerged shows that:
– State Department envoys in Europe offered Ukraine’s president a White House visit if he promised to investigate a discredited theory suggesting Russia did not interfere in the 2016 election that put Trump in office.    A whistleblower complaint by an intelligence officer suggested Trump also held back nearly $400 million in security aid to Ukraine as additional leverage, which Trump has denied doing.
– The Justice Department is now investigating its own probe into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election and allegations that Trump’s campaign colluded with Moscow.    Attorney General William Barr and another senior department official traveled to Europe in recent months to investigate the theory that the FBI investigation, first launched during the presidential campaign in 2016, was actually a plot to stop Trump from becoming president.
    The president’s tendency to say untrue things, particularly on Twitter, has caused headaches for his administration before.    Until now, however, the government had largely taken pains to distance itself from such statements.
    As recently as last year, the Justice Department argued in a series of court cases that when it came to national security, the president did not necessarily know what he was tweeting about.
    Here are the three cases in which Trump has publicly advanced views of uncorroborated conspiracies behind episodes damaging his presidency.    The White House declined to comment on the cases:
A CROWDSTRIKE CONSPIRACY
    Investigations by U.S. intelligence, law enforcement, Congress and outside researchers have all concluded that Russia’s government was to blame for hacking Democratic Party organizations and leaking stolen emails at politically opportune moments in 2016.    Russia has denied involvement, although U.S. investigators even named the Russian officers who were sitting at the keyboard during the breaches.
    But another view has taken hold in on some right-wing websites.    In that telling, the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike, which the DNC hired to investigate the hack, falsely accused Russia, and spirited the hacked email servers to Ukraine as part of a coverup.    As early as March 2017, an unnamed poster on the fringe website 4chan wrote that “Russia could not have been the source of leaked Democrat emails released by WikiLeaks.”    Other posts incorrectly said CrowdStrike co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch is Ukrainian (he is a U.S. citizen born in Russia).
    Trump referenced that view during a July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, mentioning CrowdStrike by name, and saying “The server they say Ukraine has it.”    Ahead of that call the U.S. special representative to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, suggested in a text message to a Zelenskiy aide that Zelenskiy might score a White House visit if he promised to “get to the bottom of what happened” in 2016, a reference to the election meddling.
    CrowdStrike said in a blog post that its finding of Russian involvement was supported by U.S. intelligence and that it never took possession of the hacked servers.
    Trump’s former homeland security adviser, Tom Bossert, said officials in the administration tried to dissuade Trump.    “It’s not only a conspiracy theory.    It is completely debunked,” he said on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” last month
.
A MALTESE PROFESSOR
    Russian involvement in the 2016 election produced an investigation like few others in U.S. history, focused on whether Trump’s campaign had colluded with the Kremlin to win.
    Another theory, endorsed by Trump, holds that the probe was actually an elaborate effort by U.S. officials and foreign spies to deny him the presidency.
    The FBI opened its Russia probe in 2016, after an Australian diplomat reported that a Trump campaign aide named George Papadopoulos had boasted that Russia had obtained email “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, Trump’s Democratic opponent, weeks before the hack of the Democratic National Committee became public.    Papadopoulos told the FBI that he learned that from a Maltese academic, Joseph Mifsud.
    Papadopoulos has alleged that Mifsud was actually a Western intelligence operative trying to frame him, and by extension, Trump.    On Twitter, Trump has hinted at that theory, repeating messages asking why Mifsud was not charged with a crime, and quoting a television interview in which Papadopoulos said the “whole thing was a complete setup.”
    Now Barr is investigating how the government opened an investigation – which went on to be led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller – that the president dismissed as a “hoax” and a “witch hunt” from the start.    Barr told CBS News that official explanations for the FBI’s investigation “don’t hang together.”    He has not elaborated on what he is investigating or why, but told a Senate subcommittee this year that “there is a basis for my concern.”
    Barr traveled to Italy seeking information about Mifsud, and to the United Kingdom to meet with its intelligence officials.    He has tapped the lead federal prosecutor in Connecticut to lead the review.     The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment.
WHISTLEBLOWER ALLEGATIONS
    Trump’s efforts to pursue those conspiracies came to light in large part because an unnamed U.S. intelligence officer filed a whistleblower complaint about Trump’s July 25 call with Zelenskiy.
    Trump has accused Democrats of secretly ghostwriting the whistleblower’s complaint.    He described the whistleblower’s sources as “spying on our own president,” and said they deserve “Big Consequences.”
    He also said on Wednesday that the Intelligence Committee Inspector General, who first reviewed the complaint and determined that it was credible and urgent, had presided over a “scam.”
    Trump also said his administration was “trying to find out” the whistleblower’s identity, and that he wanted to question his unnamed accuser.
    When the whistleblower’s lawyers said a second official had also spoken to the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Trump said that person too was “coming in from the Deep State,” a phrase that commonly refers to an alleged secret cabal within the U.S. government.
    One of the initial whistleblower’s lawyers, Mark Zaid, has said that Congress did not help the whistleblower prepare the nine-page set of allegations that touched off the House impeachment inquiry.
    Nonetheless, Trump’s allies in the House and his lawyers have taken up the accusation that the whistleblower worked in secret with the Democratic head of the House committee leading the impeachment inquiry, Adam Schiff.
    In a letter Tuesday, White House Counsel Pat Cipollone cited this among the president’s reasons for refusing to cooperate with the impeachment probe.    The whistleblower’s party leanings and his contact with Democrats “raises serious questions that must be investigated,” he wrote.
(Reporting by Karen Freifeld, Brad Heath, Steve Holland, Mark Hosenball, Jonathan Landay, David Morgan, Andy Sullivan and Heather Timmons and Richard Cowan; Editing by Ross Colvin and Frances Kerry)
[Whoever wrote this must be watching CNN and believes what they say.].

    The following found at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/giuliani-romania-biden-ukraine-scandal
10/10/2019 Giuliani Cryptically Tells Fox News To ‘Watch Romania’ - And Another Country by Summer Concepcion, newswriter for TPM based in New York.
Warsaw, Poland, 13/02/2019 - A press briefing held prior to the rally of the Iranian community in Europe on the
prospects for establishing a sustainable and lasting peace in the Middle East and the Iranian regime's d... MORE
    President Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani just added another country — and possibly two! — to the list of places where he’s possibly drumming up bogus allegations against former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
    During a segment on Fox News host Sean Hannity’s show Thursday night, Giuliani sounded off on the Ukraine scandal spurred by Trump’s now-infamous July call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which Trump pressured Ukraine into manufacturing dirt against the Bidens.
    Then Giuliani pivoted to an entirely new country.    The former New York mayor urged Hannity to keep an eye out on Romania.
    “Sean, I want to keep your eye not just on China,” Giuliani said.    “I want you to keep your eye on Romania.    Just watch Romania.”
    Last week, Trump called on China to investigate Biden, in addition to his Ukraine pressure campaign.
    Giuliani’s latest Fox News appearance comes a day after the White House issued a letter to House Democratic leaders rejecting Congress’ impeachment inquiry.     On Thursday, TPM reported that two Giuliani associates who were tied to the Ukraine pressure campaign were arrested Wednesday on campaign finance charges.
    At the end of his appearance Wednesday, Giuliani teased that he’s “got another country” on “the list” to keep an eye on.
    “We go to China, told you about Romania, I got another country that we have on the list and then we go back to all the stealing [Biden] did when he went back to the Senate,” Giuliani said.

    The following found at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/giuliani-pals-tied-to-ukraine-scheme-arrested-on-campaign-finance-chargesGiuliani Pals Tied To Ukraine Scheme Arrested On Campaign Finance Charges by Josh Kovensky, an investigative reporter for Talking Points Memo, based in New York.
NEW YORK, NEW YORK - SEPTEMBER 23: Former New York City Mayor and attorney to President Donald Trump Rudy Giuliani
visits "Mornings With Maria" with anchor Maria Bartiromo at Fox Business Network Studios on September... MORE
    Two associates of Trump personal attorney Rudy Giuliani who were tied to the Ukraine pressure campaign were arrested on Wednesday on campaign finance charges, a source familiar told TPM.
    The pair — Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman — traveled to Kyiv in 2019 as Giuliani and Trump pressed the Ukrainian government to fabricate dirt on Joe Biden and the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation.    The duo have run the gamut in their work with Giuliani, most recently teaming up with the former NYC mayor to probe opportunities in Ukraine’s gas business but also reportedly aiding the Trump attorney in his pressure campaign on Kyiv — for which the President now faces impeachment.
    The duo were arrested Wednesday night at Washington-Dulles International airport, while reportedly trying to flee the country.    They had depositions before Congress scheduled for today and tomorrow.
    Prosecutors from the Southern District of New York charged the pair – as well as David Correia and Andrey Kukushkin — on two counts of conspiracy, false statements to the FEC, and falsifying records.
    Prosecutors accuse the four of conspiring “to circumvent the federal laws against foreign influence by engaging in a scheme to funnel foreign money to candidates for federal and State office so that the defendants could buy potential influence” with politicians and government.
    The indictment accuses Parnas and Fruman of funneling $325,000 in foreign cash to pro-Trump Super PAC America First Action in a mysterious transaction that TPM wrote about last month.
    The pair founded a company called Global Energy Partners, and marked it down as having made the contribution.    But as TPM reported, and the indictment alleges, GEP did not make the contribution — rather, the money came from another firm.
    Prosecutors allege that the money in fact came from a “private lending transaction” with unnamed third parties, and that the pair intentionally concealed the origin of the funds from the FEC.    America First Action also recorded the $325,000 as having come from GEP, and told TPM at the time that it complied with all applicable laws and regulations.    AFA did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
    That PAC also benefitted an unnamed “then-sitting U.S. Congressman” who received a commitment from Parnas and Fruman for $20,000.
    At around that time, the indictment reads, “Parnas met with Congressman-1 and sought Congressman-1’s assistance in causing the U.S. Government to remove or recall the then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine.”
    Last year, Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) sent a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo calling for Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch’s removal, accusing her of being anti-Trump.    America First Action reportedly spent more than $3 million to benefit Sessions during the 2018 election cycle.
    Yovanovitch was fired in May 2019, after Ukraine’s then-prosecutor general Yuriy Lutsenko began to publicly accuse her of corruption, and after Giuliani pushed for her removal.
    In a statement, America First Action said that “In May 2018, America First Action received a $325,000 contribution and donor form from Global Energy Producers.”
    After the FEC opened an investigation concerning the contribution, America First Action said, it “placed that contribution in a segregated bank account, it has not been used it for any purpose and the funds will remain in this segregated account until these matters are resolved.    We take our legal obligations seriously and scrupulously comply with the law and any suggestion otherwise is false.”
    The indictment also details a scheme to create a marijuana business in Nevada.    Parnas and Fruman allegedly funneled money from a foreign official to a Nevada state candidate’s election campaign in order to help secure a license for marijuana retail.
    For the marijuana licensing venture, the pair allegedly worked with David Correia and Andrey Kukushkin.    Correia allegedly drafted a table contemplating between $1 and $2 million in political contributions to accomplish the scheme.    The unnamed foreign national allegedly wired $1 million in furtherance of the effort late last year, but it all stumbled on one hitch: the deadline for registering marijuana licenses in Nevada was September 2018.
    So, the indictment alleges, the defendants attempted to contribute to a Nevada State candidate who was running for an office in which the candidate would be empowered to “change the rules.”
    Parnas and Fruman are expected to appear in federal court in Virginia on Thursday.
    Read the indictment here:
[There is no date on the indictment as you can see above.    So no one knows when it was created and it is amusement that someone is doing this at a strange time since these two are the sources of Giuliani's information about Joe Bidens dealings with Ukranian corruption, and also no one knows who the Congressman was also not named.    Something is fishing do you think the DEEP STATE is causing this?].

[IT DID NOT TAKE LONG BEFORE THE DEEP STATE CAME OUT WITH AN ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT GIULANI WITH AN ALLEGED STORY WHICH DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH THAT JOE BIDEN IS STILL CORRUPT AND DOES EVERYONE WANT 4 MORE YEARS OF OBAMA ERA CORRUPTION, BUT THE PROBLEM NOW IS THESE TWO WILL BE PUT IN A DARK PLACE NOT TO BE SEEN IN THE DAYLIGHT AGAIN JUST AS THEY DID TO FLYNN AND STONE.]
10/11/2019 Giuliani-linked pair charged over donations - Allegedly sent foreign money to candidates by Bart Jansen and Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – Two Ukrainianborn business partners, who showered Republican campaign committees with nearly $500,000 and dined with President Donald Trump at the White House, were arrested late Wednesday on campaign finance charges as they tried to leave the country, federal authorities said Thursday.
    Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman helped Rudy Giuliani meet a Ukrainian prosecutor as the president’s personal lawyer pushed for an investigation into Trump’s political rival Joe Biden.    Both of the men are among the prospective witnesses House Democrats want to question in their impeachment inquiry.     The indictment charges Parnas, Fruman, David Correia and Andrey Kukushkin with federal campaign finance law violations.    The charges relate to a $325,000 donation to a group supporting Trump’s reelection.
    It alleges they “conspired to circumvent the federal laws against foreign influence by engaging in a scheme to funnel foreign money to candidates for federal and state office so that the defendants could buy potential influence with candidates, campaigns and the candidates’ governments.”
    Parnas and Fruman had no significant history of political donations and “sought to advance their personal financial interests and the political interests of at least one Ukrainian government official with whom they were working,” the indictment charges.
    To hide their sources of funding and capital, Parnas and Fruman created a limited liability company called Global Energy Producers and “intentionally caused certain large contributions to be reported in the name of GEP instead of their own names,” the indictment says.
    The indictment alleges that Parnas, Fruman, Correia and Kukushkin schemed with an unidentified foreign national to get retail marijuana licenses in states, including Nevada. In 2018, Correia drafted a table of prospective political donations.
    The plan allegedly included two $500,000 transfers.    The foreign national arranged for the funds to be wired from overseas accounts to a U.S. corporate bank account controlled by Fruman and another individual, the indictment charges.
    Giuliani said he couldn’t comment on the case and didn’t represent the men in campaign finance matters.
Contributing: Kevin McCoy, Kristine Phillips, Associated Press

10/11/2019 Giuliani associates arrested at airport - GOP donors accused in campaign finance scheme by Bart Jansen, Kevin Johnson and Kevin McCoy, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – Two Ukrainian-born business partners, who showered Republican campaign committees with nearly $500,000 and dined with President Donald Trump at the White House, were arrested late Wednesday on campaign finance charges, federal authorities said Thursday.
    Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman helped Rudy Giuliani meet a Ukrainian prosecutor as the president’s personal lawyer pushed for an investigation into Trump’s political rival Joe Biden. Both of the men are among the prospective witnesses House Democrats want to question in their impeachment inquiry.
    The indictment charges Parnas, Fruman, David Correia and Andrey Kukushkin with federal campaign finance law violations.
    Manhattan U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman said Parnas and Fruman were arrested at Dulles International Airport near Washington as they prepared to board an international flight with one-way tickets.    Kukushkin was arrested in San Francisco, and Correia was not yet in custody.
    Prosecutors allege that they “conspired to circumvent the federal laws against foreign influence by engaging in a scheme to funnel foreign money to candidates for federal and state office so that the defendants could buy potential influence with candidates, campaigns and the candidates’ governments.”
    They began attending campaign fundraising events in March 2018, the indictment alleges.
    According to court documents, Fruman contributed $10,000 on Nov. 1, 2018, to a Nevada state candidate.    State campaign finance filings show Fruman contributed to the campaigns of two Republican candidates: Adam Laxalt, former state attorney general, and Wesley Duncan, former state assembly member.
    Having no significant prior history of political giving, the pair “sought to advance their personal financial interests and the political interests of at least one Ukrainian government official with whom they were working,” the indictment charges.
    To hide their sources of funding and capital, Parnas and Fruman created a limited liability company called Global Energy Producers and “intentionally caused certain large contributions to be reported in the name of GEP instead of their own names,” the indictment says.
    The indictment alleges that Parnas, Fruman, Correia and Kukushkin schemed with an unidentified foreign national who is a Russian citizen to get retail marijuana licenses in states, including Nevada.
    In May 2018, Parnas posted pictures on Facebook of himself and Fruman with Trump in the White House and with the president’s son Donald Jr. in California.    That was the same month their company, Global Energy Producers, was credited with giving $325,000 to the committee that supports Trump’s reelection, America First Action SuperPac.
    The campaign contribution sparked a complaint to the Federal Election Commission because of questions about the source of the money.
    “In July 2018, a complaint was filed with the Federal Election Commission concerning this contribution,” America First Action said Thursday in a statement.    “There is also separate litigation pending in Florida that concerns these funds.    Accordingly, America First Action placed that contribution in a segregated bank account, it has not been used for any purpose and the funds will remain in this segregated account until these matters are resolved.    We take our legal obligations seriously and scrupulously comply with the law and any suggestion otherwise is false.”
    Giuliani declined comment Thursday.
    Parnas and Fruman helped arrange a meeting in January in New York between Giuliani and Ukraine’s then-prosecutor general, Yuri Lutsenko, according to Ukrainian media reports.
    Trump and Giuliani pushed an unsubstantiated claim that Biden urged the prosecutor’s removal in 2016 to thwart an investigation into a company tied to his son Hunter.    Biden denied wrongdoing, and Lutsenko told The Washington Post that Hunter Biden “did not violate anything.”
    The $325,000 campaign contribution May 17, 2018, took a wayward path to America First Action.    The contribution was attributed to Global Energy Producers on the committee’s report to the FEC.    Parnas was listed as CEO of the company and Fruman as president in other campaign documents.
    According to The Associated Press, the money came from a different corporate entity, Aaron Investments I, which was managed by Parnas and his wife.    Aaron Investments received $1.2 million from the proceeds of a private mortgage May 15, 2018, secured by a condo unit in North Miami Beach owned by a corporation tied to Fruman, according to AP. Wire-transfer records show $325,000 was wired from Aaron Investments to America First Action, even though the contribution was credited to Global Energy Producers.     Four days after the contribution, on May 21, 2018, Parnas posted a picture on Facebook of himself with Fruman and Trump Jr. at the Beverly Hills Polo Lounge in California.    “Power Breakfast!!!” the caption said.
    The Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan campaign finance watchdog based in Washington, filed a complaint with the FEC in July 2018 arguing that Global Energy Producers shielded the source of the political contribution.    Under federal law, contributions must be attributed to the person or entity providing the money, to avoid straw donations.
Contributing: Kristine Phillips
Lev Parnas shared photos and video on Facebook in May 2018 after his visit with President Donald Trump
at the White House. Parnas and his business partner are accused of campaign finance violations. AP
A Facebook post in May 2018 proclaimed a “power breakfast” attended by, from left, Donald Trump Jr.,
Tommy Hicks, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman. Parnas and Fruman were arrested Wednesday. AP

10/11/2019 Factbox: The criminal charges against Giuliani’s associates by Jan Wolfe
FILE PHOTO: Rudy Giuliani is seen ahead of U.S. President Donald Trump introducing his Supreme Court nominee
in the East Room of the White House in Washington, U.S., July 9, 2018. REUTERS/Leah Millis
    (Reuters) – Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two foreign-born businessmen associated with U.S. President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, were arrested on federal charges they conspired to funnel foreign money to U.S. political candidates, prosecutors said on Thursday.
    Giuliani, who did not return a request for comment, previously said he worked with Parnas and Fruman to get Ukrainian officials to investigate Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden, Trump’s political rival.
    The following lays out some of the allegations against Parnas and Fruman.
– Federal prosecutors in Manhattan say that beginning in 2018, Parnas and Fruman made illegal donations to political candidates.    The donations included a $325,000 contribution to America First Action, a political action committee that supports pro-Trump political candidates, according to an indictment.
    John Dowd, a lawyer for Parnas and Fruman, declined to comment.    Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for the president, told Reuters that “neither the president nor the campaign was aware” of the defendants’ alleged scheme.
– Parnas and Fruman conspired to circumvent federal law by funneling money to political candidates to advance their own financial interests and the political interests of Ukrainian officials, the indictment says.
– In disclosure forms submitted to the U.S. Federal Election Commission, Parnas and Fruman listed the $325,000 contribution to the pro-Trump group as coming from a business called Global Energy Producers (GEP).    Prosecutors say GEP was a shell company with “no real business.”
– Parnas and Fruman deliberately made the contributions in GEP’s name to “hide from creditors that they had access to funding, and to conceal from the public and the FEC their involvement in making these contributions,” according to the indictment.
– Prosecutors said Parnas and Fruman sought the help of a then-sitting congressman to get the U.S. government to remove the then-ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch.    The indictment says the efforts were conducted in part at the request of at least one or more Ukrainian government officials.
– Parnas and Fruman also conspired to funnel donations to state and federal candidates to benefit a planned marijuana business funded by an unnamed Russian businessman.    A co-conspirator said they should hide the foreign national’s role in the business because of “his Russian roots and current political paranoia about it,” according to the indictment.
– Parnas and Fruman were arrested on Wednesday at an airport outside Washington carrying one-way tickets to Vienna.
– A federal magistrate judge in Virginia said Fruman and Parnas could be released and kept in home detention once they each pay a $1 million bond.
– Parnas and Fruman are accused of criminal violations of laws that promote transparency in U.S. elections, as well as conspiracy to defraud the United States.
(Reporting by Jan Wolfe; Editing by Noeleen Walder and Peter Cooney)
[IT IS NOT HARD TO SEE THAT THIS CAME UP AFTER ALL THESE YEARS AND IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE 'DEEP STATE' IS PUSHING THIS ISSUE, BUT BEFORE THIS IS OVER IT WILL BE NOTHING AFTER SLEEPY JOE IS OUT OF THE POLITICAL SCENE].

[THE BELOW ARTICLE LETS YOU KNOW WHY THE DEEP STATE IS TRYING TO ATTACK GIULINI SO MUCH SINCE HE CAME OUT OF THE COLD INVESTIGATIONS
WITH VERY HOT NEWS ISSUES OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATIONS CORRUPT ACTIONS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES
].
10/11/2019 Ukraine Files: Bidens got $17.5 million in racketeering by OAN Newsroom
Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden gestures during a
campaign stop in Manchester, N.H., Wednesday, Oct. 9, 2019. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)
    Rudy Giuliani has sounded the alarm over a new report, suggesting that Joe Biden may have been paid up to $1 million in proceeds of corruption in Ukraine.    In a Wednesday interview, the president’s attorney cited new findings from Ukrainian MP Andriy Derkach.    The report reveals money transfers from Ukrainian energy company Burisma to Rosemont Seneca, the American based firm that represented Biden’s interests in that country.
    Derkach has claimed Biden was paid $900,000 to pressure the Ukrainian government not to investigate the business of Burisma
.
    “I’d like to emphasize — Biden’s fifth visit to Kyiv in December 2015 had the only purpose to get Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin fired because of his probes into Burisma,” said the parliamentarian.
    Giuliani said Hunter Biden, a former board member of Burisma, had close ties to Burisma CEO Mykola Zlochevsky.    Zlochevsky is known to have bribed top officials of the pro-Russian Yanukovych administration in order to expand his business in the country.
    “He’s a major oligarch — he stole $5 billion from his people,” said Giuliani.    “This guy is one of the major criminals of the Ukraine and he’s now walking around free because Joe Biden got the case dismissed.”
    The attorney has confirmed Derkach’s claim that Joe Biden repeatedly pressured the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, who paid Hunter Biden for this protection.    He said this racketeering scheme allegedly enriched the Bidens and other Obama-era officials.
    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky identified former U.S. ambassador Marie Yovanovich as a “bad ambassador” in the July phone call with President Trump.
    “Indeed we are ready to investigate the Burisma case,” said Zelensky.    “It will be a joint investigative team…of American and Ukrainian general prosecutors.”
    Derkach has also claimed Hunter Biden received an additional $16.5 million in proceeds of corruption from Burisma.    Several probes were launched in 2014 to investigate Zlochevsky’s forced acquisitions of assets and the transfers of money to the Bidens.    Each of these inquiries grinded to a halt and were later closed, which Derkach claims happened by request of the U.S. Embassy.
    “Prosecutor General Ryaboshapka said he’s auditing all criminal cases into Burisma, alleged U.S. election meddling and other cases of transnational corruption,” said the MP.    “I am transferring my findings to the prosecutor’s office for a review.”
    Derkach has promised more disclosures on Biden’s activities, saying the documents are now leaking from the highest levels of the Ukrainian government.    Rudy Giuliani has said he will be releasing more of his own findings on the former vice president in the coming days.

10/11/2019 Flashback: Obama administration brushed off concern over Hunter Biden by OAN Newsroom
    A newly resurfaced video shows that Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine were a source of controversy for the previous administration, long before President Trump’s July phone call.
    On Friday, reporters called attention to a State Department press conference held back in 2014.    The department’s former spokesperson was asked if Hunter Biden’s position on the Burisma board could be perceived as a “conflict of interest” or “cronyism.”
    The Obama official denied the allegation and pointed out Biden’s status as a private citizen.    The reporter didn’t appear satisfied with the answer and continued to push the issue.
    “I am wondering if there are concerns from this building about how the Russians and or the Ukrainians would perceive the involvement of a son of the vice president of the United States in this, especially given the situation?” asked the reporter.
    The reply from the official was, “No, there are not.”
    The issue was raised on several other occasions in 2014 when reporters questioned Hunter Biden’s ability to land the job given his inexperience and history of drug abuse.

10/11/2019 Former associate of James Clapper assisted in whistleblower complaint by OAN Newsroom
    New details are painting a clearer picture of the controversial whistleblower and their perceived motive.    A Friday report revealed that an associate of the former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, helped the whistleblower with their complaint.
    Charles McCullough is the attorney who assisted Andrew Bakaj at the beginning of the process.    He was previously the inspector general of the Intelligence Community during the Clinton email scandal.    Critics of the complaint say it makes sense why his former employer has been praising the complaint.
    After leaving the government in 2017, James Clapper became a national security analyst for CNN.    He is allegedly responsible for perpetuating fake news surrounding foreign involvement in the 2016 Election.    Before that, he lied to Congress about government surveillance, claiming that the U.S. did “not wittingly” collect data on millions of Americans.
    McCullough now works at Compass Rose Legal Group and is no longer involved in representing the whistleblower.    Bakaj, the former staffer for Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton, remains on-board.

[Adam Schiff continues to bring persons into his non constitutional Impeachment Inquiry and is not releasing transcripts and only
releasing to the news what they want to just as he did when he created his fake transcript
and as you see below he is still doing that obstruction of the constitution
]

10/12/2019 Washington Post issues op-ed on fake news by OAN Newsroom
    The Washington Post is pushing back against allegations of fake news.    In a Friday op-ed, publisher Fred Ryan said comparing unflattering news to fake news is “corrosive” to the country.    He also said that journalists are the target of calculated attacks around the world.
    Ryan said the truth isn’t always what people want to hear. He explained that presidents have always been at odds with the media, but that hostilities have skyrocketed under President Trump.
    The president took aim at what he’s calling the “fake news media” during his Friday night rally in Louisiana.
    “Fake news media – there they are right there,” he said.    “As soon as I start talking about the fake news, I see those lights go off so fast.”
    President Trump has been in conflict with mainstream media ever since he announced his White House bid.    The Washington Post has been one of his biggest critics.    The president gave the newspaper the nickname the “Amazon Washington Post” after it was purchased by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.
[The Fake News people know who they are or they are too dumb to realize they are the Fake News.].

10/13/2019 Trump calls Giuliani probe ‘shameful’ by Sean Rossman, USA TODAY
    President Donald Trump on Saturday acknowledged news reports that his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani might be under investigation by federal prosecutors, calling the reported probe “shameful.”
    “So now they are after the legendary ‘crime buster’ and greatest Mayor in the history of NYC, Rudy Giuliani,” Trump wrote in a tweet.    “He may seem a little rough around the edges sometimes, but he is also a great guy and wonderful lawyer.    Such a one sided Witch Hunt going on in USA.    Deep State.    Shameful!
    Trump’s comments came after news broke Friday in The New York Times that federal prosecutors are investigating Giuliani for potential lobbying law violations relating to his work in Ukraine.    The Times, citing two anonymous people familiar with the inquiry, reported the investigation focuses on Giuliani’s efforts to “undermine” former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie L. Yovanovitch, who testified before three House committees Friday in the impeachment inquiry of Trump.
    The investigation of Giuliani is also, the Times reports, linked to Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, Ukrainian-born business partners arrested Wednesday in connection with alleged schemes to funnel foreign money to U.S. political campaigns.    Parnas and Fruman helped Giuliani meet former Ukrainian prosecutor Yuri Lutsenko as the president’s personal attorney pushed for an investigation into Trump’s political rival Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
    The impeachment inquiry of Trump, which is tied to the president’s efforts to get Ukraine to investigate political rivals like Biden, has drawn attention to Giuliani and whether his activities in Ukraine violate a federal law that requires Americans who work on behalf of foreign governments to register with the Justice Department.
    Giuliani defended himself against such a crime by saying he was working for Trump, not a foreign government.
    “Look, you can try to contort anything into anything, but if they have any degree of objectivity or fairness, it would be kind of ridiculous to say I was doing it on Lutsenko’s behalf when I was representing the president of the United States,” Giuliani told the Times.
    Representatives for Manhattan U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman did not respond to inquiries from USA TODAY.
    Giuliani said Saturday that he has had no contact with federal prosecutors in Manhattan, but he said any such scrutiny was likely politically motivated.
    “No, nothing but leaks,” Giuliani said.    “It’s a political attack, otherwise why leak it.    If it’s an appropriate law enforcement investigation, you try to keep it secret so the subjects aren’t alerted.”
    A spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York declined to confirm Friday if Giuliani is under investigation, only saying that the investigation into Parnas and Fruman is ongoing.
    Giuliani declined to comment on his dealings with Parnas and Fruman, saying they are his clients and much of their communications are bound by attorney-client privilege
.
Contributing: Kristine Phillips, Kevin Johnson, Bart Jansen and Kevin McCoy.
Federal prosecutors are reportedly investigating Rudy Giuliani for potential lobbying law violations. EVAN VUCCI/AP
[The New York Times failed to state that the two Ukrainian-born suspects are American citizens.].

10/13/2019 Hunter Biden steps down from Chinese-backed firm following corruption claims by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Oct. 11, 2012, file photo, Hunter Biden waits for the start of the his father’s, former Vice President
Joe Biden’s, debate at Centre College in Danville, Ky. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)
    Joe Biden’s son, 49-year-old Hunter Biden, will be leaving his position at a Chinese-backed private equity fund by the end of the month.    The announcement was made in a statement released by his lawyers on Sunday.
    Hunter pledged that he will not work for foreign-owned companies if his father is elected in 2020.    He said he wants to avoid any potential conflicts of interest.
    President Trump continues to call for transparency from Hunter and Joe Biden regarding their business dealings with companies in China and Ukraine.
    “But (I) also insist on transparency from Joe Biden and his son Hunter on the millions of dollars that have been quickly…taken out of Ukraine and China,” the president said recently.    “Millions and millions of dollars (were) taken out very rapidly while he was vice president.”
    During an interview last week, President Trump’s China advisor Michael Pillsbury said he attempted to discuss the Bidens with Chinese officials while visiting Beijing.
    “I’ve never seen them get so secretive in my entire life,” said Pillsbury.    “The Chinese know they don’t want any American probe into what happened with Hunter Biden.”
    Hunter has adamantly denied all allegations of corruption and said he has never discussed foreign business activities with his father.    Hunter said he believes he was acting appropriately and in good faith whenever he engaged in business pursuits.
    “Hunter always understood that his father would be guided…by established U.S. policy, regardless of its effects on Hunter’s professional interests,” read the statement.    “He never anticipated the barrage of false charges against both him and his father by the President of the United States.”
    Allegations of shady business practices have plagued the former vice president and his son for weeks now.    Following a whistleblower complaint over President Trump’s alleged influence in Ukraine, the president said he was looking into potential corruption surrounding the Bidens.
    China’s foreign ministry has said it has “no intention of intervening in the domestic affairs of the United States,” but the president and conservative lawmakers are pushing for an investigation.
    President Trump continues to use Twitter to call attention to the Bidens.
    Trump tweet: “Where’s Hunter?    He has totally disappeared!    Now looks like he has raided and scammed even more countries!    Media is AWOL.”

[WHERE IS HUNTER BIDEN?    WELL HERE WE GO AGAIN AS THE DEEP STATE TRIES TO PROVE THAT THE TRUMP-GIULIANI INVESTIGATION IS INVALID SO DECIDE YOURSELF SINCE BIDEN IS ON TAPE BRAGGING ABOUT FIRING THE PROSECUTOR WHICH IS A 'QUID PRO QUO' OR "THIS FOR THAT" AS YOU MAY NOTICE THAT IS NOT MENTIONED IN THE FOLLOWING ARTCLES OR EVEN SHOWN TO AMERICA ON THE FAKE NEWS CHANNELS].
10/14/2019 Biden’s son will leave Chinese board by Nicholas Wu, USA TODAY
    In a statement released through his attorney Sunday morning, Hunter Biden, son of Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden, said he would resign from the board of a Chinese company and pledged not to serve on boards of foreign companies if his father is elected president.
    Hunter Biden had received criticism from President Donald Trump and Republicans for his work on foreign boards as House Democrats escalated an impeachment inquiry into Trump for pressuring the Ukrainian government into opening an investigation into the Bidens.
    Trump has also said China should investigate Hunter Biden, though the Chinese government has said publicly that it would not.
    USA TODAY has spoken to two dozen leaders and investigators in Ukraine who say Trump’s accusations against Hunter Biden’s work in Ukraine are baseless.
    George Mesires, Biden’s attorney, wrote in a statement posted on Medium that Biden had decided to resign his seat on the board of the Chinese investment firm BHR.    Mesires said Biden had not received any compensation for being on the board, nor did he receive any equity in it while Joe Biden was vice president.
    “To date, Hunter has not received any compensation for being on BHR’s board of directors,” Mesires wrote.    “He has not received any return on his investment; there have been no distributions to BHR shareholders since Hunter obtained his equity interest.    Moreover, Hunter played no role in directing or making BHR’s investments.”
    Mesires said Biden would resign from the BHR board by Oct. 31.
    According to Mesires, “Hunter undertook these business activities independently,” never discussed them with Joe Biden, and “when Hunter engaged in his business pursuits, he believed that he was acting appropriately and in good faith.”
    Biden “never anticipated the barrage of false charges” from Trump, Mesires wrote.
    If Joe Biden were elected president in 2020, Hunter Biden pledged “not to serve on boards of, or work on behalf of, foreign owned companies” and would comply with all ethics and guidelines related to conflicts of interest, Mesires concluded.
    Joe Biden has defended his son on the campaign trail and has said his son would serve a visible role on his 2020 campaign.
    “He’s a fine man.    He’s been through hell,” Joe Biden said in an Oct. 3 interview with the Reno Gazette-Journal, part of the USA TODAY Network.
Hunter Biden’s attorney said he pledged “not to serve on boards of, or work on behalf of, foreign owned
companies
” if his father were elected president in 2020. PABLO MARTINEZ MONSIVAIS/AP FILE

10/14/2019 IN UKRAINE, TRUTH HARD TO PIN DOWN - Conspiracy theories pushed by Trump thrive in the young democracy battling corruption and distrust by Kim Hjelmgaard, USA TODAY
    VODIANE, Ukraine – In a muddy field 5,000 miles from Washington, D.C., are a set of gas wells that extend several thousand feet underground.
    The wells are owned by Burisma, a Ukrainian company registered in Cyprus – a company no one outside the energy industry would have known a month ago.
    Now this place is ground zero for a central claim – one with no credible evidence – in a scandal that has engulfed the Trump administration in an impeachment inquiry: that former Vice President Joe Biden forced the Ukrainian government to fire a prosecutor in order to protect his son Hunter Biden, who served on Burisma’s board.
    Burisma’s gas fields are ringed by woodlands and an assortment of post-Soviet tropes: crumbling factories and farm buildings, babushkas clutching bags of food as they ride bicycles, bored security officials in fatigues who always seem to require permission from a boss who can never be found.
    “There’s no one here who will talk to you.    Now go away,” a guard shouted at the entrance to Burisma’s small office in Vodiane, 300 miles southeast of Kyiv, formerly known as Kiev.
    “Hunter Biden?    Never heard of him,” said Ludmila Rynovaya, 72, a resident of Vodiane’s nearby village.    “We’re pretty good at corruption,” she said.    “We don’t need Americans to help us.”
    Over the course of about a week in Ukraine, the message from two dozen government officials and anti-corruption investigators quickly became clear: The allegations against the Bidens are entirely lacking in evidence.
    But they persist, and not only because Trump and his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, keep repeating them.
    What is true and what is false is exceptionally hard to pin down in this fledgling democracy, one riddled with regulatory loopholes, poor governance and never-ending budget shortages.
    Ukraine is a place of great economic promise, with extensive natural resources and a highly educated, techsavvy workforce.
    But abuses of power and cronyism are rampant, reaching from the highest levels of government to everyday tasks like acquiring a driver’s license, according to more than two dozen Ukrainians interviewed for this story.
    “It’s not really corruption, but more a way of saying, ‘Thank you,’” said Vladimir Grigorishin, 49, a Kyiv resident.
    He’s a customs “broker,” which means he mediates fees between tax officials and private business owners who rely on foreign-made products.    The process involves informally negotiating payments to officials.
    Outside Ukraine, this is known as bribery.    For Grigorishin, it’s business.
‘The whole thing is manufactured’
    There are few, if any, trustworthy voices or credible evidence in Ukraine to back up the allegations peddled by Trump and Giuliani.    Even Trump’s staff has repeatedly warned him the claims are baseless.
    “Rudy Giuliani’s only interest in Ukraine was to push the idea of an investigation into Biden and then push that idea with the American media, to hype it, and to attack Biden’s son ahead of the U.S. election” next year, said Sergii Leshchenko, a former lawmaker who helped spearhead anti-corruption efforts under former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.
    “The whole thing is manufactured for Trump’s political advantage,” said Leshchenko, a former journalist.
    Allegations like this are not uncommon in Ukraine.    Since gaining independence in 1991, the country has struggled to confront corruption and misinformation, said Olexiy Haran, a political scientist at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.
    “After Communism, we’ve had to build a completely new system – all new laws, judges, a constitution.    This has created many legal loopholes,” he said.
    Many hide in plain sight.
    “Speeding tickets are easy to make go away,” said Orest Grigorishin, 23, a Kyiv musician.    He views such activity, officially illicit, as essential to surviving in the faction-ridden country.
    There are more egregious examples.    Some involve people an arm’s length from Trump.
    Yuriy Lutsenko is one of the former Ukrainian prosecutors who, according to a whistleblower’s complaint, peddled a series of baseless claims including the one against the Bidens.
    Lutsenko is a “lawyer” who has no legal training.    He got the job after the law was changed to allow someone without legal qualifications to fill the post.
    He has served jail time for embezzlement and abuse of office.    His supporters claimed the charges were politically motivated. You hear that a lot here.
    “Lutsenko is a crook,” said Daria Kaleniuk, co-founder and executive director of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, a Kyiv-based organization that has led Ukraine’s anti-corruption efforts.    “He basically used the general prosecutor’s office that he headed as a kind of public relations office for himself.”
    Lutsenko did not return multiple requests for comment.
Museum of corruption
    “Ukraine is an extremely good place to be if you’re into making money illegally,” said Sevgil Musaieva, editor of online newspaper Ukrayinska Pravda.
The news outlet published some of the first investigations into Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager.    Manafort is now imprisonedon convictions related to concealing millions of dollars he made in Ukraine.
    His client: former President Viktor Yanukovych, a Kremlin-friendly president who was ousted from office in 2014 and now lives in exile in Russia.    Ukraine convicted him of treason in January.
    Yanukovych abused his office in other ways.    Today, his sumptuous estate outside Kyiv, called Mezhyhirya Residence, has been preserved as a kind of museum of corruption.
    The estate is furnished in a manner that calls to mind the decadent court of France’s King Louis XIV.    Visitors can marvel at its former zoo, pier for yachts, helipad, tennis court, horse stables, rare-breed dog kennel, boxing ring, fleet of vintage cars, spa and shooting range.
    “Here, you can stand and look over your empire like a real czar,” a visitor remarked as he surveyed the view of the Dnieper River from the balcony of one of the master bedrooms.
    That’s partly where Hunter Biden comes in, according to Kaleniuk of the Anti-Corruption Action Center – not as an example of American corruption, but of Ukrainian reputation management.
    Biden joined Burisma’s board after Yanukovych’s ouster, when some Ukrainian companies tried to distance themselves from pro-Moscow authorities.    They asked Westerners and other highprofile figures to sit on their boards.
    “Ukraine is full of (people) who acquire wealth illegally through their connections to politics,” Kaleniuk said.    “Then they try to whitewash this wealth and their reputations with the help of an army of Western lawyers and public relations types.” Burisma, Ukraine’s largest private natural-gas company, is owned by Mykola Zlochevsky.    He served in Yanukovych’s government and has been at the center of multiple corruption cases.
    “I’m not sure that (Hunter) Biden understood the environment he was getting into” when he agreed to serve on Burisma’s board, Musaieva said.
    Hazy allegations float from Ukraine to the U.S. Trump and Giuliani have been pushing unsubstantiated allegations that Joe Biden sought to help his son by persuading the Ukrainian government to dismiss a general prosecutor named Viktor Shokin.
    In 2014, Shokin began investigating Burisma for money laundering and tax irregularities.
    Hunter Biden joined Burisma’s board that same year and was reportedly paid about $50,000 a month.
    The core allegation from Trump and Giuliani is that Joe Biden intervened to have Shokin fired in order to halt a criminal investigation into Burisma.    To help his son’s business interests, essentially.
    But no one who spoke with USA TODAY said those allegations have any merit, and no credible evidence has emerged to support them – though several experts said it seems clear Hunter Biden got the job because of his name.
    Hunter Biden wasn’t the subject of the probe, according to Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau, an independent government agency that has worked closely with the FBI.
    No one disputes that Joe Biden wanted Shokin, the prosecutor, fired.    Outside the country, he was viewed as corrupt.
    “The pressure to remove Shokin did not just come from Biden,” said Pavlo Klimkin, Ukraine’s minister of foreign affairs in Poroshenko’s administration.    “The pressure also came from the European Union and others. I know. I was in the meetings about this.”
Reliability questioned
    Giuliani has appeared on cable TV news shows in the U.S. waving an affidavit signed by Shokin, the prosecutor whom Biden has boasted of forcing out.    In it, Shokin says he was fired in 2016 because he was leading a “wide-ranging corruption investigation” into Burisma.
    Vitali Kasko, deputy to the new general prosecutor, has a simple response: “Shokin is not a reliable figure.”    Kasko once worked for Shokin but resigned, citing Shokin’s total “lawlessness.”
    Shokin did not to respond to multiple requests for comment.
    Besides Shokin, Giuliani enlisted the help of Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas, Florida-based associates with family and business connections to Ukraine.    They worked to dig up dirt on the Bidens and Hillary Clinton, according to their own admission.
    Fruman and Parnas were arrested last week on campaign-finance charges, accused of funneling “foreign money” for candidates and campaigns.     The charges don’t appear related to work they were doing on behalf of Giuliani.
    The two set up meetings for Giuliani with Ukrainian officials.    Meanwhile, according to published reports, they pushed business plans related to the natural gas industry.
    “It doesn’t matter who in Ukraine tells you what – a lawyer, a politician, media, someone in business.    They are either lying to you or at the very least trying to confuse you,” said Oleksandr Techynskyi.    His 2014 documentary “All Things Ablaze” chronicles the revolution that led to Yanukovych’s ouster.
‘These prosecutors are politicians’
    Lutsenko, who succeeded Shokin as Ukraine’s general prosecutor, is another one of Giuliani’s sources.
    Lutsenko has turned out to be another unreliable narrator, according to several Ukrainian officials.    In March, he started making false claims in opinion articles published in The Hill, a U.S. political news website.
    His claims should sound familiar.    Among them: that Joe Biden pressured Poroshenko to fire Shokin in order to quash a criminal probe into Burisma.    That the former U.S. ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, obstructed Ukrainian authorities’ pursuit of corruption cases.
.     No credible evidence has emerged to back up either allegation.
    The Ukraine office of Transparency International, a Berlin-based corruption monitoring group, said it valued Yovanovitch’s help fighting corruption.    But Trump unceremoniously pulled her out of Ukraine in May.
    “The best way to think about this is that these prosecutors are politicians,” said Aubrey Belford, an editor for the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project in Ukraine.
    Before Lutsenko lost his job in August, he implied he was receptive to reopening the investigation into Burisma.    Since then, Lutsenko has said in interviews he knows of no evidence linking the Bidens to wrongdoing.
    Now he, too, is under investigation, for protecting illegal casinos in Ukraine.    He denies it.
    Two countries led by TV stars.
    Like Trump, Ukraine’s president has spent time in the world of entertainment – and like his U.S. counterpart, he has parlayed this into a political career.
    Zelensky starred in a sitcom about an idealistic teacher who is propelled to the presidency after his students film him railing against corruption.    In the show, called “Servant of the People,” the video goes viral and a political star is born.
    The real-life version is not that different.    Zelensky ran on an anti-corruption platform and named his political party “Servant of the People.”
    Like Trump, Zelensky is not without controversy.    He has close ties to Igor Kolomoisky, a Ukrainian oligarch accused of siphoning about $5 billion from a bank Ukraine nationalized in 2016.    Kolomoisky is the owner of the TV network that aired “Servant of the People.”
    Anastasiya Kozlovtseva, of Transparency International’s Ukraine office, said Zelensky’s choice for general prosecutor is encouraging because he is an experienced and credible anti-corruption campaigner.    “But we’re waiting to see how Zelensky deals with his ties to Kolomoisky,” she said.
    Trump’s scandal is not Zelensky’s biggest problem.    Ukraine is fighting a war with Russia that has claimed 13,000 lives, displaced 1.5 million people and led to Ukraine ceding parts of its territory to the region’s superpower.
    “There’s a danger we could sign a weak peace deal with Russia that would bring us closer to Putin’s orbit,” said Haran, the political scientist.
    And then there is the matter of Zelensky delivering on his campaign promise to end Ukraine’s culture of corruption.
    Many politicians have been elected on similar promises, only to be replaced by others who promise it, too.    Meanwhile, reformers are regularly threatened and accused of wrongdoing.
    “We wanted to drain the swamp here in our country,” Zelensky told Trump in their July call.    “We brought in many new people. Not the typical politicians, because we want to have a new type.    A new type of government.    You are a great teacher for us in that regard.”
Heavy machinery owned by Burisma, a Ukrainian natural-gas company linked to an impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.
Former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych's estate outside Kyiv is now a museum of corruption. PHOTOS BY ANATOLY SOKOLOV FOR USA TODAY
SPENCER HOLLADAY/USA TODAY NETWORK, AND EPA-EFE, GETTY IMAGES

10/17/2019 Schiff: President Trump asking Ukraine to probe CrowdStrike was political by OAN Newsroom
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, of Calif., leaves a closed door meeting where
Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, testifies as part of the House impeachment inquiry into
President Donald Trump, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 17, 2019. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
    House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff is ramping up attacks against President Trump.    On Thursday, Schiff claimed the president was wrong to ask Ukraine to investigate the so called ‘CrowdStrike controversy,’ which revolves around Ukraine’s suspected role in alleged meddling in the 2016 elections.
    “I hope that every member, Democrat and Republican, will speak out and condemn this illicit action by the president,” said Schiff.
    White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney has said the president did nothing wrong by linking the Ukraine military aid to ongoing Justice Department investigations.    Schiff is disputing this assertion.
    “Military aid to a vital ally…was withheld, in part, out of a desire by the president to have Ukraine investigate the DNC server or Democrats of 2016,” he said.    “Things have just gone from very, very bad too much, much worse.”
    Schiff claimed President Trump’s request served the political purpose of boosting his 2020 reelection campaign.    White House officials have said ongoing DOJ probes are not political unless they could reveal massive wrongdoing by Democrats back in 2016.
[Well you can tell the Dems are getting desperate to find a quid pro quo and trying to stop an investigation into the corruption by his own party.    And they seem to be scared of the investigation of Crowdstrike, which tells me they are hiding something and I would guess Trump's investigators have already discovered the information.].

10/18/2019 Report: diplomat rebuffed in 2015 after warning Biden staff about Ukraine optics by OAN Newsroom
A career diplomat who oversaw Ukraine policy during the Obama administration, reportedly raised concerns about Hunter Biden’s board position in Ukraine back in 2015.
   
Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks at the 2019 Democratic
women’s leadership forum, Thursday, Oct. 17, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
    Behind closed doors this week, George Kent told Congressional investigators he was turned away by a Biden staffer, when he tried to warn that Ukrainian officials saw Hunter as a tool to gain influence with his father.
    The staffer allegedly brushed him off, saying Biden did not have the “bandwidth” to deal with Kent’s concerns, since his son Beau was battling cancer at the time.
    This after Kent said Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney told him to “lay low” from Ukraine, when Kent filed a complaint about Rudy Giuliani.

10/18/2019 Clinton probe: State Department found 588 violations by 38 people involved by OAN Newsroom
Hillary Clinton listens during a lecture on foreign policy at Rackham Auditorium,
Thursday, Oct. 10, 2019 in Ann Arbor, Mich.(Jacob Hamilton/Ann Arbor News via AP)
    The State Department has concluded its investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server.    A Friday report claimed there are nearly 600 security incidents that violated agency policies.
38 individuals were found to be culpable for 91 security violations and will soon face disciplinary action.        Another 497 violations occurred without attribution to the individuals responsible
.
    The investigation was looking into whether Clinton’s use of a private server failed to properly safeguard classified information.    Clinton submitted over 30,000 emails for review after the State Department found top secret content in a handful of her correspondences.
    Back in 2016, former FBI Director James Comey called the conduct “extremely careless,” but fell short of recommending charges against the former presidential candidate.
    “Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” said Comey.    “Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors,…like the strength of the evidence — especially regarding intent.”
    In the latest probe, investigators determined Clinton’s conduct represented an increased degree of risk to the State Department.    However, they emphasized there was “no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information.”
[LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP, LOCK HER UP …….]

10/18/2019 EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland testifies before House committees by OAN Newsroom
US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland arriving at the US Capitol
in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 17, 2019. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
    The U.S. ambassador to the European Union testified Thursday before Congress as part of the Democrat impeachment inquiry.    In his opening statement, Gordon Sondland said President Trump repeatedly told him “no quid pro quos” regarding Ukraine negotiations.    He said he took the president at his word that U.S. requests directed at Ukrainian officials were appropriate.
    Sondland stated he would not have recommended “Rudy Giuliani — or any private citizen — be involved in these foreign policy matters” but worked with him at President Trump’s request.    Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney told reporters Thursday that it’s the president’s prerogative if he wants Giuliani as the point person on Ukraine policy.
    “That’s the president’s call,” emphasized Mulvaney.    “It’s not illegal, it’s not impeachable — the president gets to use who he wants to use.”
    Sondland has said Giuliani, Energy Secretary Rick Perry, envoy Kurt Volker and himself set in motion efforts to get Ukraine to investigate Burisma and the 2016 election.    He said, at the time, he was unaware that the Ukrainian gas firm was tied to Hunter Biden.    He also said he had no knowledge President Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine as a means to leverage the country’s response.
    Reports have claimed some lawmakers were skeptical of Sondland’s testimony. Some said it appeared the ambassador was shifting blame to the White House after many of the witnesses implicated him as a key figure in the Ukraine saga.    The ambassador also reportedly had many moments where he could not recall aspects of some events.
    His testimony lasted for over nine hours and comes after the State Department initially blocked him from appearing before Congress last week.    The EU ambassador was then compelled to show after the Democrats issued him a subpoena.

10/19/2019 2 plead not guilty to conspiring with Giuliani associates
    NEW YORK – Two businessmen pleaded not guilty Thursday to conspiring with associates of Rudy Giuliani to make illegal campaign contributions, as a prosecutor said evidence includes data from over 50 bank accounts and information gathered through 10 search warrants.    David Correia and Andrey Kukushkin are among four men charged with using straw donors to make illegal contributions to politicians they thought could help them, including committees supporting President Donald Trump and other Republicans.

10/20/2019 Impeachment Inquiry: House will hold open hearings ‘eventually’ by OAN Newsroom
Michael McKinley, the former top aide to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, leaves following a joint interview with
the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and House Committee on
Oversight and Reform on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 16, 2019. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
    GOP Congressman Will Hurd is questioning why the House Intelligence Committee is the one spearheading the ongoing impeachment inquiry.    In a Sunday interview, the Texas lawmaker said when it comes to a so-called quid pro quo, he hasn’t heard from any Ukrainian officials who feel like that was the arrangement.
    He said even if that was the expectation, there’s nothing indicating it was an investigation of the previous election or to get dirt for 2020.    Hurd also said no one from the State Department hinted at some kind of a deal either.
    “In this case let’s say Ukraine — if they hear something, they’re going to go to their contacts at the embassy and say, ‘hey what does this actually mean?’” he explained.    “We haven’t gotten any whiff of that when it comes to this issue.”
    Hurd went on to ask why the Intelligence Committee is looking at the issue when they should be looking at the intelligence the U.S. had on Turkey.    He said the whole inquiry is not even an inquiry at all — just regular oversight hearings.     The panels conducting the investigation have been criticized for their closed door proceedings, which Republican congressmen like Andy Biggs and Matt Gaetz have been excluded from.    The Freedom Caucus Chairman has since accused Democrats of leaking information to control the narrative.
    “If you were to have a formal impeachment inquiry, you wouldn’t be having Soviet style secret hearings,” said Biggs.    “Normally every member of Congress can go into any committee hearing that’s ongoing — You can’t do that here, because we’re not allowed in.”
From left, Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa., Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz.,
Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz., and Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, pose for a group photo on Capitol Hill in Washington,
Wednesday, Oct. 16, 2019, outside the room where people are interviewed for the impeachment inquiry. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
    Democrat Congressman Jim Himes said Sunday that the House Intelligence Committee will hold open hearings on impeachment eventually.    Himes argued the pace of the investigation makes it difficult to give an exact timetable for when those hearings will be opened to the public.
    The congressman also spoke out on why Democrats have lacked transparency in their investigation.     “(During) the previous impeachment inquiries of Nixon and of Clinton, the Congress was handed a fully done investigation,” explained Himes.    “We’re doing that now, and an investigation doesn’t happen in the light of day.”
    Himes also said Democrats could still proceed with their investigation without questioning Rudy Giuliani, who has defied a House subpoena.

10/20/2019 Report: Ukraine whistleblower has ties to Rep. Schiff’s staffers by OAN Newsroom
    The identity of the whistleblower at the heart of the Ukraine story is still in question, but a new name has been floated around in D.C. circles.    One America’s Chanel Rion has more from the White House.
    As to the above subject the following was found at http://hopelesslypartisan.com/is-the-whistleblower-a-biden-associate-named-eric-ciaramella/
10/11/2019 IS THE “WHISTLEBLOWER” A BIDEN ASSOCIATE NAMED ERIC CIARAMELLA? by Ken Berwitz
    Reports are now circulating – this one via Rob Crilly, Steven Nelson and David M. Drucker’s article for the Washington Examiner – that the “whistleblower” who claimed President Trump made an improper call to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, is a Joe Biden operative:
    The 2020 Democratic candidate with whom the CIA whistleblower had a “professional” tie is Joe Biden, according to intelligence officers and former White House officials.
    Lawyers for the whistleblower said he had worked only “in the executive branch.”    The Washington Examiner has established that he is a career CIA analyst who was detailed to the National Security Council at the White House and has since left.    On Sept. 26, the New York Times reported that he was a CIA officer.    On Oct. 4, the newspaper added that he “was detailed to the National Security Council at one point.”
    A retired CIA officer told the Washington Examiner, “From everything we know about the whistleblower and his work in the executive branch then, there is absolutely no doubt he would have been working with Biden when he was vice president.”
    Is this true?    From one report alone, which does not contain hard evidence but only speculation, we do not know.
    But other sources – none of which I’m familiar with, so I’m not attributing them here – are claiming to know, specifically, who the “whistleblower” is:
    His name is Eric Ciaramella – a former assistant to National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster and dedicated anti-Trumper.
    Let me be very clear about this.    I do NOT know if this is true.    I do NOT know if the “whistleblower” is Eric Ciaramella.
    And, it should be pointed out, I also do not know what difference it makes, at this point, who the “whistleblower” is anyway – since, when President Trump released the transcript of his conversation, so we all know what he and President Zelensky discussed, he made the issue moot.
    But, for whatever it’s worth, there it is.
    Now let’s see which mainstream media, if any, confirm or debunk any of the above information.
[I still think it is Dan Coats, the future will tell and note that the WHOLE INTERNET has been scrubbed of any photo/image of Eric Ciaramella.].

10/21/2019 WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, minus beard, appears in London court
Demonstrators hold banners during a protest outside of Westminster Magistrates Court, where a case management hearing in the
U.S. extradition case of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is held, in London, Britain, October 21, 2019. REUTERS/Hannah McKay
    LONDON (Reuters) – WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange appeared in a London court on Monday for a hearing on whether he should be extradited to the United States to face spying charges.
    Assange, dressed in a navy suit and light blue jumper, raised his fist to supporters in the public gallery.    He was cleanly shaven in contrast to the long beard he had grown while holed up in Ecuador’s embassy.
    Assange, 48, faces 18 counts in the U.S. including conspiring to hack government computers and violating an espionage law.    He could spend decades in prison if convicted.
    Australian-born Assange made international headlines in early 2010 when WikiLeaks published a classified U.S. military video showing a 2007 attack by Apache helicopters in Baghdad that killed a dozen people, including two Reuters news staff.
    Admirers have hailed Assange as a hero for exposing what they describe as abuse of power by modern states and for championing free speech.
    His detractors have painted him as a dangerous figure complicit in Russian efforts to undermine the West and U.S. security, and dispute that he is a journalist.
    WikiLeaks angered Washington by publishing hundreds of thousands of secret U.S. diplomatic cables that laid bare critical U.S. appraisals of world leaders, from Russian President Vladimir Putin to members of the Saudi royal family.
    In 2012, he took refuge in Ecuador’s London embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden where he was accused of sex crimes which he denied, saying he believed he would ultimately be sent on to the United Sates.
    He was dragged from the embassy in April after seven years and given a 50-week jail term for skipping bail.    That sentence was completed but he remains in prison while his extradition case continues.
(Reporting by Andrew MacAskill; writing by Guy Faulconbridge; editing by Alistair Smout)

10/22/2019 Wikileaks founder Assange loses bid to delay hearing
    LONDON – WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange appeared in a U.K. court Monday to fight extradition to the United States on espionage charges, and he lost a bid to delay proceedings so that his legal team would have more time to prepare his case.    Assange and his legal team failed to convince District Judge Vanessa Baraitser that a delay in the already slow-moving case was justified.    The full extradition hearing is still set for five days in late February, with interim hearings in November and December.

10/22/2019 Rep. Schiff’s witness connections raise allegations of being compromised by OAN Newsroom
House Intelligence Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., arrives on Capitol Hill for the interview with U.S. Ambassador
to the European Union Gordon Sondland as part of the impeachment inquiry. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
    The star witness in Democrats’ impeachment effort is given preferential treatment behind closed doors, but is cross-examined by the press.    Reports on Monday detailed how Fiona Hill is being used in chairman Adam Schiff’s campaign against the president.
    The former adviser wasn’t even working at the White House during the infamous July 25th phone call with the Ukrainian president.    Not only did she not have first-hand knowledge of the call, but her resume shows she worked for the George Soros-funded Open Society Institute for six years.
    While speaking outside of Hill’s closed-door testimony last week, Representative Jim Jordan raised concerns about the secrecy of the process.
    The secrecy of the hearing is problematic for Republicans, largely because of Hill’s conflicts.    She has questionable publications for the left-leaning outlet Vox as well as ties to figures such as Joseph Mifsud, Christopher Steele, Bruce and Nellie Ohr.
Former White House advisor on Russia, Fiona Hill, leaves Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, Oct. 14, 2019, after testifying
before congressional lawmakers as part of the House impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

[THE SHIFTY SCHIFF FAKE NEWS CONTINUES WITH BITS AND PIECES TO THE PRESS BUT NO REAL MEAT ON THE BONES OF THIS SKELETON THAT
THE DEMOCRATS ARE TRYING TO BUILD.    YOU CANNOT HAVE A "QUID PRO QUO" THIS FOR THAT WITHOUT A "QUO" A THAT
.]
10/23/2019 Ukraine envoy testifies in impeachment probe by Nicholas Wu and Bart Jansen, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – Allies of President Donald Trump made clear to Ukraine last summer that the release of military aid for the country would be contingent on whether it opened an investigation into an energy company that employed former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter, a senior diplomat told lawmakers Tuesday in the House impeachment inquiry.
    Bill Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat to Ukraine, said in his opening statement, obtained by The Associated Press, that he was “alarmed” by the linking of aid to investigations of Trump’s Democratic rival Joe Biden.
    Taylor said the demand was relayed to him by Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union and a key Trump ally, during a phone call the two had. Sondland discussed Trump’s interest in seeing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky make a public announcement about a probe into Burisma, the energy company that employed Hunter Biden as a member of its board of directors.
    “During that phone call, Ambassador Sondland told me that President Trump had told him that he wants President Zelensky to state publicly that Ukraine will investigate Burisma and alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 U.S. election,” Taylor said.
    Taylor said it was made clear to him that if Ukraine did not agree to the investigation, there would be a “stalemate” over the nearly $400 million in military aid that Congress had approved for Ukraine’s efforts to fend off Russian military aggression.
.     “I understood the ‘stalemate’ to mean that Ukraine would not receive the much-needed military assistance,” Taylor said.    “Ambassador Sondland said that this conversation concluded with President Zelensky agreeing to make a public statement in an interview with CNN.”
    Democrats on the three House committees investigating Trump’s dealings with Ukraine – Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, and Oversight and Reform – called Taylor’s opening statement “explosive” and “a direct line” between Trump’s demand for an investigation and the withholding of military aid.
    “He drew a very direct line in the series of events he described between President Trump’s decision to withhold funds and refuse a meeting with Zelensky unless there was a public pronouncement by him of investigations of Burisma,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla.    “I do not know how you would listen to today’s testimony by Ambassador Taylor and draw any other conclusion except that the president abused his power.”
    Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., and some other members gasped and sighed during Taylor’s opening remarks.    Lieu said, “In my mind, I kept saying wow, wow, wow.”    Rep. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., called it “explosive.”    Rep. Tom Malinowski, DN. J., described it as “juicy.”    Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., said it was “a code red.”
    “This is my most disturbing day in Congress so far, very troubling words,” said Rep. Andy Levin, D-Mich., who has held the seat for 10 months.
    Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., said the House inquiry may need to “revisit previous witnesses” because Taylor’s testimony shed new light on them.    Taylor also appeared to keep notes on his correspondence.
    “He referenced personal notes that he keeps,” said Lynch.    “You know, I don’t want to get into this testimony, but he indicated that he kept extensive notes on all of this.”
    But Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., said there was “nothing new here, I think.” Rep Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, slammed Democrats as “going out and leaking everything,” though he did not comment when asked if the leaks were wrong.
    “This is my most disturbing day in Congress so far, very troubling words.” Rep. Andy Levin, D-Mich.
[A news leak is the unsanctioned release of confidential information to news media.    It can also be the premature publication of information by a news outlet, of information that it has agreed not to release before a specified time, in violation of a news embargo.    So are Democrats and Adam Schiff in violation?    Of course in this fake Impeachmnet Inquiry which is not in our Constitution and even is violating it!    But all they are doing will not see the day of light if they actually do a real Impeachment that requires Congress to vote.].

10/24/2019 Report: Rudy Giuliani seeking defense attorney by OAN Newsroom
FILE – Rudy Giuliani, an attorney for President Donald Trump, speaks in Portsmouth, N.H. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File)
    Rudy Giuliani is reportedly seeking out a new defense attorney.    He broke his days-long media silence in a tweet Wednesday, where he said everything he did was was to protect his client, President Trump, against false charges despite the fake news.    Giuliani then said the Democrats don’t believe the president has rights.
    This comes as reports say he is shopping around for a new defense attorney in light of a reported federal investigation into his foreign business ties.
    Two of Giuliani’s other client’s, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, pleaded not guilty to campaign finance violations related to Giuliani’s dealings overseas on Wednesday.    Giuliani has denied knowing anything about their alleged actions.
    “Many false things have been said about me and my family in the press and media recently,” stated Parnas.    “I look forward to defending myself vigorously in court, and I’m certain that in time the truth will be revealed and I will be vindicated.”
This combination of Oct. 9, 2019, photos provided by the Alexandria Sheriff’s Office shows booking photos
of Lev Parnas, left, and Igor Fruman. The two business associates of Rudy Giuliani are due in a
New York City court in their campaign finance case. (Alexandria Sheriff’s Office via AP, File)

10/24/2019 Department of Justice launches criminal investigation into Russia probe by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Thursday, April 18, 2019, file photo, a sign for the Department of Justice hangs in the
press briefing room at the Justice Department, in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, File)
    The Department Justice is opening a criminal investigation into its own Russia probe.    A new report from The New York Times said officials have shifted the Russia investigation overseen by Attorney General Barr from an “administrative review” into a criminal investigation.
    The move gives U.S. attorney John Durham the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents.    DOJ rules state that a criminal inquiry can only be undertaken after finding a “reasonable indication” of wrongdoing.    The intent of the investigation will be to uncover the origin of the Russia probe, but it is not clear what potential crime Durham is investigating or what prompted the inquiry.
    This comes after Special Counsel Robert Mueller III closed the official investigation months ago.
    This story is developing, please check back later for more details.
[I am glad to see that the day is finally here for someone to put the former Obama administration and their corruption to be brought out into the light as it already smells to the high heaven as it has been rotting all over the fake news and we expect to see that justice will be done and the truth will set all back to its right place.    I can already imagine that the lower fish in this sea will be ratting on their superiors and visa versa to their minions, and I can guarantee the DEEP STATE will have all the Democrats have demonstrations against all the claims.    Stay tuned for the clearing out of the SWAMP as the FISA-UnderSurveillance corruption comes out into the sunshine.].

10/25/2019 Russian agent Butina to be freed from U.S. prison, awaits deportation by Sarah N. Lynch
FILE PHOTO: Maria Butina appears in a police booking photograph released by the Alexandria Sheriff's Office
in Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. August 18, 2018. Alexandria Sheriff's Office/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Convicted Russian agent Maria Butina is set to be released from a Florida prison on Friday after serving most of her 18-month sentence for conspiring to influence U.S. conservative activists and infiltrate the National Rifle Association, and is expected to be quickly deported to her native country.
    Butina, 31, had been scheduled for release from the low-security prison in Tallahassee in early November, but a change in federal law moved up her release date based on credit for good behavior, her attorney Robert Driscoll said.    She is expected to be taken into custody by U.S immigration authorities immediately after being released to be deported, Driscoll added.
    Russian President Vladimir Putin has previously expressed “outrage” over Butina’s prison sentence and said she did not carry out any orders from Russian security services.
    Butina, a former graduate student at American University in Washington who publicly advocated for gun rights, pleaded guilty in December to one count of conspiring to act as a foreign agent and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors.
    The Siberia native admitted to conspiring with a Russian official and two Americans to infiltrate the NRA, the powerful gun rights group closely aligned with U.S. conservatives and Republican politicians including President Donald Trump, and create unofficial lines of communication to try to shape Washington’s policy toward Moscow.
    Her 18-month sentence included nine months she spent incarcerated after her July 2018 arrest.
    Butina’s case was separate from former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, which detailed numerous contacts between Trump’s campaign and Russia.    Her activities occurred during the same period as the contacts investigated by Mueller.
    The Russian official with whom Butina conspired was later identified as Alexander Torshin, a deputy governor of Russia’s central bank.    He was never charged in the case, but was hit with sanctions by the U.S. Treasury Department.
    One of the two Americans referenced in her case was conservative political activist Paul Erickson, her boyfriend.    Erickson was not charged for his links to Butina, but was indicted on unrelated wire fraud and money laundering charges in South Dakota.    The case against Erickson is still pending.
    In addition, Overstock.com Chief Executive Officer Patrick Byrne resigned in August after confirming a report by Fox News contributor Sara Carter that he also had an intimate relationship with Butina.
    Federal prosecutors have said Butina did not engage in “traditional” spy craft, but worked behind the scenes to make inroads in conservative political circles and promote friendlier U.S.-Russian relations.    She arranged dinners in Washington and New York and attended events to meet prominent politicians.
    Butina in 2015 appeared at a Trump campaign event and asked him a question about whether he wanted better relations with Russia.    Trump responded by telling Butina that he would “get along very nicely with Putin.”
    Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs last year accused the United States of forcing Butina to make a false confession to “absolutely ridiculous charges” of being a Russian agent.
    “It’s not clear what she was convicted of or what crime she committed,” Putin said in April.    “I think it’s a prime example of ‘saving face.’    They arrested her and put the girl in jail.    But there was nothing on her, so in order not to look totally stupid they gave her, fixed her up, with an 18-month sentence to show that she was guilty of something.”
(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; Editing by Will Dunham)

10/25/2019 Russia expects woman convicted by U.S. of being agent home on Saturday
FILE PHOTO: Maria Butina appears in a police booking photograph released by the Alexandria Sheriff's Office in
Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. August 18, 2018. Alexandria Sheriff's Office/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo
    MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russian national Maria Butina, who was jailed in the United States in April after admitting to working as a Russian agent, will be released from a U.S. prison on Friday and arrive back in Moscow the next day, Russia’s foreign ministry said.
    Butina pleaded guilty in December last year to one count of conspiring to act as a foreign agent for Russia, prompting Moscow to accuse Washington of forcing her to confess to what it described as ridiculous charges.
    The case has been an irritant in fraught relations between Moscow and Washington that are strained over everything from Syria to the arrest in Moscow of Paul Whelan, a former U.S. Marine held on spying charges that he denies.
    Butina, who was arrested in July 2018, was sentenced to 18 months in prison in April after she expressed remorse for conspiring with a Russian official to infiltrate a gun rights group and influence U.S. conservative activists and Republicans.
    The 30-year-old Siberian native will be transferred from a federal prison in Tallahassee, Florida before being taken to Miami from where she will fly to Moscow, Russia’s foreign ministry said in a statement on Friday.
(Reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin and Andrey Kuzmin; Writing by Tom Balmforth; Editing by Andrew Osborn)

JUSTICE IS COMING AND THE SUSPECTS ARE ALREADY LAWYERING UP AND ON TELEVISION DENYING THEIR CRIMES
10/25/2019 Dept. of Justice’s probe into the Russia hoax turns into criminal investigation by OAN Newsroom
    Attorney General William Barr’s probe into the origins of the Russia investigation is turning into a criminal case.    The change reportedly allows U.S. attorney John Durham, who was chosen by Barr to lead the probe, to subpoena documents as well as witness testimonies and to file criminal charges if necessary.    This comes after reports last week said Barr was expanding the investigation after Durham found something “significant:”    However, it’s still not clear what exactly prompted the switch.
    The probe was first launched in May as an administrative review into the origins of the Russia hoax.    President Trump has repeatedly denounced former special council Robert Mueller’s Russia probe by calling it a “witch hunt” and a “hoax.”    When asked whether he prompted the attorney general to open the investigation, however, the president said he hadn’t, but also said he appreciates Barr’s work.
    “No, I didn’t ask him to do that…but, I think it’s a great thing that he did it,” he stated.    “It was the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the people of this country.”
Attorney General William Barr, center, and Vice President Mike Pence, left of Barr, attend a Cabinet meeting in the
Cabinet Room of the White House, Monday, Oct. 21, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
    According to reports, Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s upcoming report on possible surveillance abuses by the Obama-era FBI against President Trump’s 2016 campaign will also contain an update on why this inquiry is turning into a criminal probe.
    Meanwhile, Durham has reportedly expressed interest in investigating former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan, who were in charge while the since-debunked Steele dossier was released.    This led to the secret surveillance of Trump campaign officials in 2016.
    It was recently reported that multiple CIA officials have pursued legal council because of Durham’s legal review.    Horowitz has said his report will be released in the near future.

10/25/2019 James Clapper reacts to reports of Justice Dept. criminal probe by OAN Newsroom
Former National Intelligence Director James Clapper is pictured.(J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)
    Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is in disbelief that the Department of Justice has opened a criminal inquiry into how the Russia probe was carried out.
    During an appearance on CNN Thursday, Clapper said he just learned about the investigation as the mainstream outlets broke the story.    He immediately questioned the timing of the probe, and speculated the public reporting of the inquiry as politically motivated.    The former Obama-era official then questioned what aspects of the investigation was connected with potential criminal conduct.
    Clapper has been a target of President Trump’s anger as the former director helped lead the investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign.
    Clapper then said he doesn’t know what anyone did during the Russia probe that would rise to the level of criminal activity.

10/25/2019 Maria Butina released from Fla. prison to be deported back to Moscow by OAN Newsroom
    An alleged Russian operative is being deported back to Moscow after she was released from prison early on good behavior.    Maria Butina left the Florida prison on Friday, where she had served more than 15 months of her 18 month sentence.
NEW:     Maria Butina, who was convicted of crimes relating to the 2016 presidential election, has been released from prison and is expected to be deported back to Russia. — Stephanie Myers (@_StephanieMyers) October 25, 2019
    Butina pleaded guilty last year to being a foreign agent and trying to infiltrate conservative political circles and the National Rifle Association (NRA).    During her trial, prosecutors said Butina would attend gun rights events before and after the 2016 election in order to establish unofficial lines of communication to promote Russian interests in U.S. policy.
FILE – In this April 21, 2013 file photo, Maria Butina, leader of a pro-gun organization in Russia, speaks to a
crowd during a rally in support of legalizing the possession of handguns in Moscow, Russia. (AP Photo/File)
    “I am in my industry because I think freedom is very important and the basis of any freedom is, of course, gun rights…and I would like to know more and bring this knowledge to Russia,” stated the alleged Russian agent.    “I’m traveling from Moscow, from Russia, and I hope it will be useful for my country.”
    Russian President Vladimir Putin has denied that Butina is a Russian operative, and claimed the U.S. forced her confession. U.S. immigration agents are set to escort Butina from Miami to Moscow, where she intends to return to her hometown in Siberia.

10/25/2019 Michael Flynn’s legal team drops evidence of alleged FBI entrapment by OAN Newsroom
Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, leaves the federal court following a status
conference with Judge Emmet Sullivan, in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2019. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
    Michael Flynn’s legal team is piecing together a damning timeline of events, which could prove the FBI entrapped him into a guilty plea.    The case against the former National Security adviser lost credibility this week as the retired army general’s attorney Sidney Powell filed a 37-page motion in court Thursday.
    A mostly un-redacted version of the filing was made public Friday and may prove the defense’s allegation of an ambush against Flynn by the FBI.    Drawing from the text messages sent between FBI love birds Peter Strzok and Lisa Page in January of 2017, Powell noted that Strzok said “now that this is out, we can use it as a pretext to go interview some people.”    That was in reference to news first breaking about the existence of the Steele Dossier.
    Powell went on to describe the “many meetings” between Strzok and former DBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.    The two reportedly discussed what interview strategies they wanted to use on Flynn.    The day before the interview, the pair spoke to other high-ranking members of the agency — including James Baker and Lisa Page — about how they could keep Flynn relaxed and unaware that he was being talked to in connection with a criminal investigation.
FILE – In this July 12, 2018 file photo, FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok is seated to testify before the the
House Committees on the Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform during a hearing in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
    Powell has said none of this information was available to Flynn before he made his guilty plea to the Special Counsel.    She also noted that within days of Flynn’s decision, those who had pushed behind the scenes for his prosecution were reportedly demoted or forced to resign.    Shortly after, news broke of Strzok and Page’s affair and “their malice toward President Trump.”
    The judge who accepted Flynn’s plea later recused himself because he was a friend of Stzrok.    Flynn’s legal team said this was the basis for his case to be dismissed.    They called on the prosecution to stop withholding further exonerating evidence.
    It remains unclear if this motion will be enough to delay Flynn’s sentencing, which is set for mid-December.

[The Open Society Policy Center (OSPC) is a non-partisan and non-profit 501(c)(4) organization that engages in advocacy aimed at influencing U.S. government policy on domestic and international issues, including civil rights and liberties, criminal justice reform, immigration, multilateralism, development assistance, health policy and promotion of human rights, transparency and accountability.
    It all began as New World Order or NWO, an emerging clandestine totalitarian world government by various conspiracy theories.    New World Order, a secretive power elite with a globalist agenda conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government—which will replace sovereign nation-states—and an all-encompassing propaganda whose ideology hails the establishment of the New World Order as the culmination of history's progress.    So the cabal that operates through many front organizations to orchestrate significant political and financial events, ranging from causing systemic crises to pushing through controversial policies, at both national and international levels, as steps in an ongoing plot to achieve world domination.    Before the early 1990s, New World Order conspiracism was limited to two American countercultures, primarily the militantly anti-government right and secondarily that part of fundamentalist Christianity concerned with the end-time emergence of the Antichrist.    Skeptics, such as Michael Barkun and Chip Berlet, observed that right-wing populist conspiracy theories about a New World Order had not only been embraced by many seekers of stigmatized knowledge but had seeped into popular culture, thereby inaugurating a period during the late 20th and early 21st centuries in the United States where people are actively preparing for apocalyptic millenarian scenarios.    Those political scientists are concerned that mass hysteria over New World Order conspiracy theories could eventually have devastating effects on American political life, ranging from escalating lone-wolf terrorism to the rise to power of authoritarian ultranationalist demagogues.    So what is now going on is it exists and it is trying to undermine the democracy and constitution of the United States of America and subject us to the Globalism concepts which President Donald Trump is fighting against everyday.]
10/25/2019 Soros non-profit group spends $72 million in lobbying efforts by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Thursday, April 27, 2017 file photom, George Soros, Founder and Chairman of the Open Society Foundation,
waits for the start of a meeting at EU headquarters in Brussels. (Olivier Hoslet/Pool Photo via AP)
    An advocacy group funded by billionaire George Soros is ramping up its lobbying efforts in the age of President Trump.    Friday reports showed the Open Society Policy Center (OSPC) spent more than $72 million since January of 2017.
    The 501(c)(4) nonprofit uses its resources to advocate for different domestic and international policies.    However, the recent increase in spending was dramatic.    From 2002 to 2016, the organization spent nearly $4 million per year.    That number has skyrocketed since President Trump took office.    The group now spends an average of $25 million per year.    At this rate of spending, it doesn’t look like the figure will decrease ahead of 2020.
    Soros has been open in his opposition to the Trump administration.    On Friday, he expressed support for 2020 hopeful Elizabeth Warren and her campaign promises.    He added the Massachusetts senator is the “one to beat” and said he believes President Trump is a danger to the world.
    “Clearly, I consider the Trump administration a danger to the world,” said the billionaire.    “But I regard it as a purely temporary phenomenon that will disappear in 2020, or even sooner.”
    Most of the nonprofit’s lobbying efforts have been spent on congressional efforts focused on government oversight and human rights.    OSPC Executive Director Tom Perriello condemned the administration in a recent statement to the Washington Free Beacon.
    “On some of the issues we work on, there historically had been a bipartisan consensus,” stated Perriello.    “But an administration that casually and callously refers to lynchings and…parts of the Constitution (as) ‘phony’ presents historic challenges.”
[If you have read my Chapter 8 of my book at www.mazzaroth.com that I wrote 35 years ago and how the world has been taken over by a one-world government that developed from suspicious organizations and then from GATT, then the World Trade Organization (WTO), and this DEEP STATE and unknown, who groomed Obama and Hillary into office and Chuck Shumer knows very well and we do not know the extent of who else in our Article 1 and 2 who have bought into it or was who has been attacking Trump within his ranks as we know now that Trump because he ran a campaign that the U.S. is to be its own America First which goes against this entity that will go to any depths to do him in is at play and the man Soros has been one of the leaders of that Cabal trying to do that, so if we do not keep Trump in office for 4 more years we will be controlled by the true biblical word ANTICHRIST, which is what I will call them from that point on until GOD intervenes.    Wake up America.
    1 John 18: "Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared.    This is how we know that it is the last hour."
    Romans 1:21: "because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened."].

10/25/2019 Steve Bannon to appear in Stone trial by OAN Newsroom
President Donald Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon gestures as he speaks during during an ideas
festival sponsored by The Economist, Saturday, Sept. 15, 2018, in New York. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)
    Two former allies are expected to clash in a highly anticipated trial regarding the 2016 election.    Friday reports said former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon will take the stand against former 2016 Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone.
    Bannon has not been subpoenaed to appear but will likely testify about Stone’s contacts with the Trump campaign regarding WikiLeaks.    The former strategist was reportedly referenced in Mueller’s report as the senior official who reached out to Stone about such contacts.
Roger Stone, a longtime confidant of President Donald Trump, accompanied by his wife, Nydia Stone,
leaves federal court in Washington, Tuesday, July 16, 2019. (AP Photo/Sait Serkan Gurbuz)
    Stone has been critical of the Special Counsel investigation and the president’s legal team, who he said never fully understood the magnitude of the efforts against him.
    “I’m not sure they understood the political ramifications and political nature of this case,” he said.
    "The idea of waving executive privilege and…relying on the good instincts of Bob Mueller was a naive strategy.”
    Bannon has not been charged in relation to Stone’s case, which is set to take place next month.

10/25/2019 Hunter Biden under fire for ties to overseas business dealings in Romania by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Oct. 11, 2012, file photo, Hunter Biden waits for the start of the his father’s, Vice President
Joe Biden’s, debate at Centre College in Danville, Ky. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)
    Hunter Biden can’t seem to shake off bad press over his foreign business dealings.    The crosshairs are now hovering over the former vice president’s son for his consultation of a Romanian businessman who was charged with fraud.
    A Thursday NBC report drew attention to a 2016 trip Biden took to advise Gabriel Popoviciu.    Popoviciu was caught up in a legal battle over a questionable land deal he made with the rector of a local Romanian university back in 2006.    The school official allegedly sold off government land to the businessman for significantly less money than it was worth.    The official further claimed the land belonged to the school.
    The rector was arrested years later following a government investigation and Popoviciu was charged as an accessory to that deal.    He appealed the decision and eventually hired Hunter Biden as a counselor for his legal team.
    Sources said it’s unclear how much Hunter Biden actually contributed, but experts believe the businessman may have hired him for his relationship to Joe Biden, the acting vice president at the time.    Popoviciu allegedly wanted to use Hunter’s status as the vice president’s son as leverage to win his case.
    It is unknown what Hunter discussed with the official or how much he was paid, but pundits have said the optics are not good — considering his shady business deals in Ukraine and China.    This comes after Hunter Biden stepped down from his position on the board of a Chinese investment company to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

10/26/2019 Russian woman convicted by U.S. of being agent returns home
Convicted Russian agent Maria Butina is accompanied by federal agents after her release from a Florida prison,
during her transfer onto a jet bound for Moscow at Miami International Airport in Miami, Florida,
U.S. October 25, 2019. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement/Handout via REUTERS
    MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russian national Maria Butina, who was jailed in the United States in April after admitting to working as a Russian agent, arrived in Moscow on Saturday, greeted by her father and Russian journalists who handed her flowers.
    “Russians never surrender,” she said in a brief statement at the airport, flanked by her father and a foreign ministry spokesman.    She thanked her supporters and added she was happy to be back.
    Butina pleaded guilty in December last year to one count of conspiring to act as a foreign agent for Russia by infiltrating a gun rights group and influencing U.S. conservative activists and Republicans.
    Her case further strained the U.S.-Russian relations, prompting Moscow to accuse Washington of forcing Butina, a 30-year-old graduate student, to confess to what it described as ridiculous charges.
    Butina, released from a Florida prison on Friday after serving most of her 18-month sentence, did not comment on her case in her statement at the airport.
    But in an interview with Russian state media apparently recorded during the flight, Butina insisted on her innocence.
    “Some actions will need to be taken with regards to the outrage that happened to me,” RIA news agency quoted her as saying.
    Butina had been scheduled for release from the low-security prison in Tallahassee in early November, but a change in federal law moved up her release date based on credit for good behavior, according to her attorney in the United States, Robert Driscoll.
    Her 18-month sentence included nine months she spent incarcerated after her July 2018 arrest.
(Reporting by Gabrielle Tetrault-Farber; Writing by Olzhas Auyezov; Editing by Alison Williams and Frances Kerry)

10/26/2019 President Trump weighs in on Michael Flynn case, impeachment inquiry by OAN Newsroom
President Donald Trump, accompanied by Vice President Mike Pence, left, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, speaks
Wednesday, Oct. 23, 2019, in the Diplomatic Room of the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
    President Trump is taking aim at Michael Flynn’s case and the impeachment inquiry.    He took to Twitter on Saturday to defend Flynn, noting the new claim that FBI agents manipulated records against the former National Security adviser was just the beginning of a “massive story of injustice and treason.”
    Earlier this week, Flynn filed a motion against the FBI for an alleged entrapment scheme.    The filing claimed the Intelligence Community tampered with Flynn’s 2017 interview records, which led him to be charged for lying to the FBI about his Russian contacts.
    President Trump said the setup of Flynn highlights the Department of Justice’s double standard.    He noted they largely stayed silent in the face of Hillary Clinton’s suspicious behavior.
    The president also emphasized that not a single American citizen has been charged with anything related to Russian collusion, despite the House’s desperate attempts to indict administration members.
    President Trump took aim at the impeachment inquiry, saying the Ukraine investigation is “just as corrupt and fake as all of the other garbage that went on before it.” The president blasted Adam Schiff, saying the representative presented a parodied version of Ukraine phone call because he couldn’t find fault with the real one.
    “The conversation I had was perfect,” stated President Trump.    “(Schiff) He went before the United States Congress and he said a made-up story — he totally fabricated it.”
    The president said he believes the impeachment case is falling apart, claiming the investigation is a “witch hunt.”    He further called for Democrats to “end this scam now.”

    The following found at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/john-durham-investigation-fbi-misconduct-criminal-probe
10/26/2019 Durham's investigation into possible FBI misconduct is now criminal probe, sources say by Gregg Re, Ed Henry, Fox News
Durham's Russia origins probe now a criminal investigation
Probe into possible FBI misconduct shifts course; chief national correspondent Ed Henry reports.
    U.S. Attorney John Durham's ongoing probe into potential FBI and Justice Department misconduct in the run-up to the 2016 election through the spring of 2017 has transitioned into a full-fledged criminal investigation, two sources familiar with the investigation told Fox News on Thursday night.
    One source added that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's upcoming report on alleged FBI surveillance abuses against the Trump campaign will shed light on why Durham's probe has become a criminal inquiry.    Horowitz announced on Thursday his report would be available to the public soon, with "few" redactions.
    The investigation's new status means Durham can subpoena witnesses, file charges, and impanel fact-finding grand juries.
    Fox News reported on Tuesday that Durham's probe had expanded significantly based on new evidence uncovered during a recent trip to Rome with Attorney General Bill Barr.
    Barr reportedly told embassy officials in Italy that he "needed a conference room to meet high-level Italian security agents where he could be sure no one was listening in."
    A source in the Italian Ministry of Justice told The Daily Beast earlier this month that Barr and Durham were played a taped deposition made by Joseph Mifsud, the professor who allegedly told ex-Trump aide George Papadopoulos that the Russians had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton.    Mifsud reportedly was explaining to investigators in the deposition why people would want to harm him, and why he needed police protection.
    Papadopoulos has suggested he was connected with Mifsud as part of a setup orchestrated by intelligence agencies.
    Sources told Fox News that Durham was "very interested" to question former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan, an anti-Trump critic who recently dismissed the idea.    The New York Times reported Thursday that Durham's criminal review has prompted some CIA officials to obtain criminal legal counsel in anticipation of being interviewed.
GOP REVEALS NEVER-BEFORE-SEEN STRZOK TEXTS DISCUSSING 'CRESCENDO OF LEAKS'
    Brennan and Clapper were at the helm not only when Mifsud spoke to Papadopoulos, but also when an unverified and largely discredited dossier, written by British ex-spy Christopher Steele and funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee, was used to help justify a secret surveillance warrant against former Trump adviser Carter Page in the run-up to the 2016 election. (The Times' reporting on Thursday, which overtly framed Durham's probe as politically tainted without evidence, did not mention the Steele dossier at all.)
    The FBI apparently obscured the fact that the Clinton campaign and DNC funded the dossier in its warrant application, telling the secret court only that the dossier was prepared at the behest of an unidentified presidential campaign.
    Additionally, in its original FISA application and subsequent renewals, the FBI told the FISA court it "did not believe" Steele was the direct source for a Yahoo News article implicating Page in Russian collusion.    Instead, the FBI suggested to the secret court, the September 2016 article by Michael Isikoff was independent corroboration of the dossier.    But, London court records showed that contrary to the FBI's assessments, Steele briefed Yahoo News and other reporters in the fall of 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS.
    It has further emerged that Steele had communications with a State Department contact -- which were relayed to the FBI -- in which Steele claimed the Russians were running a "technical/human operation run out of Moscow targeting the election" and that "payments to those recruited are made out of the Russian Consulate in Miami."
    There is no Russian consulate in Miami, a fact the State Department official, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec, emphasized in her notes.    And, Steele had suggested his client was "keen" to see his information come to light prior to Election Day.
    Kavalec forwarded her notes to the FBI and other government officials several days before the FISA warrant was issued for Page.
    Additionally, Special Counsel Robert Mueller was unable to substantiate other key claims in the dossier, including that the Trump campaign employed hackers in the United States, that there was a compromising recording of the president in a hotel room, and that ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen flew to Prague to build a conspiracy with hackers.    Cohen has denied ever heading to Prague, and no public evidence has contradicted that claim.
    Nevertheless, in responding to the expanded Durham probe, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., and House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff, D-Calif., followed the Times' framing and accused the Trump administration of misconduct.
    “These reports, if true, raise profound new concerns that the Department of Justice under Attorney General William Barr has lost its independence and become a vehicle for President Trump’s political revenge," they said.    “If the Department of Justice may be used as a tool of political retribution, or to help the President with a political narrative for the next election, the rule of law will suffer new and irreparable damage.”
    Also on Thursday, top Republicans revealed never-before-seen texts from fired FBI agent Peter Strzok, in which he apparently discussed systemic leaking at the bureau.
DISPUTE ERUPTS AS BRENNAN, COMEY APPEAR TO DISPUTE WHO PUSHED THE STEELE DOSSIER
    Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, revealed the texts in a letter to the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) requesting an update on whether the FBI's apparent leaks to the media were being probed.
    The senators pushed to know whether the ICIG was looking into Strzok's email to FBI colleagues on April 13, 2017, when he wrote that an unidentified "agency" might be the "source of some of the leaks" to the media that he'd been seeing.
    "I'm beginning to think the agency got info a lot earlier than we thought and hasn't shared it completely with us," Strzok wrote, according to documents that the senators included in their letter to the ICIG.    "Might explain all these weird/seemingly incorrect leads all these media folks have.    Would also highlight agency as a source of some of the leaks."
    The senators also asked why Strzok texted bureau colleague Lisa Page on Dec. 15, 2016: "Think our sisters have begun leaking like mad.    Scorned and worried and political, they're kicking in to overdrive."
    "What are they worried about, and what are they kicking into 'overdrive?' Johnson and Grassley wrote."    "Who are the 'sisters,' and what does it mean to say that the 'sisters have [been] leaking like mad'?"
    In a June 6, 2017 email to Page, Strzok mused, "Think there will be a crescendo of leaks/articles leading up to Thurs."
    And, a Dec. 13, 2016 text message apparently showed Strzok trying to set up a Skype meeting with a reporter.    "Text from reporter: retrieving my password for Skype," he wrote.
    Then, on April 6, 2017, Strzok wrote to senior FBI leadership to complain about a New York Times article entitled, "C.I.A. Had Evidence of Russian Effort to Help Trump Earlier Than Believed," claiming it painted the FBI in an unfavorable light and got key facts wrong.
    "Mike, below is inaccurate, favors the CIA at the expense of the FBI in particular, and is at odds with what Apuzzo and Goldman know," Strzok wrote.    "Most importantly, it's at odds with the D's [FBI Director's] recent public testimony that we've been looking at links (which necessarily imply favoring Trump) since July '16."
    Strzok specifically objected to the Times' reporting that the CIA's briefings with lawmakers "indicate that intelligence officials had evidence of Russia’s intentions to help Mr. Trump much earlier in the presidential campaign than previously thought," and "reveal a critical split last summer between the C.I.A. and counterparts at the F.B.I., where a number of senior officials continued to believe through last fall that Russia’s cyberattacks were aimed primarily at disrupting America’s political system, and not at getting Mr. Trump elected, according to interviews."
    Horowitz, the DOJ watchdog, faulted the FBI last year for repeated violations of its media communications policy, noting that agents had received gifts from reporters and leaked regularly and brazenly -- even from phones at FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C.

10/28/2019 President Trump: Adam Schiff is ‘the biggest leaker’ in Washington by OAN Newsroom
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., speaks with members of the media after former deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman
signaled that he would not appear as scheduled for a closed door meeting to testify as part of the House impeachment inquiry
into President Donald Trump, Monday, Oct. 28, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)
    President Trump blasted Adam Schiff for being “the biggest leaker” in Washington, while Democrats continue to call witnesses behind closed-doors in relation to their ongoing attempts to push presidential impeachment.
    Before leaving for Chicago Monday, reporters asked the president why he didn’t alert the Democrats about the special forces raid on the now dead founder of ISIS. President Trump replied by calling the House Intelligence Committee chairman “a corrupt politician” who runs “a biased operation.”
    This comes after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued a statement demanding the House majority be briefed on the al-Baghdadi raid.    The president then blasted the left-wing party as the “do-nothing Democrats” before denouncing the impeachment inquiry as a “witch hunt” and a “scam.”
    Meanwhile, President Trump is considering releasing video from the U.S. raid which led to the death of the ISIS founder.
President Donald Trump talks to reporters before boarding Air Force One for a trip to Chicago to attend the International Association
of Chiefs of Police Annual Conference and Exposition, Monday, Oct. 28, 2019, in Andrews Air Force Base, Md. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

10/30/2019 Report: Whistleblower possibly identified, attorneys caution against speculation by OAN Newsroom
The Capitol in Washington is seen at dawn, Thursday, Oct. 3, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
    New developments are surfacing in the impeachment inquiry.    Media company RealClear Politics claimed Wednesday there’s strong evidence that the alleged whistleblower could be Eric Ciaramella.
    Ciaramella is a registered Democrat who previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.    His name has been tossed around on social media platforms for weeks and is known by many on Capitol Hill.
    “I’ve heard the name.    CNN has the name.    The White House has the name.    House Intel Committee has a name.    Who is this guy being protected from? — The American people.” — Fred Fleitz, NSC Chief of Staff
    Ciaramella left the National Security Council in 2017 to return to the CIA.    An official interviewed by RealClear Politics said Ciaramella has been accused of working against the president.
    Following the release of the report, Ciaramella’s legal team issued a statement.    Attorneys Mark Zaid and Andrew Bakaj said they can “neither confirm nor deny the identity of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower.”    They went on to caution against speculation, claiming that it can cause harm to any person who may be suspected to be the whistleblower.
    “Disclosure of the name of any person who may be suspected to be the whistleblower places that individual and their family in great physical danger,” read the statement.    “Such behavior is at the pinnacle of irresponsibility and is intentionally reckless.”
    This is developing news.    One America News has not confirmed this information.
[CIARMELLA WAS HIRED BY OBAMA INTO THE BRENNAN NSA, AND AN ADVERSARY OF TRUMP, AND WAS THEN IN THE CIA INVOLVED WITH THE RUSSIA-FISA HILLARY CORRUPTION WITH CIA JOHN CLAPPER, AND WAS ASSOCIATED WITH FORMER VP JOE BIDEN IN HIS UKRAINE CRIMES AND IS MOST LIKELY THE MYSTERIOUS WHISTLEBLOWER WHO WAS USED BY THE DEMOCRATS AND SHIFTY SCHIFF TO TRY TO IMPEACH TRUMP AS THE SWAMP AND DEEP STATE ARE DESPARATE TO GET CONTROL OF THE UNITED STATES AGAIN FOR THE GLOBALIST REGIME AS THE NEW WORLD ORDER IN THE END TIMES.].

    The following found at https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/30/judge-tells-government-to-respond-to-allegations-it-hid-evidence-from-michael-flynns-legal-team/
10/30/2019 Collusion: Judge Tells Government To Respond To Allegations It Hid Evidence From Michael Flynn’s Legal Team by Margot Cleveland
    Whether Judge Emmett Sullivan will schedule oral argument after receiving these latest filings is yet to be seen.    And how he will rule is anyone’s guess.
    Late last week, Michael Flynn’s star attorney Sidney Powell filed a much-anticipated brief on the public docket detailing evidence that federal prosecutors had withheld from her client.    Powell’s brief, which also exposed the FBI’s plot to set up Trump’s then-national security advisor, dominated conservative media coverage for several days and prompted a Twitter thread from President Trump quoting the brief at length and calling the targeting of Flynn “a disgrace.”
    Then, just as the noise began to quiet, Judge Emmett Sullivan—the federal judge presiding over the Flynn criminal case—issued a surprise order.
    “In view of the parties’ comprehensive briefing concerning Defendant’s Motion to Compel Production of Brady Material, the Court cancels the motion hearing previously scheduled for November 5, 2019,” the short minute order issued on Monday read.    Court watchers promptly speculated on the significance of the order.
    It could mean one of two things.    It could mean Sullivan had found the briefing sufficiently clear to allow him to render a decision on Powell’s motion to compel without the benefit of oral argument by the parties.    Or it could mean that the briefing was so detailed that Sullivan needed more time to study the arguments before engaging with counsel and intended to reschedule the hearing for later.
    While Powell appeared undaunted by Judge Sullivan’s order canceling the November 5, 2019, hearing, the government’s immediate filing of a document cast as a “Notice of Claims Raised and Relief Sought for the First Time In A Reply Brief” suggests federal prosecutors feared Sullivan had made up his mind—and not in their favor.
    In their filing, the government complained that Flynn’s reply brief “seeks new relief and makes new claims, based on new arguments and new information.”    “Issues may not be raised for the first time in a reply brief,” federal prosecutors stressed, before suggesting that “by making new arguments for the first time in his Reply, the defendant has potentially placed this Court in the position of reviewing novel assertions and arguments that the defendant claims are essential to his cause without the benefit of the government’s factual responses and legal analysis.”
    The government then highlighted several of the arguments Powell made in her reply brief, such as that “the government suppressed text messages that ‘would have made a material difference’ to the defendant”; “that the defendant’s false statements were not material; that the defendant’s attorneys were acting under an ‘intractable conflict of interest,’ which the government exploited to extract a guilty plea; and that the ‘FBI had no factual or legal basis for a criminal investigation.’
    To these points, prosecutors retorted, “each new argument or claim is unsupported by fact or law,” prompting Powell to tell me, “The prosecutors appear to dwell in an imaginary alternative universe.”
    Yesterday’s filing by federal prosecutors also read as the judicial version of working the refs, with the government suggesting the court may be intending “to strike any arguments or claims raised for the first time by the defendant in his Reply,” or planning “to require the defendant to raise any new claims for relief in a properly pled motion to which the government can respond fully.”    The government then asked the court for “guidance,” and the chance “to file a surreply that concisely addresses only newly-raised Brady issues, such as those identified above.”
    The government got what it wanted—and then some.
    Late yesterday, Judge Sullivan entered an order directing the government to file a surreply brief by November 1, 2019, but in doing so instructed prosecutors to address not just the Brady issues, but any “new relief, claims, arguments, and information raised in Defendant’s Reply Brief.”    The order also gave Flynn a chance to respond to the government’s arguments by November 4, 2019.    But that’s it: Judge Sullivan made clear that no new arguments should be made in Powell’s sur-surreply and no further pleadings concerning Flynn’s motion to compel would be accepted.
    Whether Judge Sullivan will schedule oral argument after receiving these latest filings is yet to be seen.    And how he will rule is anyone’s guess. But that Judge Sullivan did not limit the additional briefing to specific Brady issues, but instead directed the government to respond broadly to any “new relief, claims, arguments, and information,” suggests the long-time federal judge’s concern has been piqued by what he’s read so far.
[So this will determine what kind of judge Sullivan is in that will he cave to the "DEEP STATE" who will do whatever it takes to cover up their criminal activities or will he bring to life the truth behind what the FBI (i.e. McCabe, Strzok and Comey) did to Flynn as part of the Russian Collusion corruption headed up by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and will eventually include James Baker, Lisa Page, David Bowdich, Trish Anderson, and Jori Boone.].

11/1/2019 Exclusive: Overhaul of Ukraine prosecution agency buries Manafort inquiries – investigators by Polina Ivanova and Ilya Zhegulev
FILE PHOTO: A woman leaves Ukraine's Prosecutor General's Office in Kiev, Ukraine October 4, 2019. REUTERS/Valentyn Ogirenko/File Photo
    KIEV (Reuters) – Sweeping changes to Ukraine’s top law enforcement agency ordered by President Volodymyr Zelenskiy are set to derail a series of long-running criminal investigations, including two related to U.S. President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, three current and former Ukrainian prosecutors told Reuters.
    The reorganization, which includes fresh leadership for the agency and mandatory skills testing for prosecutors, represents an upheaval of Ukraine’s General Prosecutor’s Office (GPO), one of the most powerful bodies in the country, and one that has long been the target of criticism.
    Zelenskiy, who came to power in May, has said the makeover is essential because the office is widely distrusted by Ukrainians and has been seen as a political tool for the well-connected to punish their enemies.
    The overhaul, which began in October, comes amid widespread scrutiny of the agency following efforts by Trump and his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, to get Ukraine to open an investigation into the Republican president’s political rival – Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden – and his son Hunter, who served on the board of a Ukrainian gas company
.
    Plans to shake up the GPO played a role in a July 25 phone call between Zelenskiy and Trump that is now at the heart of the impeachment inquiry into the U.S. president.    On that call, Zelenskiy told Trump he was installing a new head at the agency who would be “100% my person, my candidate” and who “will look into the situation” regarding the Bidens.
    New Prosecutor General Ruslan Ryaboshapka took office at the end of August.    Under his leadership, the GPO is preparing to transfer all existing investigations to other law enforcement agencies, a process the GPO told Reuters would begin Nov. 20.
    Ryaboshapka, who previously headed an anti-corruption agency and briefly served as Zelenskiy’s deputy chief of staff, also has imposed a written legal exam for all the GPO’s prosecutors, a move many of those staffers view as insulting and an unfair test of their skills and experience.    More than 200 have already been fired for refusing to take the exam, according to the prosecutor’s office.
    During a press conference in October, Zelenskiy said what he meant in his comments to Trump was that Ryaboshapka would be an honest prosecutor.    Ryaboshapka declined to be interviewed by Reuters and has not responded directly to questions sent by Reuters about the criticism of his reforms.    But his office defended them and the exam process.    “The purpose of the reform is to create a renewed, professional, efficient prosecutor’s office that will be trusted by the public,” it said in a statement on Oct. 25.
    Among those who have been fired are 13 prosecutors from the Special Investigations Unit, which was overseeing corruption cases from the period of former President Viktor Yanukovich.    Manafort, who worked as a political consultant in Ukraine for years, was implicated in two of those probes, one linked to a dossier of off-the-books payments made by a Ukrainian political party, and another looking at the alleged illicit use of state funds by Yanukovich’s government.
    Manafort’s attorney did not respond to requests for comment, but Manafort previously has maintained his innocence.
    Serhii Horbatiuk, the former head of the Special Investigations Unit, who was fired for refusing to take the new test, said he believed Zelenskiy’s overhaul was aimed at concentrating power in the hands of loyalists who could exercise more control over sensitive cases, including the probes linked to Manafort.
    “This entire reform is being done in order to take control of the General Prosecutor’s Office… and have the guarantee that there will be no dissent,” Horbatiuk said in an interview with Reuters conducted in his office on Oct. 22, the day before he was fired.
    He and two other prosecutors in his former unit said the transfer of long-running investigations out of the GPO, along with the dismissal of seasoned investigators working on those cases, would result in a massive backlog – and the de facto demise – of the probes.
    “In the fog of this reform you can create such a pile of cases…which will lead to an absence of results,” Horbatiuk said.
    Those fears are overblown, according to Andriy Smirnov, the deputy chief of staff of Zelenskiy’s administration responsible for handling judicial reform.    He said no critical knowledge would be lost if the cases moved to other departments, including the probes related to Manafort.
    “All of this is easy and happens quickly.    With no harm to the investigation,” Smirnov told Reuters.    “The problem being described to you does not exist.”
    Smirnov said the overhaul was in no way designed to allow the government to influence politically sensitive cases.    He described the allegations made by Horbatiuk and two other senior members of his former unit as a “paranoid” response to new leadership.
    In comments to journalists on Oct. 30, Ryaboshapka described the work of Horbatiuk and his team as “ineffective.”
‘BLACK LEDGER’ CASE
    Three members of the Special Investigations Unit told Reuters the loss of key personnel and reshuffling of responsibilities would effectively sabotage five years’ worth of investigations into alleged corruption during the pro-Kremlin presidency of Yanukovich, who was in office from 2010 until he was driven from power in a popular revolt in 2014.    Manafort worked as a consultant for Yanukovich’s political party for over a decade.
    “At least 50% of the information… is in the investigator’s head, it doesn’t fit into the official paperwork,” said Andriy Rodionov, a senior investigator in the unit who is still on staff after passing the mandatory exam.    “Any handing over of these cases is an automatic burial of them.”
    Manafort was Trump’s campaign chairman from May to August of 2016.    He stepped down after a Ukrainian lawmaker divulged details contained in a so-called “black ledger” of alleged off-the-books payments made by Yanukovich’s Party of the Regions.    Manafort, who earned millions for his consultancy work in Ukraine, was among the recipients listed in the ledger, which was corroborated at the time by anti-corruption investigators and which prosecutors told Reuters has long been the subject of a GPO probe.
    Following Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, Manafort was convicted of bank fraud and filing false tax returns and sentenced to 7.5 years in U.S. prison.    In building their case against Manafort, U.S prosecutors accused him of concealing the payments he received from Ukraine.
    In Ukraine, senior investigator Rodionov said prosecutorial firepower was sputtering when it came to the probes involving Manafort.    He said he has already lost three members of his team as part of Zelenskiy’s restructuring; two refused to take the test and another failed it, he said.    Overall, the Special Investigations Unit has lost around a third of its staff, Rodionov said, with the number likely to rise as more prosecutors either refuse to participate in further rounds of assessment or fail to pass them.     Giuliani has called the black ledger a fraudulent document used to unfairly malign Manafort and damage Trump.    He has urged Ukraine to investigate whether Ukrainian officials conspired to meddle in the 2016 U.S. presidential election on behalf of Democrat Hillary Clinton, a conspiracy theory that has been widely debunked.
    Giuliani did not respond to requests to comment for this story.    He told Reuters in a recent interview that “some” Ukrainians say the black ledger is forged.    Earlier this year he said that Manafort had communicated to him through an attorney that the ledger’s “entries about me are false.”

    Rodionov said his team had been “within weeks” of announcing official suspects in the second probe linked to Manafort, which involves allegations that Yanukovich’s administration illegally used state funds to pay a prominent New York law firm to write a report justifying the imprisonment of one of Yanukovich’s political rivals.    Manafort helped the Ukrainian government commission that report, and he promoted its conclusions to reporters and others in the United States.
    “We were ready…to formally announce indictments of both Ukrainian and American citizens,” Rodionov said.    “I spent three years trying to put it all together and now they will crumple it up and stuff it all in a box and hand the box away.”
    A quiet end to Ukraine’s investigations into Manafort would likely play well in the White House.    Trump and his backers have worked for years to discredit Mueller’s Russia investigation, and Trump has previously talked about pardoning Manafort.
    A recent survey by Rating Group Ukraine, an independent polling firm, found that almost two-thirds of Ukrainians don’t trust the GPO.    Critics say that, under previous presidents, the office was used to go after political opponents, squeeze businesses or shield corrupt officials.
    Since Ukraine gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, the country has had more than 20 prosecutors general.    Not one has completed the designated five-year term, which was extended to six years in 2017.
    Yuriy Bezshastniy, another Special Investigations Unit prosecutor who was fired for refusing to take the law exam, said the reorganization was harming the ability of the nation to hold powerful wrongdoers accountable.    He said he found it difficult to understand why the reforms had been introduced or who had come up with them.
    “I’m seeing all sorts of nonsense,” he said.    “Was it politicians or businessmen or clowns or lawyers?    What’s going on is an absolute nightmare,” said Bezshastniy, who had served in the prosecutor’s office since 2001.
    Asked what would happen to Yanukovich-era cases, he replied: “It’s an end to them.    They’re killing two birds with one stone — kicking out people who were actually doing something… and messing up all the cases with one stroke of a pen.”
(Additional reporting by Pavel Polityuk and Natalia Zinets in Kiev and Karen Freifeld in New York; Writing by Luke Baker and Matthias Williams; Editing by Marla Dickerson)

11/2/2019 Paul says whistleblower is ‘Biden’s point man on Ukraine’ - Wants person under oath about corruption by Ben Tobin, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
    Sen. Rand Paul is calling for the subpoena of the whistleblower at the heart of the presidential impeachment inquiry after his alleged identity was revealed in a report.
    Real Clear Investigations, which is part of the nonprofit RealClearFoundation, published an article Wednesday that allegedly identifies the person whose complaint was revealed last month in connection to a July call President Donald Trump took part in with Ukranian leader Volodymyr Zelenskiy.
    In the call, Trump asked Zelenskiy to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, a Democratic presidential candidate, and his son, Hunter Biden, who had served on the board of an energy company in Ukraine.
    “It is being reported that the whistleblower was Joe Biden’s point man on Ukraine,” Paul wrote in a tweet Thursday afternoon.    “It is imperative the whistleblower is subpoenaed and asked under oath about Hunter Biden and corruption.”
    The name being reported may or may not be true.    No major media outlet is reporting the name.    Paul is one of several officials in Washington, including Trump, to call for the identity of the whistleblower to be released.
    But in an op-ed penned in The Washington Post on Monday, Andrew Bakaj and Mark Zaid – who represent the whistleblower – said his identity “is no longer relevant.”
    “Because our client has no additional information about the president’s call, there is no justification for exposing their identity and all the risks that would follow,” the two wrote.
    This is not the first time Paul, a Kentucky Republican, has called for the whistleblower to come forward.
    “Ultimately, if someone’s going to accuse you of something that’s going to bring down a presidency, I think we deserve to know who that person is,” Paul said at an event in Mayfield, Kentucky, in early October, according to footage published by Paducah-area TV station WPSD.
    “Our criminal justice system is usually predicated upon if I accuse you of something, I’ve got to show up in court and accuse you of it.”
    Contact Ben Tobin at bjtobin@gannett.com and 502-582-4181 or follow on Twitter @TobinBen.    Support strong local journalism by subscribing today: subscribe.courier-journal.com.
[WHOEVER THE COWARD IDIOT WHO STARTED THIS WHOLE THING SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE WHETHER THEY LIKE IT OR NOT BUT NOW THAT EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THEIR CLAIM IS NOT CREDIBLE AND SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO INVESTIGATION FOR DUE PROCESS AND IF NOT THEN THAT IS JUST MORE PROOF THAT THE ATTEMPT TO IMPEACH TRUMP BY THE DEEP STATE IS OBVIOUS AS WELL AS THIS FAKE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.]

11/2/2019 DOJ releases 500 pages of Mueller investigation memos by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Thursday, April 18, 2019, file photo, a sign for the Department of Justice hangs in the
press briefing room at the Justice Department, in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, File)
    The Department of Justice has released 500 pages of documents related to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into the 2016 election.
    The documents came Saturday in response to a series of Freedom of Information Act suits filed by BuzzFeed News and CNN.    The collection included recorded communications between key Trump administration members and summaries of FBI interviews of witnesses.    BuzzFeed said new records will be released every month for the next eight years.
    The DOJ has reportedly pushed back against releasing the full amount of documents created, saying it could total 18 billion pages.
    The release comes almost exactly one month after the DOJ said it would release the memos, which were described as the backbone of the Mueller report.    The department had previously released a shorter, redacted version back in April, which alleged that the special counsel found no “conclusive” evidence of obstruction of justice.

11/2/2019 DOJ denies claims in Flynn case, defends firing of FBI’s McCabe by OAN Newsroom
Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, leaves the federal court following a status
conference with Judge Emmet Sullivan, in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2019. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
    The Justice Department is shooting down claims that lawmakers “set up” former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.    In a Friday court filing, the DOJ said allegations of institutional abuse against Flynn are “divorced from the facts.”
    The 46 page document came in response to a court filing made last week.    Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell, argued the adviser was entrapped by Obama holdovers, such as former FBI Director James Comey and former FBI agent Peter Strzok.    Powell said Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page manipulated interview notes to claim Flynn lied when he hadn’t.
    Earlier in the week, the attorney laid out the evidence against the FBI officials on One America News.
    “I attached a number of exhibits, including a comparison of the FBI interview form between February 10 and 11th that shows dramatic changes to it,” stated Powell.    “We included as exhibits the raw notes of the FBI agents and our own transcription of them.”
    The DOJ has rejected the accusations, saying they gave Flynn multiple opportunities to tell the truth.    Flynn’s lawyers said they plan on responding to the court filing in the near future.
FILE – In this June 7, 2017, file photo, then-FBI acting director Andrew McCabe listens during a Senate Intelligence Committee
hearing about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)
    The Justice Department is also defending the 2018 firing of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.    After a “lengthy investigation,” the DOJ said Friday that McCabe lacked honesty in interviews with investigators and agents.    It said the standard penalty for these actions is removal from the agency.
    McCabe was fired in 2018 after allegedly being less than honest about his role in an FBI probe of the Clinton Foundation.    The former FBI official has claimed his removal was part of a plan by President Trump to remove DOJ and FBI employees who were not politically loyal to him.

11/2/2019 Whistleblower’s attorney threatens legal action by OAN Newsroom
The Capitol is seen in Washington, early Friday, Sept. 27, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
    The whistleblower’s legal team is saying it won’t hesitate to take legal action against media outlets that identify him.    Speaking to the Daily Caller, the whistleblower’s attorneys said any organization that reports his name will be personally liable if that person is physically harmed.
    This comes after RealClear Investigations suggested the whistleblower could be Eric Ciaramella.    Ciaramella is reportedly a registered Democrat who previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.    His name has been tossed around on social media platforms for weeks and is known by many on Capitol Hill.
    “I’ve heard the name.    CNN has the name.    The White House has the name.    House Intel Committee has a name.    Who is this guy being protected from?    The American people.    …We should talk about this right now.” – Fred Fleitz, former CIA analyst
    The whistleblower’s legal team noted that there’s no law banning media outlets from identifying whistleblowers.    They instead said the decision comes down to “ethics and professionalism.”

11/3/2019 OAN gives alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella the opportunity to deny media claims by OAN Newsroom
    One America News reporter Neil W. McCabe followed up on information from multiple sources that the alleged whistleblower, Eric Ciaramella, was hiding out at his parents’ home in Connecticut.
    After McCabe knocked on the front door and rang the doorbell, a man who gave the same name as Ciaramella’s father drove up and spoke to McCabe in the driveway.    He acknowledged that he knew Eric and asked McCabe for his business card.
    McCabe also called two numbers associated with the family at that address and left a message with each.    At the end of this news package, McCabe tells the so-called whistleblower he is welcome to respond to OAN.
    Ciaramella is a CIA analyst, who was assigned to the National Security Council staff’s Ukraine desk at the White House.    In addition to being a vocal advocate for more aid to Ukraine, the analyst was reported to have also advised then-Vice President Joe Biden, when Biden held sway over America-Ukraine relations.

11/3/2019 President Trump: Reveal the whistleblower and end the impeachment hoax by OAN Newsroom
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters upon arrival at the White House
in Washington, Sunday, Nov. 3, 2019. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
    President Trump has accused the “fake news media” of shielding the whistleblower’s identity.    In a Sunday tweet, the president said the whistleblower “got it so wrong” and added that he must come forward.
    He claimed the media outlets know the identity of the whistleblower, but refuse to reveal him because there would be “hell to pay” from the Democrat Party.
    The president went on to criticize the so-called whistleblower for their political bias.    He highlighted recent reports, which suggested the person in question was an Obama appointee with anti-Trump views.
    “I don’t know if that’s true or not, but they said is he’s an Obama person,” stated President Trump.    “But he was like a big, big anti-Trump person — they said terrible things.”
    He has consistently called for the individual to be identified since the complaint first surfaced earlier this year.
    Following these remarks, President Trump praised One America News for our commitment to straightforward facts and quality journalism.    The president cited our very own investigative reporter Pearson Sharp and his special report.    He said it would be great if “legitimate sections of law enforcement” would look into our investigative pieces.
    President Trump went on to say, “I wish more people were seeking the facts and the truth.”
    This follows a recent report from RealClear Politics, which claimed that the whistleblower could be Eric Ciaramella. Ciaramella is reportedly a registered Democrat who previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.    His name has been tossed around on social media platforms for weeks and is known by many on Capitol Hill.
    Following the release of the report, Ciaramella’s legal team issued a statement.    Attorneys Mark Zaid and Andrew Bakaj said they can “neither confirm nor deny the identity of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower.” They went on to caution against speculation, claiming that it can cause harm to any person who may be suspected to be the whistleblower.
    “Disclosure of the name of any person who may be suspected to be the whistleblower places that individual and their family in great physical danger,” read the statement.    "Behavior is at the pinnacle of irresponsibility and is intentionally reckless.”
    The whistleblower’s legal team noted that there’s no law banning media outlets from identifying whistleblowers.    They instead said the decision comes down to “ethics and professionalism.”

11/5/2019 Reports: Burisma lobbied Obama-era State Dept. to pressure Ukraine to fire top prosecutor by OAN Newsroom
Then-Vice President Joe Biden, right, and his son Hunter Biden,left, are pictured at a street
dedication ceremony in the village of Sojevo, Kosovo, on Aug. 17, 2016. (Visar Kryeziu/AP Photo)
    New documents have revealed a massive lobbying effort at the Obama-era State Department by Ukrainian energy company Burisma.    The newly released State Department documents show Joe Biden pressured the Ukrainian government to fire its top prosecutor back in 2016, which is about a month after Burisma reached out to the agency.
    The company employed Biden’s son Hunter and was under an investigation by prosecutor Viktor Shokin at the time.    Ukraine suspected Burisma executives of money laundering and corruption.
Republican lawmakers have said the so-called whistleblower may have ties to Biden’s alleged corruption schemes.
    “The whistleblower, actually, is a material witness completely separate from being the whistleblower because he worked for Joe Biden.    He worked for Joe Biden at the same time Hunter Biden was receiving $50,000 a month.    So, the investigation into the corruption of Hunter Biden involves this whistleblower because he was there at the time.    Did he bring up the conflict of interest?    Was there discussion of this?    What was his involvement with the relationship between Joe Biden and the prosecutors?” — Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)protect” the company from scrutiny.

11/6/2019 Stone’s criminal trial underway - Trump ally accused of role in Wikileaks release by Kristine Phillips, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – Roger Stone, a longtime Republican operative, will stand trial this week on accusations that he lied about his role as a middleman between WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential race.
    Stone, who has maintained his innocence, is among the most prominent allies of President Donald Trump to be charged as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the presidential election.
    The spectacle of Stone’s trial, which began with jury selection Tuesday, could reinvigorate the Trump-Russia controversy as the president faces accusations that he sought to have another country, Ukraine, interfere in the 2020 election.
    Stone will face a jury at a federal courthouse across the street from the Capitol, where an impeachment inquiry has yielded testimony about the Trump administration’s efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.     The government’s evidence against Stone includes emails and text messages that show his efforts to learn about WikiLeaks’ plan to release damaging emails about Hillary Clinton, Trump’s Democratic rival in the 2016 election. Prosecutors said they have messages in which Stone pressured a witness to scuttle his congressional testimony.
    Prosecutors contend Stone knew WikiLeaks had damaging information about Clinton’s campaign before the anti-secrecy group released a trove of emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee in 2016.
    Stone told senior Trump campaign officials about WikiLeaks in the summer of 2016, according to prosecutors.    After the group published the DNC emails in late July, a campaign official was directed to contact Stone and ask about additional releases, according to court records.    Prosecutors have not said who directed that official.
    The indictment cites several emails and text messages between Stone and two associates: Jerome Corsi, a rightwing political commentator, and Randy Credico, a radio host who interviewed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
Contributing: Bart Jansen, Kevin Johnson and David Jackson
Roger Stone, second from right, arrives at a federal courthouse in Washington
on Tuesday. His wife, Nydia Stone, holds his arm. MANUEL BALCE CENETA/AP

    The following found at https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/25/all-the-russia-collusion-clues-are-beginning-to-point-back-to-john-brennan/
10/25/2019 Collusion: All The Russia Collusion Clues Are Beginning To Point BackTo John Brennan by Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist.
The evidence suggests John Brennan’s CIA and the intelligence community did much more than
merely pass on details to the FBI.    It suggests they fabricated events completely.
    Last weekend, NBC News reported that the Justice Department’s probe into the origins of the Russia collusion investigation is now focusing on the CIA and the intelligence community.    NBC News soft-peddled this significant development by giving former CIA Director John Brennan a platform (a pen?) to call the probe “bizarre,” and question “the legal basis for” the investigation.    Politico soon joined the spin effort, branding the investigation Attorney General William Barr assigned to Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham “Trump’s vengeance.”
    However, if the media reports are true, and Barr and Durham have turned their focus to Brennan and the intelligence community, it is not a matter of vengeance; it is a matter of connecting the dots in congressional testimony and reports, leaks, and media spin, and facts exposed during the three years of panting about supposed Russia collusion.    And it all started with Brennan.
    That’s not how the story went, of course.    The company story ran that the FBI launched its Crossfire Hurricane surveillance of the Trump campaign on July 31, 2016, after learning that a young Trump advisor, George Papadopoulos, had bragged to an Australian diplomat, Alexander Downer, that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton.    This tip from Downer, when coupled with WikiLeaks’s release of the hacked Democratic National Committee emails and evidence of Russian efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election, supposedly triggered the FBI’s decision to target the Trump campaign.
The Real Story Is Different
    But as the Special Counsel Robert Mueller report made clear, it wasn’t merely Papadopoulos’ bar-room boast at issue: It was “a series of contacts between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government,” that the DOJ and FBI, and later the Special Counsel’s office investigated.
    And who put the FBI on to those supposedly suspicious contacts?    Former CIA Director John Brennan.
    “I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about,” Brennan told the House Intelligence Committee back in 2017.    Whether or not there was collusion with Russia, Brennan didn’t profess to know, but he passed on the information to the FBI to reach a conclusion.
    “It’s not CIA’s job to make a determination about whether a U.S. person is cooperating, colluding, or whatever in some type of criminal or legal matter,” Brennan explained, stressing that instead, “it is our responsibility to give the Bureau everything that they need in order to follow that path and make such a determination and recommendation if they want to press charges.”
    The evidence suggests, however, that Brennan’s CIA and the intelligence community did much more than merely pass on details about “contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign” to the FBI.    The evidence suggests that the CIA and intelligence community—including potentially the intelligence communities of the UK, Italy, and Australia—created the contacts and interactions that they then reported to the FBI as suspicious.
Creating a Russia Collusion Narrative
    Stefan Halper features prominently in the plot.    All-but-officially outed by the government as a CIA source, the aging academic had contact with at least four members of the Trump campaign.    Halper’s job of connecting targets with Russians, however, dates back to January 2014, when he worked at Cambridge University alongside Sir Richard Dearlove, the former director of the British intelligence service MI6, and Christopher Andrew, the official historian for the British counterintelligence group MI5.
    In January 2014, according to a lawsuit filed against Halper for defamation by the Russian-born Svetlana Lokhova, Dearlove and Andrew invited her to attend a group dinner with U.S. Gen. Michael Flynn.    At the time, Flynn served as Barack Obama’s director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.
    The dinner went forward as planned on February 28, 2014, with Halper, Dearlove, and Andrew all in attendance, alongside Flynn and Lokhova and several others from the Cambridge community.    After dinner, according to Lokhova’s complaint, Andrew invited Lokhova to address General Flynn,” and they had a brief public exchange about her academic research on Russia.    Then, as laid out in her lawsuit, after “General Flynn informally became an advisor to the Trump presidential campaign, . . . Halper came back into the picture,” with Andrew inviting Lokhova and Halper to join him for dinner at his house.
    While the 2014 dinner went unnoticed at the time and seemed of no concern to the Obama administration, after the Russia collusion narrative gained steam, the media reported that “US intelligence officials had serious concerns about Michael Flynn’s appointment as the White House national security adviser because of his history of contacts with Moscow and his encounter with a woman who had trusted access to Russian spy agency records.”    Other outlets made clear the then-unidentified woman was Lokhova.
    So, had Halper and his British intelligence counterparts arranged Flynn’s incidental meeting with the Russian-born Lokhova and then reported that contact to the FBI to later justify spying on Flynn?
Halper Sure Gets Around
    Halper also crossed paths with Trump campaign advisor Carter Page at a symposium held in Cambridge in mid-July of 2016, shortly after Page spoke at the New Economic School in Moscow.    Page “said he did not detect anything untoward from Halper,” although the former Trump campaign advisor also “noted that in their first conversation at Cambridge, Halper said he was longtime friends with then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort.”
    When asked whether Halper raised Russia as a topic of conversation, Page told me that his “interactions with Halper from the very beginning originated and was based upon our mutual interest as foreign policy scholars.”    Page added that “the specifics of those conversations are a long forgotten memory,” given that at the time, some three years ago, they were but “innocuous interactions with this professor.”    But “it seems unlikely I wouldn’t have discussed such generalized topics related to Russia with him.”    After all, Page stressed, he had lived and worked in both London and Russia, and for much of the past century the Washington-Moscow relationship had been central to foreign policy.
    So, had Halper chatted up Page to prompt the Trump aide to speak of Russia and his Russian connections?    And did Halper then relay those connections to the CIA, which then fed them to the FBI?
    After the FBI launched its investigation into the Trump campaign at the end of July 2016, Halper reached out to Sam Clovis, Trump’s national co-chairman.    Clovis, who met with Halper in the D.C. area, similarly described their conversation as innocuous, and focused “mostly on foreign policy issues, including China.”
    While Clovis didn’t mention any talk of Russia, the same cannot be said about Halper’s outreach to Trump advisor Papadopoulos.    In September 2016, Halper and a woman posing as Halper’s research assistant, “Azra Turk,” met with Papadopoulos in a London bar, asking him directly whether the Trump campaign was working with Russia, which Papadopoulos denied.
    Earlier this year, The New York Times reported that the FBI had directed Halper and Turk to contact Papadopoulos, while the Russia-conspiracy mainstay instead portrayed the Page contact as coincidental.    But was it?    And what about the Flynn set-up at Cambridge?    Were those instead additional efforts to create connections and conversations about Russia to justify the FBI launching an investigation into the Trump campaign?
Same Pattern, Different Agents
    Then there’s Joseph Mifsud, who arranged for Papadopoulos to connect with myriad real and fake Russians, with his cover as a Russian-connected academic serving as the supposed impetus to launch Crossfire Hurricane.    While we do not yet know who ran the Mifsud operation, given that Barr and Durham returned to the United States with two Blackberry devices used by mystery man rules out the possibility that he served as a Russian or otherwise hostile agent: No foreign adversary would allow his smartphones to be appropriated by the enemy.
    Mifsud’s presence at the Russia Today dinner gala at which Flynn was seated next to Putin adds to the questions concerning Mifsud, his handlers, and his role.    Was Mifsud responsible for creating or highlighting connections between Trump campaign members?    Did Mifsud then share this invented “intel” with the CIA, which then fed it to the FBI?
    Felix Sater is another suspicious character.    Back in 1998, none other than Andrew Weissmann—more recently known as Mueller’s pitbull and No. 2 in the special counsel investigation—approved a cooperation agreement with Sater that kept the felon out of prison.    From publicly available information, as late as 2005, Sater continued to cooperate with the FBI.    And reports indicate Sater continued as an FBI and CIA asset much longer.
    So, was Sater working for the FBI or CIA when he pushed his connections to Putin to Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen?    Did Sater relay those exchanges to the CIA to construct more suspicious connections with Russia?
    And what about the infamous Trump Tower meeting? Had that been arranged to create yet another connection between the Trump campaign and Russians?
    These are the questions Barr and Durham should be asking themselves to arrive at the bottom line: Were the Russia connections contrived by the CIA, and was Brennan the plotter-in-chief hoping to prevent a President Trump—or to destroy him later?

11/6/2019 Trump Jr. tweets article claiming whistleblower worked with Steele by OAN Newsroom
FILE – This Tuesday, March 7, 2017 file photo shows Christopher Steele, the former MI6 agent who set up
Orbis Business Intelligence and compiled a dossier on Donald Trump, in London. (Victoria Jones/PA via AP)
    Donald Trump Jr. tweeted out an article revealing the alleged whistleblower worked with several people who facilitated the anti-Trump dossier.    A Wednesday Breitbart report said Eric Ciaramella’s name popped up in emails regarding Obama administration officials’ interactions with Ukraine.
    The emails involved the signing of the one billion dollar loan guarantee to Ukraine when Ciaramella worked for the National Security Council.
    Another name on the emails is dossier author Christopher Steele.    The loan guarantee was approved after Ukraine fired prosecutor Viktor Shokin, who was investigating the Burisma gas company which employed Hunter Biden.
    Ciaramella was first suggested as the potential whistleblower last week.    A report by RealClear Politics claimed there’s strong evidence that the alleged whistleblower could be Eric Ciaramella.    He is a registered Democrat who previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.    His name has been tossed around on social media platforms for weeks and is known by many on Capitol Hill.
[From felix1999: Below are some quick facts on Ciaramella from the explosive report:
  • Registered Democrat
  • Worked for President Obama
  • Worked with Vice President Joe Biden
  • Worked for CIA Director John Brennan
  • Vocal critic of President Trump
  • Helped initiate the Russia “collusion” investigation hoax
  • Was fired from the National Security Council in 2017 for leaks, and returned to the CIA
  • He was accused of working against Trump and leaking against Trump,” a former National Security Council official said. (WHY WASN'T HE FIRED THEN?)
    “Also, Ciaramella huddled for ‘guidance’ with the staff of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, including former colleagues also held over from the Obama era whom Schiff’s office had recently recruited from the NSC,” the NSC official said.
    “And Ciaramella worked with a Democratic National Committee operative who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election, inviting her into the White House for meetings, former White House colleagues said,” the NSC official added.
    Almost everything Ciaramella alleged in his complaint has been proven to be totally false.
    He filed a complaint about a call that they never heard, and Democrats want Trump impeached over a call that they also never heard.
    The Office of Intelligence Community Inspector General launched an internal investigation after the complaint and found that Ciaramella had a “political bias” in favor of one of Trump’s rivals in the 2020 presidential election.
    We now know that person is Joe Biden, meaning Ciaramella is literally a major support of Biden’s 2020 campaign to defeat Trump.
Democrats impeachment plan has backfired on her in spectacular fashion, and now this whistleblower is nothing more than a left-wing hack trying to take down the president.]

11/6/2019 Senator Graham calls for release of whistleblower’s identity by OAN Newsroom
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. speaks during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington,Thursday, Oct. 24, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
    GOP Senator Lindsey Graham is joining calls to identify the whistleblower, claiming the statute used to protect them is “being abused.”    While speaking on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Graham said the law protecting whistleblowers is meant to shield a person from being fired and does not necessarily give them anonymity. He called House Democrat’s impeachment process illegitimate and suggested if they impeach the president based on the phone call with Ukraine’s president, it will go nowhere in the Senate.
    “Nobody should be prosecuted based on an anonymous accusation,” stated Graham.    “Impeachment is the political death penalty.”
    The senator pointed out that Democrats would not have their inquiry without the unverified whistleblower’s complaint.
    “Without the whistleblower complaint, none of this would be going on,” said Graham.    “I want to know who the person is, but the people who should do this are the Intel Committee in the Senate — they’re the ones that were assigned this case.”
    He also said he will not be reading the recently released impeachment inquiry transcripts.
    The whistleblower’s legal team has said it won’t hesitate to take legal action against media outlets that identify him.    Speaking to the Daily Caller, the whistleblower’s attorneys said any organization that reports the name will be personally liable if that person is physically harmed.
    However, they noted that there’s no law banning media outlets from identifying whistleblowers.    They instead said the decision comes down to “ethics and professionalism.”

11/7/2019 Sen. Paul blocks Senate resolution backing whistleblower protection by OAN Newsroom
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., speaks during a Senate Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)
    Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) blocked a resolution to keep the identity of the secret.    The resolution was introduced by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii).    It would have protected whistleblowers from retaliation.
    Paul accused Democrats of “selective outrage,” adding, they are determined on removing the president from office.    The Kentucky lawmaker is now proposing his own legislation, which would let President Trump face his accuser.
    One America’s John Hines caught up with Sen. Paul and has this from Washington.

11/7/2019 Alleged whistleblower’s name appears on witness transcript by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Oct. 22, 2019, file photo, Ambassador William Taylor is escorted by U.S. Capitol Police
as he arrives to testify before House committees as part of the Democrats’ impeachment investigation
of President Donald Trump, at the Capitol in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
    Democrats leading the impeachment inquiry have blasted the president and GOP lawmakers for demanding the release of the alleged whistleblower’s name.    They claimed Republican efforts to out the informant violated federal law and could jeopardize the person’s safety.
    “The president’s allies would like nothing better than to help the president out this whistleblower,” stated House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff.    “Our committee will not be a part of that — we will not stand for that.”
    However, it appears Schiff may have accidentally leaked the alleged whistleblower’s name in the transcript of a witness testimony.
    On page 236 of Bill Taylor’s testimony, the name ‘Eric Ciaramella’ is included in a question the top Ukraine diplomat was asked during his closed-door session.    Taylor was asked if the name rang a bell.    He denied familiarity with the name as well as any communications with Ciaramella.
    RealClear Investigations recently suggested the alleged whistleblower could be Ciaramella.    He is a registered Democrat who previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.    His name has been tossed around on social media platforms for weeks and is known by many on Capitol Hill.
FILE – In this Nov. 6, 2019, file photo, President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally
at the Monroe Civic Center in Monroe, La. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)
    President Trump is saying the whistleblower gave inaccurate information about his phone call with the president of Ukraine and has asked for his name to be released.
    “The whistleblower should be revealed because the whistleblower gave false stories,” stated the president.    “Some people would call it a fraud.”
    Republicans on Capitol Hill claimed the president has the right to face his accuser.    They said it is a vital part of the impeachment inquiry.
    “Without the whistleblower complaint, none of this would be going on,” stated GOP Senator Lindsey Graham.    “Nobody should be prosecuted based on an anonymous accusation.”
    President Trump said new evidence shows the whistleblower’s attorney holds an anti-Trump bias.    He called for the House inquiry to be shut down, claiming “there is no case.”
    During his Keep America Great rally in Louisiana, the president discussed how the attorney’s impeachment efforts kick-started in 2017.
    “’Coup has started,’ whistleblower’s attorney said in 2017,” stated President Trump. “Ultimately, it’s all a hoax – it’s a scam.”
    The president has urged the American people to “read the transcript,” referring to his assertion there is no evidence that shows a quid pro quo between the Trump administration and Ukraine.

11/7/2019 Transcript of George Kent’s testimony released by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Oct. 15, 2019, file photo, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent
arrives on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, File)
    The House has released the transcript of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent.
    During his testimony, the top State Department official said the Ukrainian president met with special envoy Kurt Volker prior to the July phone call between President Trump and President Zelensky. Volker reportedly wanted to “underscore the importance of the messaging Zelensky needed to provide to President Trump about his willingness to be cooperative.”
    Volker also told Kent he was going to reach out to the president’s attorney directly because he had the ear of the president on Ukrainian issues.    When Kent pushed back on the idea, he mentioned Rudy Giuliani’s record of attacking former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and tweeting about launching probes into the Bidens.
    “If there’s nothing there, why does it matter?” asked Volker.    “If there is something there, it should be investigated.”
    Kent finally told Volker that asking another country to investigate a prosecution for political purposes undermines their advocacy for the rule of law.
FILE – In this Aug. 1, 2018 file photo, Rudy Giuliani, attorney for President Donald Trump, addresses
a gathering during a campaign event in Portsmouth, N.H. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File)
    The transcript also allegedly showed that Giuliani “waged a campaign of lies” to smear Yovanovitch to Ukrainian journalists during his attempts to oust her.    Noting that Giuliani’s claim of the ambassador’s connection to George Soros was false, Kent said there was absolutely no basis for the allegation and called it “fake news.”
    Kent also told investigators that back in 2015, he believed Hunter Biden’s position with Burisma could create the perception of a conflict of interest regarding his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden.
    The State Department official went on to say acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney froze the Ukrainian military aid at the direction of President Trump on July 18th.    He said he did not receive a coherent explanation for why that happened at the time.    Mulvaney has since said there was no quid pro quo involved and that President Trump’s foreign policy directives were focused on investigating corruption in the 2016 election.
    “The look back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing he was worried about in corruption with that nation, and that is absolutely appropriate,” stated Mulvaney.
White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney announces that the G7 will be held at
Trump National Doral, Thursday, Oct. 17, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
    Kent’s testimony also showed that EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland had an independent relationship with Mulvaney.    He said Sondland was allowed to attend meetings with Ukrainian delegations without the approval of the National Security Council — which goes against the normal protocol.
    It also revealed Sondland used the shorthand ‘Clinton’ when referring to possible Ukrainian investigations into the 2016 election and the alleged DNC server hack.    Kent confirmed that the shorthand was used in reference to 2016.
    Kent also spoke of the failed public statement the administration was attempting to get out of Zelensky.    He said Sondland spoke with President Trump about his expectations for the Ukraine leader.
    “POTUS wanted nothing less than President Zelensky to go to a microphone and say ‘investigations, Bidens, Clinton,’” stated Sondland.
US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland walks to a secure area of the Capitol to testify as part of the House
impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, Monday, Oct. 28, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

11/8/2019 Report: Yovanovitch committed perjury according to newly discovered emails by OAN Newsroom
FILE – Former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch arrives on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
    According to a new report, ousted Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch may have lied under oath to Congress during her impeachment deposition.    Uncovered emails by Fox News show Yovanovitch was directly contacted by a Democrat congressional staffer on the Foreign Affairs Committee two days after the whistleblower complaint was filed.
    The staffer asked to speak to the former diplomat about “delicate” and “time sensitive” issue.    Yovanovitch responded to the staffer saying she “would love to reconnect and looked forward to chatting.”
    According to her deposition transcript, however, GOP congressman Lee Zeldin pressed her on this exact issue.
Yovanovitch claimed someone in the State Department’s Legislative Affairs Office responded to the email and not her specifically.    During an interview Thursday, Zeldin said it was concerning Yovanovitch may have testified incorrectly.
    Fox New’s Tucker Carlson received the emails and questioned the timing of Democrats outreach.
    “The whistleblower, however, went to Schiff’s team…before filing the complaint, so the question is: did Schiff’s office tell other Democrats on Captiol Hill what was in the complaint?” he asked.    “In other words, how long did this effort play out in secret before the rest of the country learned of it?
    A spokesperson for the Foreign Affairs Committee pushed-back on the accusations, saying the exchange was only related to the diplomat’s ouster as Ukraine ambassador.    The alleged perjury will likely be a main talking point for Republicans during Yovanovitch’s public hearing on Capitol Hill next Friday.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., talks with reporters on Capitol Hill
in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2019, about the House impeachment inquiry. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

11/8/2019 Steve Bannon testifies in Roger Stone trial by OAN Newsroom
Former White House strategist Steve Bannon speaks to reporters as he departs after testifying in the federal
trial of Roger Stone, at federal court in Washington, Friday, Nov. 8, 2019. (AP Photo/Al Drago)
    Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon is revealing new details about Roger Stone’s work on the 2016 Trump campaign.
    Speaking at Stone’s trial on Friday, Bannon described him as the campaign’s access point to WikiLeaks.    In 2016, WikiLeaks released damaging stolen emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign.    Although Stone had a relationship with the nonprofit, Bannon said the Trump team itself never had direct access to the organization or its founder, Julian Assange.
    Bannon noted he only appeared at the trial because he was subpoenaed.
    “I was compelled to testify under subpoena by (Special Counsel Robert) Mueller,” stated Bannon.    “I was forced to go to the grand jury and I’m forced to come here today.”
Roger Stone, his wife Nydia, left, and daughter Adria, leave federal court in Washington,
Friday, Nov. 8, 2019. after his trial ended for the day. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
    Stone is facing several charges, including obstruction of justice, witness tampering and lying to Congress.    He could spend decades in prison if convicted.
    He has been critical of the Special Counsel investigation and the president’s legal team, who he said never fully understood the magnitude of the efforts against him.
    “I’m not sure they understood the political ramifications and political nature of this case,” said Stone.    “The idea of waving executive privilege and…relying on the good instincts of Bob Mueller was a naive strategy.”

11/8/2019 Judicial Watch unearths visitor log from Eric Ciaramella’s time at the White House by OAN Newsroom
The White House is seen Thursday, Oct. 31, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
    More information is coming to light regarding CIA analyst and alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.    A new report from Judicial Watch revealed Obama-era visitor logs from the White House, which showed Ciaramella’s contacts during his tenure in D.C.
    In their recent analysis of the visitor logs, the nonprofit examined his ties to Alexandra Chalupa, a contractor hired by the DNC during the 2016 election.    She reportedly coordinated with Ukraine to investigate President Trump and his former campaign manager Paul Manafort.    The logs showed Chalupa visited the White House 27 times and that her point of contact was Ciaramella.    Judicial Watch released a detailed list of several other questionable figures who visited the presidential mansion.
    Daria Kaleniuk is the co-founder of the Soros-funded Anti-corruption Action Centre (ANTAC) in Ukraine and visited the White House on December 9, 2015.
    Former adviser Rachel Goldbrenner visited on both January 15 and August 8, 2016.    During the time of her visit, Goldbrenner served as an adviser to former UN Ambassador Samantha Power, who was behind the unmasking of Mike Flynn.
    Former European Assistant Secretary Victoria Nuland also met with Ciaramella and reportedly was involved in the Clinton-funded dossier.    She visited on June 17, 2016.    Judicial Watch has released documents revealing that Nuland was involved in the Obama State Department’s “urgent” gathering of classified Russia investigation information, which was disseminated to members of Congress within hours of then-candidate Trump taking office.
    ANTAC Director Artem Sytnyk visited on January 19, 2016.    He is tied to the release of documents during the 2016 campaign that were detrimental to former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort.    Sytnyk was convicted in Ukraine — along with Serhiy Leshenkco — for releasing official documents about Manafort to interfere with the 2016 election.
    Judicial Watch is calling on Congress to question Ciaramella about these meetings.

Mark S. Zaid, an American attorney, based out of Washington D.C., with a practice
focused on national security law, free speech constitutional claims, and government accountability.
    In 1998 he founded the James Madison Project, an organization dedicated to reducing government secrecy.    It is interested in the Freedom of Information Act and government whistleblowers.    He is co-editor of Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws.    He is a cofounder of the nonprofit law firm Whistleblower Aid.
    The following was found at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/coup-has-started-whistleblowers-attorney-said-in-2017-posts-calling-for-impeachment.
11/7/2019 Coup has started,' whistleblower's attorney said in 2017 posts calling for impeachment by Gregg Re, Fox News
Hannity: Whistleblower lawyer is a Trump-hater
Whistleblower attorney called for 'coup' and 'rebellion' against Trump in 2017.
    Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys representing the intelligence community whistleblower at the center of the Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry, tweeted conspicuously in January 2017 that a "coup has started" and that "impeachment will follow ultimately."
    Then, in July 2017, Zaid remarked, "I predict @CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president."    Also that month, Zaid tweeted, "We will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters."
    Amid a slew of impeachment-related posts, Zaid assured his Twitter followers that "as one falls, two more will take their place," apparently referring to Trump administration employees who defy the White House.    Zaid promised that the "coup" would occur in "many steps."
    The tweets, which came shortly after President Trump fired then-acting Attorney General Sally Yates for failing to defend federal laws in court, are likely to fuel Republican concerns that the anonymous whistleblower's complaint is tainted with partisanship.    Trump's call with Ukraine's leader, which is the subject of the complaint, occurred in July 2019.
    “The whistleblower’s lawyer gave away the game," the Trump campaign's communications director, Tim Murtaugh, told Fox News.    "It was always the Democrats’ plan to stage a coup and impeach President Trump and all they ever needed was the right scheme.    They whiffed on Mueller so now they’ve settled on the perfectly fine Ukraine phone call.    This proves this was orchestrated from the beginning.”
    Added House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy: "We should take [Zaid] at his word that this is a coordinated, premeditated plot to overturn the election."
AT LOUISIANA RALLY WEDS NIGHT, TRUMP QUOTES FOX NEWS ARTICLE ON 'SLEAZEBALL' WHISTLEBLOWER ATTY
    Trump has repeatedly accused Democrats and partisans in the intelligence community of effectively plotting a coup against him, through selective leaks and lengthy investigations.
    "45 years from now we might be recalling stories regarding the impeachment of @realDonaldTrump.    I'll be old, but will be worth the wait," Zaid wrote in June 2017.
    He emphasized his interest in impeachment in a variety of other posts.
    "Johnson (1868), Nixon (1973), Clinton (1998) impeachment hearings.    Next up @realDonaldTrump (2017)," he said in May.
    In a statement to Fox News on Wednesday, Zaid defended his posts as common sentiments.
    “Those tweets were reflective and repeated the sentiments of millions of people," Zaid said.    "I was referring to a completely lawful process of what President Trump would likely face as a result of stepping over the line, and that particularly whatever would happen would come about as a result of lawyers.    The coup comment referred to those working inside the Administration who were already, just a week into office, standing up to him to enforce recognized rules of law.“
    Fox News has previously reported on social media posts by Zaid that highlighted what appeared to be open animus toward the president.
    Although Zaid described Democratic House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., as a "mature professional," and circulated articles that touted the reliability of the largely discredited Steele dossier used by the FBI to surveil a former member of Trump's campaign, Zaid has repeatedly unloaded on the president in no uncertain terms.
    "I'm not a Trump fan," Zaid said on a podcast last year.    "I go out of my way on Twitter to say '#Resistance.'    It's not a resistance against the GOP or a Republican -- I don't think [Trump] is a Republican, quite frankly."    (Zaid also boasted that he has sued "every" president since 1993, and pursues "them all," regardless of party affiliation.)
WHISTLEBLOWER CHECKED FORM INDICATING 'FIRSTHAND' KNOWLEDGE -- CONTRARY TO CONGRESSIONAL DOCS
    Also in the podcast, Zaid acknowledged that he had been fishing for plaintiffs to launch a lawsuit concerning the Trump hotel in Washington, D.C., alleging unfair competition by the president and his associates.
    "The unfair competition becomes, when Donald Trump became president, he has exploited his use of the presidency, of the Oval Office. ... to send business to the hotel. ... We identified this as a cause of action, and we were looking for a plaintiff, and we finally found this one restaurant that was willing," Zaid admitted.    A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit last year.
    Zaid also had something of an open casting call for whistleblowers on Twitter as Trump took office, writing that CIA employees should "come to" his law firm "to lawfully challenge" the new president.
    Zaid publicly requested that celebrities Debra Messing, Nancy Sinatra, Cher and Rob Reiner help promote his whistleblower law firm.
    "@cher please check out our new whistleblower page," Zaid wrote in one tweet, which garnered no response from the famed singer.
    In February, Zaid escalated his pitch to Reiner, asserting that "we have a chance to depose" Trump in court.    At one point last year, Zaid even pitched his services to Michael Avenatti, after the now-embattled attorney mentioned that he was "now representing whistleblowers within ICE."
    Another of the whistleblower's attorneys, Andrew Bakaj, tweeted in August 2017 that Trump should be removed under the 25th Amendment, which applies to incapacitated presidents.
    The posts have surfaced as Republicans demand that the anonymous whistleblower come forward and testify.    On Sunday, House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, rejected an offer from Zaid for the whistleblower to anonymously provide written answers to GOP questions
    "Written answers will not provide a sufficient opportunity to probe all the relevant facts and cross-examine the so-called whistleblower," Jordan said.    "You don't get to ignite an impeachment effort and never account for your actions and role in orchestrating it."
    Zaid acknowledged in a statement in October that his client "has come into contact with presidential candidates from both parties" -- but insisted that the contact involved the politicians' roles as "elected officials – not as candidates."
    His abrupt disclosure came shortly after The Washington Examiner reported that Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson told lawmakers the whistleblower worked “or had some type of professional relationship” with one of the Democratic presidential candidates, citing three sources familiar with Atkinson’s interview with lawmakers last month.
    Zaid and the other whistleblower attorneys did assert that the whistleblower "has never worked for or advised a political candidate, campaign or party" -- leaving open the possibility that the whistleblower did advise a current 2020 Democratic presidential candidate prior to his or her run for office.
    "The whistleblower is not the story," the attorneys said.    "To date, virtually every substantive allegation has been confirmed by other sources.    For that reason, the identity of the whistleblower is irrelevant."
    But Republicans have challenged that claim, noting that various statements in the whistleblower claim have seemingly proved inaccurate.    For example, the whistleblower complaint stated that Trump made a “specific request that the Ukrainian leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and examined by the U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike" -- a request that does not appear in the declassified transcript of the call released by the Trump administration.    Trump mentioned CrowdStrike, but did not demand the server.
    Meanwhile, Democrats on Wednesday released a transcript of testimony from U.S. diplomat Bill Taylor in which he claimed to have a “clear understanding” that Trump wanted to leverage military aid to Ukraine in return for investigations that could benefit him politically -- while acknowledging he didn't have firsthand knowledge of "what was in the president's mind."
    “That was my clear understanding, security assistance money would not come until the President [of Ukraine] committed to pursue the investigation,” Taylor said.
READ THE TRANSCRIPT
    Taylor is a top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine who has emerged as a key figure of interest in the Trump impeachment inquiry, having alleged a quid pro quo was at play despite White House denials.
    The transcript shows that Taylor testified he had been told by other officials that the White House was willing to hold up both military aid and a prospective White House meeting with Ukraine's president to extract a public announcement from Kiev that probes related to election interference and a company linked to former Vice President Joe Biden's son were underway.
    "Coup has started. ... We will get rid of him." — Whistleblower attorney Mark Zaid, in 2017
    "That's what Ambassador Sondland said," Taylor said, referring to E.U. ambassador Gordon Sondland.    "He said that they were linked.    They were linked."
    But Republicans have countered that Taylor did not have primary knowledge regarding the key events in question, but rather based his testimony off conversations with others.
TRUMP-UKRAINE HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY TO START 'OPEN HEARINGS' NEXT WEEK
    In one exchange between GOP Rep. Lee Zeldin and Taylor during his deposition, Taylor was asked whether he had any firsthand knowledge of Trump conditioning an investigation into the 2016 election and the Bidens on military aid.
    Taylor said he did not speak to the president, or have any direct communication with the president regarding the requests for investigations.    Instead, he said he was basing much of his testimony on what former United States Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations Kurt Volker and Sondland told him.

11/9/2019 Republicans call Hunter Biden, whistleblower and others to publicly testify by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Oct. 11, 2012, file photo, Hunter Biden waits for the start of the his father’s, Vice President
Joe Biden’s, debate at Centre College in Danville, Ky. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)
    House Republicans are calling Hunter Biden to testify in the upcoming public impeachment hearings.
    According to a witness list released on Saturday, Biden and his former Burisma business partner Devon Archer are among those the GOP wants to appear for open testimonies.    Republicans also want the whistleblower to appear and reveal their identity in the public forum.
    House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes released a letter with the list.    It stated that he expects each of the witnesses to be called to “ensure Democrats treat the president with fairness, as promised by Speaker Pelosi.”
Rep. Adam Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, speaks to reporters after witnesses failed
to appear under subpoena before House impeachment investigators following President Donald Trump’s orders
not to cooperate with the probe, in Washington, Monday, Nov. 4, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
    Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff is refusing the GOP’s request to call on Hunter Biden.    On Saturday, the chairman said the impeachment inquiry will not be used to undertake investigations into the Bidens or the 2016 election.
    He also said the committee is evaluating the GOP’s requests and will give consideration to witnesses within the scope of the impeachment inquiry, as voted on by the House.    The other witnesses the GOP has requested to publicly testify include former special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker and former Fusion GPS contractor Nellie Ohr.
    Later the same day, President Trump said some of his suggestions for the Republicans’ list of potential witnesses did not make the cut.     He took to Twitter Saturday to share his recommendations.
    He also mentioned both whistleblowers as possible witnesses he wanted on the list.

11/9/2019 Giuliani: Biden-Ukraine ties should have been investigated a year ago by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Aug. 1, 2018 file photo, Rudy Giuliani, attorney for President Donald Trump, addresses
a gathering during a campaign event in Portsmouth, N.H. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File )
    Rudy Giuliani is saying there’s much to uncover in the business dealings between the Biden family and Ukraine.
    During a Friday interview, Giuliani claimed Hunter and Joe Biden’s ties with Ukraine should have been investigated at least a year ago.     He claimed the corruption had been present for some time, but was not brought to light by federal agencies like the FBI because the bureau was also involved in the corruption.
    The president’s attorney went on to say as part of the president’s legal team, they found that three members of the Obama National Security Council had asked Ukrainian prosecutors to get dirt on the Trump campaign.
    “What you’re going to find out is that there was a lot dirty information — some nasty and some of it just plain false — that the Ukrainians were getting at the bidding of the Obama administration,” stated Giuliani.
    The attorney has previously claimed the Democrat impeachment inquiry was made to keep this alleged “pay for play” under wraps.
    This comes after two Republican senators asked the Secretary of State to release all documents related to Hunter Biden’s work for Ukrainian energy company Burisma.    They sought to determine if it may have influenced the Obama administration to end a corruption investigation.

11/10/2019 GOP wants Hunter Biden to testify From Wire Reports
    WASHINGTON – Democrats and Republicans are already tussling over which witnesses to call for the public impeachment hearings in the coming week.Republicans released a list of people they want to hear from.    Among them: Biden’s son, Hunter; one of his former associates at a Ukrainian energy company; and the anonymous whistleblower.
    The top Republican on the House intelligence committee, California Rep. Devin Nunes, said Democrats are conducting a one-sided inquiry and it’s important to hear from certain people familiar with Ukrainian corruption and political machinations.
    But Republicans need the committee’s approval to summon their witnesses and Democrats are in the majority.    The committee chairman, California Rep. Adam Schiff, quickly cast doubt on whether Republicans will get their way.
    Without getting into specifics, Schiff said he won’t let the hearings serve as a vehicle to conduct “sham investigations” into former Vice President Joe Biden, his son or the 2016 election.    Nor will he let the hearings aid President Donald Trump’s “effort to threaten ... and retaliate against the whistleblower.”
    Some of the eight people on the Republicans’ list have already testified privately.    They also want to hear from officials who helped the whistleblower prepare the complaint.
    Republicans want to hear from:
  • The whistleblower: The still-unidentified official who filed a whistleblower complaint following Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy.
  • Hunter Biden: The son of former Vice President Joe Biden and former board member of Burisma Holdings, Ukraine’s largest gas company.
  • David Hale: The undersecretary of state for political affairs who testified behind closed doors Wednesday.
  • Tim Morrison: National Security Council aide who testified behind closed doors on Oct. 31.
  • Kurt Volker: Special envoy to Ukraine who testified behind closed doors on Oct. 3.
  • Nellie Ohr: A contractor for research firm Fusion GPS who worked on the Steele dossier, an unverified 2016 compilation ex-British intelligence officer Christopher Steele alleging ties between Trump and the Kremlin.
  • Devon Archer: Burisma board member Devon Archer, a business partner of Hunter Biden.
  • Alexandra Chalupa: Democratic National Committee staffer who Republicans allege was part of Ukrainian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.
    “We expect you will call each of the witnesses listed above to ensure that the Democrats’ ‘impeachment inquiry’ treats the President with fairness, as promised by Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi,” Nunes wrote in a letter Saturday to Schiff.
    Schiff said three State Department witnesses will appear in two hearings Wednesday and Friday: the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Bill Taylor, career department official George Kent and Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.    Yovanovitch was ousted in May on Trump’s orders and Taylor replaced her; both have testified about their concerns with the administration’s policy on Ukraine.
House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff, D-Calif., center, says he’s
not likely to allow attacks on the whistleblower. JIM LO SCALZO/EPA-EFE
[It is very obvious that Shifty Schiff would not allow testimony that would refute the Democratic narrative that he has created behind closed doors and would keep this from the American people from seeing the other side of the narrative.
Where is the IG Report and Durham charges which will shut down this silly impeachment inquiry because the players who caused this mess will be busted finally
.].

11/10/2019 Nikki Haley: Former cabinet members told me to resist President Trump by OAN Newsroom
FILE-In this Monday, Nov. 26, 2018 file photo, United States Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley
speaks during a security council meeting at United Nations headquarters. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File)
    Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley is claiming two former cabinet members tried to recruit her to help undermine the president.    In a recent interview, Haley said former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly confronted her in a closed-door meeting to enlist her in opposing President Trump.
    Haley will detail the alleged meeting in her soon to be released memoir, “With All Due Respect.”    She said Kelly and Tillerson “confided in me that when they resisted the president, they weren’t being insubordinate — they were trying to save the country.”
Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson leaves a courthouse in New York, Wednesday, Oct. 30, 2019. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)
    According to the memoir, Tillerson told Haley lives were at stake if the president were to go unchecked. The former South Carolina governor said she declined their offers, calling them offensive.
    “Go tell the president what your differences are and quit if you don’t like what he’s doing,” said Haley.    “To undermine a president is really a very dangerous thing — it goes against the Constitution and what the American people want.”
    Although Haley has not always seen eye to eye with the president, she said she will stand by him as he continues to seek another term in office in 2020.
    “What I’ll be doing is campaigning for this one,” she said.    “I look forward to supporting the president in the next election.”
FILE – In this Nov. 16, 2018, file photo, now former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly watches as
President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)
    The former UN ambassador has also spoken out against House Democrats’ efforts to impeach President Trump.    She said his alleged attempts to seek assistance from foreign nations for political investigations is not impeachable.
    “The Ukrainians never did the investigation and the president released the funds,” stated Haley.    “There’s just nothing impeachable there.”
    stepped down from her position in the UN back in 2018 and received a warm sendoff from President Trump. “With All Due Respect” will showcase Haley’s perspectives on major national and international matters, along with other insights into her time in the Trump administration.
    The book is set to be released on Tuesday.
[More proof that Trump had to clean the SWAMP and is being attacked by the DEEP STATE.]

11/13/2019 Sen. Rand Paul names suspected whistleblower by OAN Newsroom
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., responds to reporters at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
    Sen. Rand Paul defied mainstream norms and called out the suspected whistleblower by name.    During radio interview Wednesday, the Kentucky lawmaker was asked about his position that news outlets should name the alleged whistleblower, which has been reported by conservative outlets.
    You can listen to the full radio interview here.
    Sen. Paul then named the alleged informant, saying he could be called in to testify during potential hearings in the Senate due to his reported ties to former Vice President Joe Biden.
    “I think Eric Ciaramella needs to be pulled in for testimony and then I think it will be ultimately determined at that point, but I think he is a person of interest in the sense that he was at the Ukraine desk when Joe Biden was there…when Hunter Biden was working for the Ukrainian oligarch,” said the Kentucky lawmaker.    “So simply for that alone, I think he’s a material witness who needs to be brought in.”
    Sen. Paul’s demand comes despite there being no reported confirmation of the anonymous person’s identity.
RELATED: OAN Gives Alleged Whistleblower Eric Ciaramella The Opportunity To Deny Media Claims

11/13/2019 NYT Report: President Trump floated firing Intel Community Inspector General by OAN Newsroom
President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting of the Economic Club of New York
in New York, Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2019. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)
    As President Trump calls for the Ukraine whistleblower to be identified, the inspector general who shared the whistleblower complaint may be under fire.    On Tuesday, the New York Times reported the president has considered firing Inspector General Michael Atkinson after calling him disloyal.    Atkinson, who was appointed by the president in 2017, notified House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff of the complaint in September.
    The Times report follows a tweet this weekend in which the president included Atkinson with a list of Democrats he says should testify during the impeachment hearings.    Other Republicans have Atkinson in their sights as well.
    He’s either totally incompetent or part of the deep state, and he’s got a lot of questions he needs to answer because he knowingly changed the form and the requirements in order to make sure that this whistleblower complaint got out publicly,” stated Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.).    “So he’s either incompetent or in on it, and he’s going to have more to answer for it, I can promise you, because we are not going to let him go.”
    Last month, the president tweeted that Atkinson should have never let the whistleblower scam get started in the first place.    He went on to call it a “Democrat hoax.”

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., talks with reporters on Capitol Hill
in Washington, Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2019, about the House impeachment inquiry. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

11/13/2019 Facebook accused of censorship in lawsuit over posts naming alleged whistleblower by OAN Newsroom
FILE – This March 29, 2018 file photo, shows logo for social media giant Facebook at the
Nasdaq MarketSite in New York’s Times Square. (AP Photo/Richard Drew, File)
    Facebook is facing a new lawsuit over censorship following its decision to allegedly remove posts which name the alleged whistleblower.    Tuesday reports said a law school student accused the social media platform of deleting three of his posts naming the alleged informant without any explanation.
    The student claimed he wanted to test whether Facebook was blocking posts that mention the rumored whistleblower’s name, whether with praise or negativity.
    Facebook stated any mention of the name violates its ‘Coordinating Harm Policy,’ which prohibits content that may out an informant.    A spokesperson reiterated the company’s standpoint on Tuesday.
    “We are removing any and all mentions of the potential whistleblower’s name and will revisit this decision, should their name be widely published in the media or used by public figures in debate,” stated the spokesperson.
    This comes amid other social media blocks on the whistleblower’s name.    Last week, One America’s Neil W. McCabe was locked out of his Twitter account after tweeting his report from the alleged whistleblower’s home.
    Recent reports said Wikipedia has also been censoring the name.    They have reportedly deleted any mention of the name ‘Eric Ciaramella’ from impeachment-related articles.    Wikipedia editors previously attempted to reference reports of Ciaramella being identified as the alleged whistleblower.    The site’s administrators also marked draft pages about Ciaramella as so-called ‘attack pages,’ despite their previous classification as ‘neutral.’
    Ciaramella is a registered Democrat who previously worked with former Vice President Joe Biden and former CIA Director John Brennan.    His name has been tossed around on social media platforms for weeks and is known by many on Capitol Hill.
[The DEEP STATE can release any leaks or information anytime anywhere whether it is true or not and would not be blocked, which is a violation of our First Amendment.].

11/15/2019 Roger Stone found guilty on all counts by OAN Newsroom
Roger Stone, left, with his wife Nydia Stone, leaves federal court in Washington, Friday, Nov. 15, 2019. Stone, a longtime friend
of President Donald Trump, has been found guilty at his trial in federal court in Washington. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
    A federal jury handed down a guilty verdict to former Trump campaign associate Roger Stone.    A jury found Stone guilty of all seven charges listed in his indictment on Friday, which included five counts of lying to Congress, one count of witness tampering and one count of obstructing proceedings.
    During proceedings, prosecutors mainly focused on Stone lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his work to discover what WikiLeaks planned to do with a trove of hacked DNC emails.    The case against Stone was the last remaining case brought forth by former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
    The White House has launched a petition calling for a full pardon for Stone.    The former Trump official has been released until his sentencing on February 6, 2020.
    President Trump called Stone’s conviction a double standard.    On Twitter Friday, the president noted that several Democrats were never sentenced to prison for allegedly lying to Congress.    He mentioned a number of high profile names, including crooked” Hillary Clinton, fired FBI Director James Comey, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page to name a few.    The president concluded his tweet asking “didn’t they lie?
[Process crimes are the offenses that "interfere with the procedures and administration of justice."    They are prosecuted because they are considered to harm the public interest in the functioning and integrity of the judicial system.    So, this tells me that they did not determine he did anything wrong except not tell them what they wanted him to tell them.    Just as Jerome Corsi refused to do also but they could not connect him to WikiLeaks.    So Stone has not been connected to Assange who founded WikiLeaks in 2006, and came to international attention in 2010, when WikiLeaks published a series of leaks provided by Chelsea Manning.    The U.S. government or the part we call the "DEEP DTATE" was embarrassed over the information they uncovered.]

11/16/2019 New documents allege millions went to Biden’s and Kerry’s firm by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Jan. 15, 2017 file photo, former U.S Secretary of State John Kerry speaks with the media
after attending the Mideast peace conference in Paris. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, Pool, File)
    Corrupt actions by the former Obama-era vice president and secretary of state are coming to light after new leaked documents surfaced.    In a bombshell tweet, activist and entrepreneur Michael Coodrey released a series of leaked documents from the Ukrainian General Prosecutor’s Office, which allegedly detail a so-called ‘slushfund’ collecting large sums of money from foreign sources.
    The report claimed this fund is owned and operated by former Secretary of State John Kerry and Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President Joe Biden.
    In 2014, Hunter Biden was appointed to the board of directors of Ukrainian oil company Burisma.    GOP senators are calling on the State Department to release records of business dealings within the company.    This comes after $1.8 billion in U.S. and IMF funds to Ukraine allegedly disappeared.
Career Foreign Service officer George Kent and top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine William Taylor, right,
are sworn in to testify during the first public impeachment hearing of the House Intelligence Committee
on Capitol Hill, Wednesday Nov. 13, 2019, in Washington. (Joshua Roberts/Pool via AP)
    State Department official George Kent claimed he has no idea what qualified Hunter Biden to serve on the board of a Ukrainian gas company.    Kent testified on Capitol Hill this week, saying he doesn’t know anything about Biden’s background or how he could be tied to Burisma.
    “I heard nothing about prior experience,” stated Kent.    “Do you know if he possesses any other element — other than the fact that he is the son of, at the time, the sitting vice president?
    This comes after Ukrainian investigators alleged the only reason Biden was on the company’s board was to protect Burisma from anti-corruption scrutiny — which eventually happened when Joe Biden forced Ukraine’s top prosecutor to resign in 2016.
FILE – In this Jan. 30, 2010, file photo, former Vice President Joe Biden, left, with his son Hunter, right,
at the Duke Georgetown NCAA college basketball game in Washington. (AP Photo/Nick Wass, File)
    At the same time, Ukraine’s foreign minister released a statement saying the U.S. envoy was never linked to probes into the Bidens’ alleged corruption.    The minister added the Bidens were mentioned during U.S.-Ukrainian talks, but were not conditionally attached to the investigation.
    The president weighed in on that statement during a ‘Keep America Great’ rally in Louisiana.
    “Here it is — Ukrainian Foreign Minister said on Thursday that the United States ambassador did not link financial military assistance to a request for Ukraine to open up an investigation into former Vice President and current Democratic presidential (candidate Joe Biden),” stated President Trump.

11/16/2019 Obama admin. was concerned about Hunter Biden and Ukraine by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Oct. 11, 2012, file photo, Hunter Biden waits for the start of the his father’s, Vice President
Joe Biden’s, debate at Centre College in Danville, Ky. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)
    The Obama administration’s concerns about Hunter Biden’s connections in Ukraine came to light during this week’s impeachment hearings.    Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch admitted during questioning Friday that the Obama administration took issue with Hunter Biden’s job at Ukrainian energy company Burisma.
    Representative Elise Stefanik also unveiled coaching by the Obama State Department to Yovanovitch in answering questions related to Hunter Biden during her Senate confirmation hearings.
    “For the millions of Americans watching, the State Department was so concerned about potential conflicts of interest from Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma that they rated themselves while prepping the wonderful ambassador nominee before her confirmation,” stated Stefanik.    “And yet our Democratic colleagues and the chairman of this committee cry foul when we dare ask that same question that the Obama State Department was so concerned about — but we will continue asking it.”
    President Trump’s interest in investigating the Bidens’ relationship with Ukraine resulted in Democrats opening their impeachment inquiry.    The president has defended his administration’s actions, saying it’s his job to investigate corruption claims.

11/16/2019 Rick Gates to be sentenced on December 17th by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Feb. 23, 2018 file photo, Rick Gates leaves federal court in Washington. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
    Former Trump campaign deputy manager Rick Gates is slated to be sentenced next month.    Court documents released on Friday said Gates would be sentenced December 17th after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy and lying to investigators.    He is facing up to six years in prison.
    Gates rose to prominence after providing key testimony during the Mueller investigation and was a witness in the cases against former presidential advisers Paul Manafort and Roger Stone.
    Gates pleaded guilty in February 2018 as part of a plea deal with the Mueller investigation.
    This comes just one day after a jury found Roger Stone guilty of all seven charges listed in his indictment on Friday, which included five counts of lying to Congress, one count of witness tampering and one count of obstructing proceedings.    During proceedings, prosecutors mainly focused on Stone lying to the House Intelligence Committee about his work to discover what WikiLeaks planned to do with a trove of hacked DNC emails.    The case against Stone was the last remaining case brought forth by former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
    The White House has launched a petition calling for a full pardon for Stone.    The former Trump official has been released until his sentencing on February 6, 2020.
Roger Stone, left, with his wife Nydia Stone, leaves federal court in Washington, Friday, Nov. 15, 2019. Stone, a longtime friend
of President Donald Trump, has been found guilty at his trial in federal court in Washington. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

11/19/2019 Turkey orders detention of 133 military personnel over suspected Gulen links: Anadolu
FILE PHOTO: U.S.-based Turkish cleric Fethullah Gulen at his home in
Saylorsburg, Pennsylvania, U.S. July 10, 2017. REUTERS/Charles Mostoller/File Photo
    ANKARA (Reuters) – Turkey has ordered the detention of 133 military personnel over suspected links to a network Ankara accuses of organizing an attempted coup in 2016, the state-run Anadolu news agency said on Tuesday.
    The suspects are being sought in an operation centered in the western coastal province of Izmir, Anadolu said, adding that 82 of them were serving members in the military.
    Ankara blames U.S.-based Muslim cleric Fethullah Gulen, who has lived in self-imposed exile in Pennsylvania since 1999, of masterminding the failed putsch on July 15, 2016.    He has denied any involvement.
    In the three-year purge since the coup attempt, more than 77,000 people have been jailed pending trial and about 150,000 civil servants, military personnel and others have been sacked or suspended from their jobs.    Widespread arrests are still carried out routinely.
    Turkey’s Western allies and rights groups have criticized the massive crackdown, saying President Tayyip Erdogan has used the abortive coup as a pretext to quash dissent.
    Ankara has defended the measures as a necessary response to the scale of the security threat facing Turkey, and has vowed to eradicate Gulen’s network.
(Reporting by Tuvan Gumrukcu; Editing by Shri Navaratnam)

11/18/2019 WikiLeaks founder Assange has unsuitable computer in jail, court told
FILE PHOTO: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange leaves Southwark Crown Court
after being sentenced in London, Britain, May 1, 2019. REUTERS/Henry Nicholls/
    LONDON (Reuters) – WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is struggling to prepare for his case fighting extradition to the United States because he has been given an unsuitable computer in prison, his lawyer told a British court on Monday.
    Assange, 48, who spent seven years holed up in Ecuador’s embassy before he was dragged out in April, is wanted in the United States to face 18 counts including conspiring to hack government computers and violating an espionage law. He could spend decades in prison if convicted.
    Appearing at London’s Westminster Magistrates’ Court via video link, Assange spoke only to confirm his name and date of birth in a hearing that lasted just a few minutes.
    His lawyer, Gareth Peirce, told the court that her client was unable to adequately prepare for his “very challenging case” as the computer he had been given was not suitable.
    “After months of battle he was provided with a computer but it is not the sort of computer needed to work on the case,” Peirce said.
    Judge Vanessa Baraitser said she had no jurisdiction over his conditions in prison.
    Assange, who was sentenced to 50 weeks in prison for skipping bail to flee to the Ecuadorean embassy, will remain in custody ahead of a case management hearing on Dec. 19 before full extradition proceedings in February.
(Reporting by Andrew MacAskill; Editing by Giles Elgood)

    The following found at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/attorney-general-barr-left-systemic-sabotage
11/17/2019 Attorney General Barr accuses the left of systemic 'sabotage' of Trump administration by Paulina Dedaj, Fox News
Attorney General Barr accuses the left of systemic ‘sabotage’ of Trump administration
Raw video: Attorney General Bill Barr accused congressional Democrats of ‘using every tool’ to ‘sabotage’ the
Trump administration by setting a ‘dangerous’ precedent in implying that the government is illegitimate.
    Attorney General Bill Barr accused congressional Democrats Friday of “using every tool” to “sabotage” the Trump administration by setting a “dangerous” precedent in implying that the government is illegitimate.
    During a speech at the Federalist Society’s dinner in Washington, Barr took aim at the “resistance,” accusing liberal lawmakers of attacking the very foundations of the Constitution.
    “I deeply admire the American presidency as a political and constitutional institution,” he began.    “Unfortunately over the past several decades, we have seen a steady encroachment on executive authority by the other branches of the government.”
    Barr said the “avalanche of subpoenas” and constant attempt to derail appointments by the Trump administration have only served to “incapacitate” the executive branch.
    “Immediately after President Trump won the election, opponents inaugurated what they called the ‘resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch and his administration.”
    “The cost of this constant harassment is real,” he continued.
    Barr likened the language used by Trump’s opponents to that of groups who attempt to overthrow militant rule of seized governments.
Gregg Jarrett author of the book "WITCH HUNT Critics cry 'witness intimidation' over Trump tweets on impeachment"
    “Now resistance is the language used to describe insurgency against rule imposed by an occupying military power.    It obviously connotes that the government is not legitimate.    This is a very dangerous and, indeed, incendiary notation to import into the politics of a democratic republic.”
    He continued: “They essentially see themselves engaged in a war to cripple, by any means necessary, a duly elected government.”
    Barr claimed that while Trump’s presidency falls outside the norm of previous administrations, he was elected with the public fully aware of this.
    “The fact is, that, yes, while the president has certainly thrown out the traditional beltway playbook and punctilio, he was upfront about what he was going to do and the people decided that he was going to serve as president."
    Barr’s comments came on the same as Congress held a second public hearing in the House impeachment inquiry.

11/19/2019 Attorney General Barr: Democrats work to undermine executive branch by OAN Newsroom
    According to Attorney General William Barr, far-left lawmakers are waging a partisan war against President Trump.
    While speaking at the Federalist Society in D.C. on Monday, Barr said Democrat Party officials are working to undermine the rule of law and the executive branch.
    Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they called the resistance,” explained the U.S. attorney general Barr went on to say Democrats are obstructing the work of the U.S. government, while at the same time accusing President Trump of doing just that.    He called on Democrats to work together with the president to move America forward.
FILE – U.S. Attorney General William Barr speaks during a tour of a federal prison in Edgefield, S.C. (AP Photo/John Bazemore, File)
    “What it means is that instead of viewing themselves as the loyal opposition as opposing parties have done in this country for over 200 years, they essentially see themselves as engaged in a war to cripple, by any means necessary, a duly elected government,” he stated.
    Barr pointed out the Democrat push for impeachment and other investigations into President Trump are designed to incapacitate and harass the executive branch.

11/19/2019 Dept. of Justice IG Horowitz set to testify next month about FISA abuse report by OAN Newsroom
Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz appears at the launch of the Procurement Collusion
Strike Force at the Justice Department in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2019. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen)
    Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz is set to testify next month regarding alleged FISA abuses in the 2016 election.    That’s according to Sen. Lindsey Graham, who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee.
    Horowitz upcoming testimony could signal he’s nearly complete with his report, which details alleged surveillance abuse in the 2016 election.    Specifically, the Inspector General report is expected to reveal unlawful conduct by the Obama-era Justice Department and FBI, which targeted members of the Trump campaign. This included Carter Page.     “And nobody much appears to care, but I hope you will find some interest now that the FISA warrant issued against Carter Page based on a dossier prepared by Christopher Steele is, at a minimum, disturbing,” said Sen. Graham.    “Whether or not it is illegal, I don’t yet know.”
    Republicans have long claimed this illicit behavior is what kick-started the Mueller probe.    Horowitz is scheduled to testify on December 11th.
FILE – In this Oct. 24, 2019, file photo, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., speaks during a news conference
at the Capitol in Washington. Republicans have no unified argument in the impeachment inquiry of Donald Trump in
large part because they can’t agree on how to defend the president. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

11/19/2019 Sweden drops Assange rape investigation after nearly 10 years by Johan Ahlander and Simon Johnson
FILE PHOTO: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange leaves Southwark Crown Court after
being sentenced in London, Britain, May 1, 2019. REUTERS/Henry Nicholls/
    STOCKHOLM (Reuters) – A Swedish prosecutor dropped a rape investigation against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, ending the near decade-old case that had sent the anti-secrecy campaigner into hiding in London’s Ecuadorian embassy to avoid extradition.
    Although the prosecutor’s decision can be appealed, it probably closes the case, which was launched in 2010.    The accuser’s lawyer said she was studying whether to appeal it.
    Assange skipped bail in Britain to avoid possible extradition and took refuge in the embassy in 2012.    He was dragged out by police in April this year, and is now in jail fighting extradition to the United States on computer hacking and espionage charges unveiled after he left the embassy.
    While Assange was in the embassy, the statute of limitations ran out on investigating all but one of several Swedish sex crime complaints originally filed by two women.    Deputy Chief Prosecutor Eva-Marie Persson reopened the remaining case after Assange left the embassy, but she said on Tuesday the passage of time meant there was not enough evidence to indict Assange.
    “After conducting a comprehensive assessment of what has emerged during the course of the preliminary investigation I then make the assessment that the evidence is not strong enough to form the basis for filing an indictment,” she told a news conference.    “Nine years have passed.    Time is a player in this decision.”
    Assange, a 48-year-old Australian, has repeatedly denied the sex crime allegations, calling them part of a plot to discredit him and secure his eventual transfer to the United States.
    “Let us now focus on the threat Mr Assange has been warning about for years: the belligerent prosecution of the United States and the threat it poses to the First Amendment,” WikiLeaks editor-in-chief, Kristinn Hrafnsson, said in a statement.
    Assange’s Swedish lawyer, Per Samuelson, said as far as he was aware British lawyers had not yet been able to contact Assange in jail to inform him of the Swedish decision.
    “This is the end of Assange’s association with the Swedish justice system,” Samuelson said.    “But he is not happy with the way he’s been treated.    He lost faith in the Swedish justice system years ago.”
    Elisabet Massi Fritz, lawyer for the accuser, told Reuters in a text message that she and her client would discuss whether to request a review of the decision to drop the case.    The right decision would have been to interrogate Assange in London and then charge him with rape, she said.
    “After today’s decision my client needs time to process everything that has happened over these nine years in order to be able to move on with her life.”
U.S. ANGER
    The Australian-born Assange made global headlines in early 2010 when WikiLeaks published a classified U.S. military video showing a 2007 attack by Apache helicopters in Baghdad that killed a dozen people, including two Reuters news staff.     WikiLeaks later angered the United States by publishing caches of leaked military documents and diplomatic cables.     In 2016 it played a role in the U.S. presidential campaign, releasing documents from hacked emails of Democratic Party officials. U.S. investigators determined those emails were originally obtained by Russian hackers as part of an effort by Moscow to help elect President Donald Trump.
    Admirers have hailed Assange as a hero for exposing what they describe as abuse of power by modern states and for championing free speech.    Critics say he is a dangerous figure complicit in Russian efforts to undermine the West.
    Even some critics of Assange say the U.S. charges against him could be troubling, since they treat publication of secrets as a crime, activity that advocates of press freedom say is essential for journalism.
    The case had divided opinion in Sweden, a country with strong traditions of support for both women’s rights and media freedom.     Prosecutors were criticized for letting the case drag on, while many blamed Assange for obstructing the investigation.
    The decision by the Swedish prosecutor heads off a potential dilemma for the British courts which might otherwise have had to decide between competing U.S. and Swedish extradition requests.
    Since leaving the embassy, Assange has served a British sentence for skipping bail. He is now being held pending his next hearing in February on the U.S. extradition request. He faces 18 criminal counts including conspiring to hack government computers and violating an espionage law.
(Reporting by Simon Johnson, Johan Ahlander, Niklas Pollard and Anna Ringrstrom; Editing by Peter Graff)

11/19/2019 Rep. Adam Schiff to Ukraine: Don’t investigate Bidens by OAN Newsroom
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., questions Ambassador Kurt Volker, former special envoy to Ukraine,
and Tim Morrison, a former official at the National Security Council, as they testify before the House Intelligence
Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2019, during a public impeachment hearing of President
Donald Trump’s efforts to tie U.S. aid for Ukraine to investigations of his political opponents. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, Pool)
    House Intel Chair Adam Schiff appears to be threatening Ukraine over its ongoing corruption probe of the Biden family.    During the impeachment hearings on Tuesday, Schiff claimed Ukraine’s investigations into the Bidens could influence U.S. politics.
    He suggested Ukraine should leave the Bidens alone.
    “The real message to Ukraine — our U.S. policy message is: don’t engage in political investigations,” stated Schiff.
    Republican lawmakers have suggested Democrats, rather than President Trump, have tried to pressure the foreign government.
    “If the Democrats and the media are suddenly so deeply concerned about bribery, you would think they would take some interest in Burisma paying Hunter Biden $83,000 a month,” said Representative Devin Nunes.    “And you think they would be interested in Joe Biden threatening to withhold U.S. loan guarantees unless the Ukrainians fired a prosecutor who is investigating Burisma — that would be a textbook example of bribery.”
    Some officials in Kyiv expressed concerns of possibly losing bipartisan support in the U.S. over the Biden scandal.    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Ukrainians are tired of the issue regarding energy company Burisma Holdings.
    “I think everybody in Ukraine is so tired about Burisma,” said President Zelensky.    “We have our country, we have our independence — we have our problems and questions.”

11/19/2019 Seller of bullets to Las Vegas gunman pleads guilty to ammo licensing charge
FILE PHOTO: People look at a Remembrance Wall at the Las Vegas Healing Garden during the one-year anniversary
of the October 1 mass shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S. October 1, 2018. REUTERS/Steve Marcus
    (Reuters) – A man who acknowledged selling hundreds of rounds of tracer bullets to the gunman responsible for killing 58 people at a Las Vegas music festival two years ago pleaded guilty on Tuesday to a federal charge of manufacturing ammunition without a license.
    Douglas Haig, 57, of Mesa, Arizona, became the first and only person arrested and charged in connection with the Oct. 1, 2017, massacre, which ended when the perpetrator, Stephen Paddock, killed himself.
    Haig told a news conference following his arrest early last year that none of the surplus military ammunition he sold Paddock in September 2017, weeks before the shooting, was ever fired during the killing spree.
    Haig said he had no inkling of any criminal intent by Paddock.    And authorities never accused Haig of conspiring in the attack, which ranks as the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.    Nearly 500 people were injured.
    However, prosecutors said Haig’s fingerprints were found on some of the unfired rounds in Paddock’s hotel suite and that armor-piercing cartridges recovered there bore tool marks matching equipment in Haig’s suburban Phoenix workshop.
(Reporting by Steve Gorman in Culver City, California; editing by Bill Tarrant and Richard Chang)
[Some day the real truth of what caused this event occurred in Nevada a Democrat state and will come out evemtually as I believe it was an attempt to slaughter people at a country musical festival who support the Second Amendment in hope it would change those laws and our constitution at the beginning of Trump's administration.    Somebody in the DEEP STATE knows because one investigator believes there was another individual involved associated with a locked room.].

11/20/2019 White House photo shows alleged whistleblower with Obama by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this April 6, 2019, file photo, former President Barack Obama attends a town hall meeting at the
‘European School For Management And Technology’ (ESMT) in Berlin, Germany. (AP Photo/Michael Sohn. File)
    A newly surfaced photo of the alleged whistleblower in the impeachment inquiry is fueling concerns about partisanship.    The Washington Examiner has obtained an image which shows Eric Ciaramella shaking hands in the Oval Office with former President Barack Obama.    It was discovered on a website for a friend’s 2018 wedding.
    The image has reportedly been making the rounds among the president’s GOP allies, who claimed it shows a political bias against the president.
    “This picture raises serious questions about how this sham impeachment process started,” a senior Trump administration official told The Washington Examiner. “It’s no surprise that Schiff has now changed his story about letting the falsely labeled whistleblower testify.”
    At the time the photo was taken, Ciaramella allegedly worked as the National Security Council’s Ukraine director.    Critics of the impeachment inquiry have raised questions about Ciaramella’s ties to other Obama-era officials.
    “Certain of the media released information about a man that they said was the whistleblower—I don’t know if that’s true or not,” stated President Trump.    “What they said is he was an Obama person…he was like a big anti-Trump person.”
    House Intel Chair Adam Schiff has repeatedly rejected calls by Republicans to call the alleged whistleblower to testify before the House, citing efforts to protect the individual’s identity.    During Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman’s testimony on Tuesday, he interrupted the proceedings to make sure the official didn’t mention the name.
[So as you can see above that Schiff does know who the whistleblower is and did not ask if he was referring to the whistleblower, but immediatelly prevented him from answering that question from the Republicans.].

   
IT'S HAPPENING STAY TUNED AS THE INVESTIGATIONS ARE BEGINNING AND THE SWAMP IS IN THE CROSSHAIRS

    The following found at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/horowitz-finds-evidence-fbi-employee-altered-russia-probe-document
11/21/2019 Horowitz reportedly finds FBI lawyer falsified FISA doc; WaPo stealth-deletes Strzok connection by Gregg Re, Fox News
Report: Criminal referrals likely in Horowitz FISA abuse report
Investigation findings expected soon; Fox News contributor Jason Chaffetz and Rep. Andy Biggs weigh in.
    Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz has found evidence that an FBI lawyer manipulated a key investigative document related to the FBI's secretive surveillance of a former Trump campaign adviser -- enough to change the substantive meaning of the document, according to multiple reports.
    The show-stopping development comes as Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News that Horowitz's comprehensive report on allegations of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant abuse against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page will be released on Dec. 9.    "That's locked," Graham said.
    The new evidence concerning the altered document, which pertained to the FBI's FISA court warrant application to surveil Page, is expected to be outlined in Horowitz's upcoming report. CNN first reported the news, which was largely confirmed by The Washington Post.
    But the Post, hours after publishing its story, conspicuously removed the portion of its reporting that the FBI employee involved worked "beneath" Peter Strzok, the FBI's since-fired head of counterintelligence.    The Post did not offer an explanation for the change, which occurred shortly after midnight.    Earlier this week, the DOJ highlighted a slew of anti-Trump text messages sent by Strzok when he was leading the Hillary Clinton email investigation and the probe into the Trump campaign.
    "The person under scrutiny has not been identified but is not a high-ranking official — they worked beneath former deputy assistant director Peter Strzok, according to people familiar with the investigation who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss material that has not yet been made public," The Post wrote in its now-deleted paragraph.
    The paper eventually added a correction to the bottom of its piece, reading, "Correction: An earlier version of this story erroneously stated that the FBI employee being investigated for altering a document worked underneath former Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok.    The employee was a low-level lawyer in the Office of General Counsel and did not report to the deputy assistant director."
    Nevertheless, Horowitz reportedly found that the FBI employee was involved enough in the FISA process to falsely state that he had "documentation to back up a claim he had made in discussions with the Justice Department about the factual basis" for the FISA warrant application, the Post reported.    Then, the FBI employee allegedly "altered an email" to substantiate his inaccurate version of events.    The employee has since been forced out of the bureau.
One-time advisor of U.S. president-elect Donald Trump Carter Page was called
"an agent of a foreign power" by the FBI in its 2016 FISA surveillance warrant application. He has not been charged
with any wrongdoing despite more than a year of surveillance, and several holes have emerged in the FBI's FISA case. (AP)
    In its initial 2016 FISA warrant application, the FBI flatly called Page "an agent of a foreign power."
    Sources told Fox News last month that U.S. Attorney John Durham's separate, ongoing probe into potential FBI and Justice Department misconduct in the run-up to the 2016 election through the spring of 2017 has transitioned into a full-fledged criminal investigation -- and that Horowitz's report will shed light on why Durham's probe has become a criminal inquiry.
FBI AGENTS MANIPULATED FLYNN FILE, AS CLAPPER ORDERED 'KILL SHOT,' FILING SAYS
    Durham has reportedly taken up Horowitz's findings concerning the falsified FISA document, meaning the ex-FBI lawyer who made the changes is now under criminal investigation.    The Post indicated, however, that the document was not central to the legality of the FISA warrant obtained against Page.
    Republicans have long argued that the FBI's alleged FISA abuses, which came as the bureau aggressively pursued ultimately unsubstantiated claims of criminal links between the Trump team and Russia during the 2016 presidential campaign, were politically motivated.    In recent months, a series of unearthed documents has strengthened those claims.
    Just nine days before the FBI applied for its first FISA warrant to surveil Page, bureau officials were battling with a senior Justice Department official who had "continued concerns" about the "possible bias" of a source pivotal to the application, according to internal text messages previously obtained by Fox News.
    Barr drops hints DOJ IG report on Russia probe 'imminent'
    The 2016 messages, sent between Lisa Page and then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, also revealed that bureau brass circulated at least two anti-Trump blog articles, including a Lawfare blog post sent shortly after Election Day that called Trump possibly "among the major threats to the security of the country."
DOJ OUTLINES STRZOK 'SECURITY VIOLATIONS'; FINDS 'PARANOID' CASE AGENT NOTICED STRZOK WAS SITTING ON WEINER LAPTOP
    Fox News is told the texts were connected to the ultimately successful Page application, which relied in part on information from British ex-spy Christopher Steele – whose anti-Trump views are now well-documented – and cited Page’s suspected Russia ties.    In its warrant application, the FBI inaccurately assured the FISA court on numerous occasions that media sources independently corroborated Steele's claims, and did not clearly state that Steele worked for a firm hired by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
    Much of the Steele dossier has been proved discredited or unsubstantiated, including the dossier's claims that the Trump campaign was paying hackers in the United States out of a non-existent Russian consulate in Miami, or that ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen traveled to Prague to conspire with Russians.    Special Counsel Robert Mueller also was unable to substantiate the dossier's claims that Carter Page had received a large payment relating to the sale of a share of Rosneft, a Russian oil giant, or that a lurid blackmail tape involving the president existed.
    Despite being accused by the FBI of being a Russian agent in the FISA application, and being secretly surveilled for more than a year, Page has not been charged with any wrongdoing.    He has since sued numerous actors -- including the DNC -- for defamation related to claims that he worked with Russia.
Former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn, seen here in 2018, is alleging that the FBI also doctored documents in his case. (AP)
DISPUTE ERUPTS AS BRENNAN, COMEY APPEAR TO DISPUTE WHO PUSHED THE STEELE DOSSIER
    "OI [Office of Intelligence] now has a robust explanation re any possible bias of the chs [confidential human source] in the package," Lisa Page wrote to McCabe on Oct. 12, 2016.    "Don't know what the holdup is now, other than Stu's continued concerns."
    It's unclear whether the confidential source in question was Steele or another individual.    "Stu" was an apparent reference to Stuart Evans, then the DOJ's National Security Division deputy assistant attorney general.    In one previously unearthed and since-unredacted text message, Strzok texted Page that he was "Currently fighting with Stu for this FISA" in late 2016.
    Page is not the only Trump official to allege misconduct by the FBI.    Last month, an explosive court filing from Michael Flynn’s legal team alleged that FBI agents manipulated official records of the former national security adviser’s 2017 interview that led to him being charged with lying to investigators.    Flynn's attorneys demanded the FBI search its internal "Sentinel" system to find more evidence of allegedly doctored files.
    Newly released text messages involving text messages between Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page revealed that Page -- who was not present for the Flynn interview -- had apparently made "edits" to the so-called "302" witness report in the case, which was key to Flynn's prosecution on a false statements charge.    Page told Strzok on February 10, 2017 that she “gave my edits to Bill to put on your desk.”
    Horowitz told congressional lawmakers in an October letter that his investigation and ensuing report were nearing their conclusion.
FBI BLAMES SYSTEM-WIDE SOFTWARE FAILURE FOR MISSING STRZOK TEXTS -- PHONE FROM MUELLER DAYS TOTALLY WIPED
    The "lengthy" draft report "concerns sensitive national security and law enforcement matters," Horowitz wrote in the letter, adding that he anticipated "the final report will be released publicly with few redactions."
    Horowitz noted that he did not anticipate a need to prepare or issue "separate classified and public versions of the report."
    "After we receive the final classification markings from the Department and the FBI, we will then proceed with our usual process for preparing a final report, including ensuring that appropriate reviews occur for accuracy and comment purposes," Horowitz wrote in the letter.    "Once begun, we do not anticipate the time for that review to be lengthy."
    Fox News' Brooke Singman and Charles Crietz contributed to this report.

    Back on 3/13/2019 in my early information I did the list of Obama and Comey’s FBI People and below is one of them.
Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer, wrote anti-Trump texts with former top FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.    According to the Washington Times, Clinesmith “worked on the 2016 probe into Hillary Clinton’s email use [known as Mid-Year-Exam], then worked on the FBI’s original investigation into the Trump campaign [known as Crossfire Hurricane] and, eventually, with the special counsel’s investigation into Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign.”
    But Clinesmith, like Strzok, was let go from Mueller’s investigative team once his anti-Trump texts were uncovered by the FBI inspector general (IG), who is tasked with uncovering wrongdoing at the FBI.    “Viva le resistance,” Clinesmith said in one text.
    So as you see below it has resurfaced again at:
    The following found at https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mueller-lawyer-with-anti-trump-bias-is-ex-fbi-official-facing-fisa-criminal-investigation
11/22/2019 Mueller lawyer with anti-Trump bias is ex-FBI official facing FISA criminal investigation by Daniel Chaitin & Jerry Dunleavy, Washington Examiner
    The FBI lawyer under criminal investigation for allegedly falsifying a document related to the surveillance of a Trump campaign adviser expressed negative opinions of President Trump in messages to colleagues.
    Kevin Clinesmith, who was part of special counsel Robert Mueller's team, has been identified as the attorney who could face a criminal charge as part of U.S. Attorney John Durham's expansive criminal inquiry into the origins of the Russia investigation, according to the New York Times.
    As part of the Justice Department watchdog's now-completed investigation into alleged surveillance abuses, Clinesmith was found to have altered an email that was used by officials as they prepared an application renewal to present before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to obtain a warrant to electronically surveil Carter Page, a onetime foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign.
    Clinesmith was an attorney with the FBI’s National Security and Cyber Law Branch and worked under FBI General Counsel James Baker and Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson.    He had worked on the Clinton email investigation as well as the Trump-Russia probe.    Clinesmith was present in the FBI's meeting with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos in February 2017 in Chicago, Papadopoulos told lawmakers in 2018.    An Australian diplomat's tip about Papadopoulos claiming the Russians had damaging information about Hillary Clinton effectively prompted the FBI's counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign, called Crossfire Hurricane, in July 2016.
Columnist Salena Zito on the expanded Washington Examiner magazine
    Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz's investigators found Clinesmith falsely asserted he had documentation to back up a claim while in talks with the Justice Department about the factual basis for a FISA warrant application renewal.    He then took an email from an official from another agency that contained multiple factual assertions, added material of his own, and gave it to a fellow FBI official who was preparing an affidavit for the Page case.    Clinesmith has been described in many media reports as a “low-level attorney,” but Horowitz said he “was the primary FBI attorney assigned to [the Trump-Russia] investigation in early 2017.”
    Eagerly anticipated by Trump's allies, Howoritz's report is expected to be released to the public on Dec. 9, the inspector general announced this week.    They believe it will reveal an effort to undermine Trump's 2016 campaign in which the FBI misled the FISA court in its reliance on an unverified dossier compiled by British ex-spy Christopher Steele, whose research about Trump and his associates was partially funded by Clinton's 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the Perkins Coie law firm and Fusion GPS.
    The Times, however, reported that the inspector general is expected to criticize top FBI officials but absolve them of abusing their power out of bias against Trump.    Democrats, as well as current and former FBI officials, have additionally dismissed allegations of wrongdoing and have raised concerns that information about U.S. intelligence-gathering could be leveraged to discredit Mueller.
    Horowitz previously identified Clinesmith as one of the FBI officials who conveyed a bias against Trump in instant messages.    Clinesmith was kicked out of Mueller's Russia investigation team in February 2018.    Two other FBI officials who were forced out of Mueller's team for similar anti-Trump messages were Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, both of whom have also left the bureau.
    In a lengthy instant message exchange between Clinesmith and another FBI employee on Nov. 9, 2016, the day after Trump’s presidential victory, he lamented Trump’s win and worried about the role he played in the investigation into Trump and his campaign.
    “My god damned name is all over the legal documents investigating his staff,” Clinesmith said, adding, “So, who knows if that breaks to him what he is going to do?
    A couple weeks later, on Nov. 22, 2016, he said, “Hell no,” when asked by another FBI attorney if he was “rethink[ing] [his] commitment to the Trump administration.”
    “Viva le resistance,” Clinesmith added.
    In a scathing July 2018 inspector general report on the FBI's Clinton emails investigation, Clinesmith was criticized at least 56 times, listed as "FBI Attorney 2."    Clinesmith defended himself, claiming his messages only reflected his personal views.    He asserted his opinions did not affect his work.
    During a hearing that June with Horowitz, North Carolina Republican Rep. Mark Meadows named Clinesmith as being one of two unnamed lawyers criticized in the inspector general report.
    The initial FISA application and three renewals targeting Page required the approval of top members of the FBI, the DOJ, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, but they were also handled by lower-level officials.    The initial warrant application was approved in October 2016, and the final renewal came in June 2017.
    Under suspicion of being a Russian agent, Page became a subject of interest in the FBI's counterintelligence investigation, which was later wrapped into Mueller's investigation.    Page was never charged with a crime as part of Mueller's investigation, which failed to establish criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, and denied being an agent for Russia.
    Last summer, the DOJ took the unprecedented step of releasing more than 400 redacted pages of top-secret documents on the FISA warrant obtained to wiretap Page after Trump declassified their existence.
    “We found instant messages in which FBI Attorney 2 discussed political issues, including three instant message exchanges that raised concerns of potential bias,” Horowitz wrote last year.
    The first exchange highlighted by Horowitz occurred on Oct. 28, 2016, just after FBI Director James Comey sent a letter to Congress announcing the reopening of the Clinton email investigation.    Clinesmith messaged a total of four FBI employees expressing his frustration, telling two of them, “I mean, I never really liked the Republic anyway.”
    “As I have initiated the destruction of the republic ... Would you be so kind as to have a coffee with me this afternoon?” Clinesmith asked a third FBI employee.
    And Clinesmith told a fourth FBI employee, “I’m clinging to small pockets of happiness in the dark time of the Republic’s destruction.”
    In his attempt to explain these texts to Horowitz in 2018, Clinesmith said he was expressing his annoyance with what he saw as the FBI treating the Clinton email investigation more harshly than the Trump-Russia investigation.    He continued to say he didn’t let it impact his work.
    “It’s like, in terms of, of, you know, what’s not in here too is like, you know, we, at that point we had investigation, the Russia investigation was ongoing as well.    And that information was obviously kept close hold and was not released until March,” Clinesmith said.    “So, you know, it, it was just kind of frustration that we weren’t handling both of them the same way with, with that level I guess.”
    The second exchange detailed by the inspector general occurred on Nov. 9, 2016, in which he and another FBI official were “devastated” about Trump’s victory over Clinton the day prior, and Clinesmith said he thought the Comey letter to Congress may have helped Trump win, claiming, “We broke the momentum.”
    “I am so stressed about what I could have done differently,” Clinesmith said, later adding, “It’s just hard not to feel like the FBI caused some of this.    It was razor-thin in some states.”
    Clinesmith also trashed Trump and the Republican Party.     “The crazies won finally.    This is the Tea Party on steroids.    And the GOP is going to be lost, they have to deal with an incumbent in 4 years,” he said.    “We have to fight this again.    Also, Pence is stupid.”
    Clinesmith told Horowitz in 2018, “I wasn’t anywhere near the, the room deciding on these factors. ... It was just kind of like a discussion on how I could have either moved the process along more quickly or more efficiently at a, at a more, at an earlier time, or whatnot.”
    The former FBI lawyer also attempted to explain away his third exchange on Nov. 22, 2016, in which he’d referenced “the Resistance.”
    “It’s just the, the lines bled through here just in terms of, of my personal, political view in terms of, of what particular preference I have,” Clinesmith told Horowitz.    “But, but that doesn’t have any, any leaning on the way that I, I maintain myself as a professional in the FBI.”

11/22/2019 President Trump anticipates release of IG FISA report, says he expects a ‘historic moment’ by OAN Newsroom
    President Trump is eagerly awaiting the release of the Inspector General’s report on alleged FISA abuse amid reports a former FBI lawyer is being accused of altering the surveillance document.    During an interview Friday, the president said he expects a historic moment when the report is finally made public.    He said it will probably be the biggest political scandal in the history of our country.    The president continued, saying he trusts Attorney General William Barr and the Justice Department to reveal the truth.
    “I think you’re going to see things that are going to be incredible if it’s done right and I purposefully stay out, I tell Bill Barr to handle everything,” he stated.    “I wouldn’t have to, I could get very much involved, but I purposefully don’t…we’ll see what happens.”
    This comes after reports Thursday showed a former attorney who worked under fired FBI Agent Peter Strzok is under investigation for tampering with a FISA warrant of former Trump adviser Carter Page.
President Donald Trump talks to the media during the NCAA Collegiate National Champions Day event
at the White House, Friday, Nov. 22, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)
    Meanwhile, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham announced that the other side of the Mueller report will soon be unpacked.    Graham said Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report detailing the origins of the Russia probe will be released December 9th, adding, that date is “locked.”    The report has been long-anticipated to reveal abuses and missteps by the FBI against the Trump campaign during the 2016 elections.
    “The FISA warrant issued against Carter Page based on a dossier prepared by Christopher Steele is at a minimum disturbing,” Graham stated.    “Whether or not it’s illegal, I don’t yet know, so I’m going to get answers to this.”
    Earlier this week, Graham announced that Inspector General Horowitz has been scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on December 11th, and two days after his report will be made public.    Horowitz has revealed the report will be lengthy and most of it will be declassified.    The findings are expected to particularly zone in on the FBI’s use of Christopher Steel to obtain FISA warrants.
    Steele, a former British spy with ties to Hillary Clinton and the DNC, reportedly gave the agency unverified information that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia.    Despite these claims, the FBI has defended their use of Steele by saying they believed he was a credible source.
    “Reliable track record and a known experienced and source network in Russia, and so it was something to be taken seriously,’" stated fired FBI Director James Comey.    “It didn’t mean it was all true, but something to be taken seriously.”
    Horwitz’s findings may reportedly help support former National Safety Council advisor Michael Flynn’s argument that his case should be dropped due to “outrageous government misconduct” by the intelligence agency.    Other sources say Horowitz’s report may also shed light as to why U.S. attorney John Durham decided to open a criminal investigation into possible FBI misconduct.
File Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz is pictured. (Alex Brandon/AP Photo)
[On 10/9/2019 Explainer: Barr investigates the investigators of Russian meddling by Andy Sullivan, Mark Hosenball and Sarah N. Lynch the following was mentioned: Among them: former FBI general counsel James A. Baker; former CIA Director John Brennan; former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper; former FBI agent Peter Strzok; and David Laufman, a former senior Justice Department official.]

11/22/2019 Sen. Graham launches probe into Bidens, Burisma & Ukraine by OAN Newsroom
FILE – Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., speaks during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
    Sen. Lindsey Graham is kick-starting an investigation into the Bidens and the Ukraine gas company Burisma. In a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee chair requested documents related to Joe Biden and his communications with Ukraine officials.
    In a possible GOP response to Democrat-led impeachment efforts, Graham is looking to prove Biden meddled in an investigation into Burisma, which employed his son Hunter.    This comes as President Trump has long accused Biden of helping to push out Ukraine’s top prosecutor to protect his son.
    “He (Joe Biden) wouldn’t give, I think it was billions of dollars, to Ukraine unless they fired the prosecutor who was looking at his son (Hunter Biden) and his son’s company,” stated the president.    “When you look at other people and what they’ve done…I believe there was was tremendous corruption.”
    If the Democrat-led House Intelligence Committee won’t look into the Bidens, Sen. Graham’s office said the GOP-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee will.    Graham did not set a deadline for Secretary Pompeo to handover the documents.
Former Vice President and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden visits with
an assembly of Southern black mayors Thursday, Nov. 21, 2019 in Atlanta. (AP Photo/John Amis)

11/24/2019 Giuliani Asks Senator Lindsey Graham to Probe Witnesses by OAN Newsroom
    President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani claims he has evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Democrats and Ukraine.
    In a letter to Senator Lindsey Graham Friday, Giuliani asked for help uncovering an alleged plot by Democrats against President Trump.
    In it, Giuliani writes, ‘there are at least three witnesses who have direct (non-hearsay) evidence of Democrat criminal conspiracy with Ukrainians to prevent Donald J. Trump from being President, with the alternative to remove him from office based on contrived charges’.
    He also claims these witnesses have recorded evidence of the Biden Family’s involvement in ‘bribery, money laundering, Hobbs Act extortion, and other possible crimes’.
    Giuliani released the letter to the public Saturday, one day after sending it to Senator Graham.
    Ultimately however, witnesses cannot be brought forth until Ambassador Bill Taylor grants travel visas to the individuals in question, Giuliani claimed, saying Taylor is refusing to grant them visas.

11/24/2019 State Department documents expose Biden-Ukraine corruption by OAN Newsroom
Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks to local
residents, Saturday, Nov. 23, 2019, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Justin Hayworth)
    Newly released documents are revealing additional details of the alleged corruption scheme by Joe and Hunter Biden in Ukraine.    A recent Freedom of Information request by watchdog group American Oversight has produced 100 pages of State Department documents, including testimonies from former prosecutors Viktor Shokin and Yuriy Lutsenko.
    This comes amid elevated concerns that top Obama-era officials could be harboring ill-gotten gains of Ukrainian oligarchs in exchange for help in the 2016 election.
    “When the President’s talking to the president of Ukraine, that’s the issue he’s worried about: why did this corruption take place, and if they’re investigating what went on,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.    “He had every right to ask about Biden.”
    Reports confirmed Vice President Biden used his office to protect energy company Burisma from anti-corruption scrutiny.    Documents showed the State Department was aware that Burisma owner Mykola Zlochevsky was involved in money laundering and the illegal off-shoring of at least $23 million from Ukraine.
    Ukrainian officials said Hunter Biden, who served on Burisma’s board at the time, received a salary of $50,000 per month, plus a commission.    The documents confirmed that in 2015, Zlochevsky paid $900,000 in consulting fees to Rosemont Seneca Partners, a company that represented the Bidens’ interests in Ukraine.
    Zlochevsky has been under U.S. scrutiny for several years.
    “I and other U.S. officials consistently advocated reinstituting a scuttled investigation of Zlochevsky, Burisma’s founder, as well as holding the corrupt prosecutors who closed the case to account,” said Deputy Assistant Secretary of State George Kent.
    Despite all this, the left-leaning watchdog group is focusing on the contacts between Rudy Giuliani and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
    Mainstream media has claimed Giuliani investigated corruption in Ukraine for political purposes.    Other reports said Giuliani’s probe falls in line with the State Department’s longstanding policy of battling corruption in Ukraine to advance U.S. interests in the region.
    “We provided $250 million worth of security assistance, defense assistance and $140 million or so of additional security assistance…to fight corruption continued this year,” said Secretary of State Pompeo.    “That’s what happened in Washington with respect to Ukraine.”
    State Department documents also showed that Zlochevsky assembled an international team, led by Hunter Biden, to protect his embezzlement.    The team included Devon Archer, CIA official Joseph Blade and former President of Poland Aleksander Kwasniewski.    Documents showed Kwasniewski received nearly $1.2 million for his services.    The amount received by Archer and Hunter Biden was reportedly concealed by Latvia.
    Additionally, Ukrainian officials said some $16 million left Ukraine through two secretive units, which were under the protection of former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.
    “From the Russia hoax to the shoddy Ukrainian sequel, the Democrats got caught,” stated Rep. Devin Nunes.    “Let’s hope they finally learn a lesson, give their conspiracy theories a rest and focus on governing for a chance.”
    Rudy Giuliani said he’s undeterred by the recent attacks against him.    The attorney added he is committed to uncovering the Obama administration’s pay-to-play scheme, which may devastate the Democrat Party.    He said the New York Mafia could not intimidate him in the past, and today, the Democrats won’t silence him either.

11/25/2019 Fusion GPS co-founders reject Fiona Hill’s assessment of Steele dossier as ‘rabbit hole’ by OAN Newsroom
Former White House national security aide Fiona Hill, and David Holmes, a U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, right,
testify before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington,
Thursday, Nov. 21, 2019, during a public impeachment hearing. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
    Controversial political consulting firm Fusion GPS has rejected criticism of the Steele dossier by former White House aide Fiona Hill.    In an interview Sunday, Fusion GPS co-founders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch defended the anti-Trump dossier by saying Christopher Steele is more proficient in Russian affairs than Hill.    Simpson and Fritsch rejected Hill’s assessment of the dossier as a “rabbit hole.”
    Last week, Hill claimed that Steele may have been played by the Russians to fabricate the document, but the Fusion GPS co-founders insist the dossier is credible.
    “She is not a disinformation specialist and so she is a Russia specialist in general, she is entitled to her opinion,” said Simpson.     “I know she knows Chris and has worked with him for a long time, so I am not sure that that is very well understood in that one remark.”
    The Steele dossier claimed President Trump may have been compromised by Russian intelligence, but those claims were later debunked.
Glenn R. Simpson, former Wall Street Journal journalist and co-founder of the research firm
Fusion GPS, is pictured on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)

11/27/2019 Federal judge delays Michael Flynn’s sentencing until after IG report release by OAN Newsroom
Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, leaves the federal court following a status
conference with Judge Emmet Sullivan, in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2019. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
    A federal judge has postponed former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s sentencing date.    On Wednesday, Judge Emmet Sullivan delayed the former official’s sentencing until after the DOJ Inspector General’s report is released.
    Flynn was previously scheduled for sentencing on December 18th, but his attorneys asked to postpone his sentencing until after the report’s release. Flynn’s defense team said there are details in the report which could impact his case.
    The Inspector General’s report will be released on December 9th. However, the judge did not set a new date for Flynn’s sentencing.
[This definitely makes you think that this is connected to the recent FBI lawyer issue who revised the FISA information.].

12/3/2019 Page bemoans ongoing Trump attacks by William Cummings, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – Former FBI attorney Lisa Page has tried to avoid the media spotlight since gaining national attention for her text messages with fired FBI agent Peter Strzok, which President Donald Trump and allies have used as evidence of a “deep state” conspiracy to undermine his presidency.
    But in a rare interview, Page, 39, told The Daily Beast that she could no longer silently stomach the president’s attacks on her.
    She said that “the straw that broke the camel’s back” came when Trump repeatedly called her name at an Oct. 11 rally in Minneapolis in what she described as a “demeaning fake orgasm” while mocking her and Strzok, who were engaged in an extramarital affair.
    “I had stayed quiet for years hoping it would fade away, but instead it got worse,” she said.    “It had been so hard not to defend myself, to let people who hate me control the narrative.    I decided to take my power back.”
    “I’m done being quiet,” she said Sunday night in a tweet linking to the Daily Beast interview.
    Page, who left the FBI in May 2018, said that “it’s almost impossible to describe” the feeling of being attacked by Trump.
    “It’s like being punched in the gut.    My heart drops to my stomach when I realize he has tweeted about me again.    The president of the United States is calling me names to the entire world.    He’s demeaning me and my career.    It’s sickening,” she told The Daily Beast.
    “But it’s also very intimidating because he’s still the president of the United States.    And when the president accuses you of treason by name, despite the fact that I know there’s no fathomable way that I have committed any crime at all, let alone treason, he’s still somebody in a position to actually do something about that.    To try to further destroy my life."
    “It never goes away or stops, even when he’s not publicly attacking me.”
    A new report from the Justice Department inspector general on the origin of the investigations into potential collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election is scheduled for release on Dec. 9.    And Page can expect her name to appear in that report, as well.
    In their texts, Page and Strzok made several comments that were disparaging of Trump and supportive of Clinton.    In the text exchange most often cited as evidence of their bias against Trump, Page asks Strzok to assure her that Trump is “not ever going to become president, right?
    “No.    No he won’t.    We’ll stop it,” Strzok replied
.
    Page said she had been inaccurately depicted by a “cherry-picked selection of my texts.”
    Several Trump supporters have said they were appalled by the interview, and they decried what they saw as Page’s attempt to paint herself as a victim.
    Let me get this straight,” tweeted Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.    “Page and Strzok sent texts about an ‘insurance policy’ and how they’ll ‘stop Trump’ while part of the FBI spying on Trump campaign.    Now Lisa Page is blaming the President.    1 week before Horowitz’s FISA report.”
Former FBI attorney Lisa Page has been a favorite target of President Donald Trump’s
attacks against the “deep state.” JACQUELYN MARTIN/AP
[Page does not understand of how many persons who worked under Trump since 2016 who have had their lives ruined by liberal attack mobs forcing them to move out of their homes and relocate.    And now she is complaining of being targeted as above in this Fake News article, Lisa Page's crime is an example of another idiot who let the liberal Leftist lies and 8 years of Obama's destruction of the reputation of the CIA, NSA, FBI and DOJ by turning it into a machine to bring down this country to force it to become part of the Globalist dream of no nations all under control by one entity whatever that was going to be and she apparently bought into it and now must realize her sins and accept the punishment and if she knows anything should rat them out to get back at them.].

12/5/2019 Ukraine lawmaker says he met Giuliani to discuss misuse of US taxpayer money in Ukraine
FILE PHOTO: Ukrainian lawmaker Andriy Derkach attends a news conference titled "Publication of facts of pressure of U.S. Embassy
on Ukraine's law enforcement agencies to interfere in electoral process in U.S.
," in Kiev, Ukraine October 9, 2019. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich
    KIEV (Reuters) – An independent Ukrainian lawmaker said on Thursday he had met U.S. President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer in Kiev to discuss the alleged misuse of U.S. taxpayer money by Ukrainian state bodies.
    In a statement on Facebook accompanied by photos of the meeting, Andriy Derkach said the two had discussed the creation of an interparliamentary group to fight corruption.
    As first reported by the New York Times, Giuliani has traveled to Budapest and Kiev this week to meet current and former Ukrainian officials for a documentary series amid the ongoing impeachment inquiry into the president.
(Reporting by Pavel Polityuk; writing by Matthias Williams; Editing by Hugh Lawson)

12/4/2019 President Trump: Horowitz, Durham reports to detail alleged Democrat coup by OAN Newsroom
President Donald Trump speaks during a working lunch with NATO members that have met their financial commitments
to the organization, at The Grove, Wednesday, Dec. 4, 2019, in Watford, England. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)
    President Trump is welcoming the upcoming publication of two separate reports, which looked into the origins of the failed “Russia hoax.”    On Wednesday, the president told reporters he is expecting reports from DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz and attorney John Durham.
    He said the reports will show whether Democrat Party officials launched the “Russia hoax” to redo the outcome of 2016 election.
    “For me, it’s okay, but this should never happen to a president again,” said President Trump.    “It’s an absolute disgrace to our country.”
    During an interview last week, the president said he expects a historic moment when the report is finally made public.    He said it will probably be the biggest political scandal in the history of our country.    The president said he trusts the attorney general and the Justice Department to reveal the truth.
    “I think you’re going to see things that are going to be incredible, if it’s done right and I purposefully stay out,” stated President Trump.    “We’ll see what happens.”
    The president also said he expects many House Democrats to vote against impeachment because the majority of Americans don’t support it.
[When the very report comes out on Monday 12/9/2019 and if it does prove the Obama administration created the Russian collusion "hoax" then it will prove who are the real criminals and the Dems are so desparate that they are pushing/ramming their Impeachment witchhunt onto the scene in a last ditch attempt to try to disprove the truth, because they know their time is short.].

12/4/2019 Judicial Watch sues State Dept. for docs on alleged Ukraine corruption cover-up by OAN Newsroom
Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testifies before the House Intelligence Committee on
Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, Nov. 15, 2019, during the second public impeachment hearing of
President Donald Trump’s efforts to tie U.S. aid for Ukraine to investigations of his political opponents. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
    Government oversight group Judicial Watch is suing the State Department for documents related to former Ukraine Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.    On Wednesday, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information lawsuit to obtain a list of corrupt Ukrainian officials allegedly protected by Yovanovitch.
    The group said she gave the list to then Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko in late 2016 and told him not to prosecute activists who were funded by globalist billionaire George Soros.    Lutsenko recently confirmed these claims.
    Judicial Watch argued the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine was a hotbed of Democrat Party corruption and anti-Trump activities.

    Yovanovitch has denied allegations she drafted a so-called “Do Not Prosecute” list for top Ukrainian judicial officials to follow.    The diplomat said she advocated for the rule of law to prevail in Ukraine and for top prosecutors, judges and law enforcement to stop wielding their power selectively to target political opponents.
    “I want to reiterate first that the allegation that I disseminated a ‘Do Not Prosecute’ list was a fabrication.    Mr. Lutsenko, the former Ukrainian Prosecutor General, who made that allegation, has acknowledged that the list never existed.    Also untrue are unsourced allegations that I told unidentified embassy employees or Ukrainian officials that President Trump’s orders should be ignored because ‘he was going to be impeached’ or for any other reason.    I did not and would not say such a thing.” — Marie Yovanovitch, former Ukraine Ambassador
    Related: President Trump Questions Foreign Service Of Ousted Ambassador Yovanovitch Amid Impeachment Hearings

[THE DEEP STATE IS GETTING ANTSY AS TO THE UPCOMING RELEASE OF THE HOROWITZ INVESTIGATING THE INVESTIGATORS ON MONDAY 9, 2019 AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE NEXT THREE NEWS ARTICLES THAT IT IS PUTTING OUT ITS NARRATIVE ACCORDING TO THEM I GUESS TO INFLUENCE AND CREATE CONFLICT OF THE RELEASE AND SINCE NO ONE HAS SEEN IT YET IGNORE THESE AND SEE WHAT IS ACTUALLY RELEASED].
12/9/2019 DOJ to release findings of Russia investigation - Report expected to say probe valid but flawed by Eric Tucker, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    WASHINGTON – The Justice Department’s internal watchdog will release a highly anticipated report Monday that is expected to reject President Donald Trump’s claims that the Russia investigation was illegitimate and tainted by political bias from FBI leaders.
    But it is also expected to document errors during the investigation that might animate Trump supporters.
    The report, as described by people familiar with its findings, is expected to conclude that there was an adequate basis for opening one of the most politically sensitive investigations in FBI history and one that Trump has denounced as a witch hunt.    It began in secret during Trump’s 2016 presidential run and was taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller.
    The report comes as Trump faces an impeachment inquiry in Congress centered on his efforts to press Ukraine to investigate a political rival, Democrat Joe Biden – a probe the president also claims is politically biased.
    Still, the release of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s review is unlikely to quell the partisan battles that have surrounded the Russia investigation for years.    It’s also not the last word: A separate internal investigation continues, overseen by Trump’s attorney general, William Barr and led by a U.S. attorney, John Durham.    That investigation is criminal in nature, and Republicans may look to it to uncover wrongdoing that the inspector general wasn’t examining.
    Trump said Saturday that he was waiting for the chance to see Horowitz’s report and that he looked forward “very much to seeing what happens with the Durham report, maybe even more importantly, because it’s a horrible thing that took place and it should never happen to another president.”
    Horowitz’s report is expected to identify errors and misjudgments by some law enforcement officials, including by an FBI lawyer suspected of altering a document related to the surveillance of a former Trump campaign aide.    Those findings probably will fuel arguments by Trump and his supporters that the investigation was flawed from the start.
    But the report will not endorse some of the president’s theories on the investigation, including that it was a baseless “witch hunt” or that he was targeted by an Obama administration Justice Department desperate to see Republican Trump lose to Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016.
    It also is not expected to undo Mueller’s findings or call into question his conclusion that Russia interfered in that election in order to benefit the Trump campaign and that Russians had repeated contacts with Trump associates.
    Some of the findings were described to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity by people who were not authorized to discuss a draft of the report before its release. The AP has not viewed a copy of the document.
The release of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s review is unlikely to quell partisan
battles that have surrounded the Russia probe. J. SCOTT APPLEWHITE/AP
[I CAN DEFINITELY SEE THAT THE COURIER-JOURNAL IS BIASED BASED ON THE ABOVE ARTICLE SINCE THE HOROWITZ REPORT HAS NOT EVEN COME OUT YET AND THAT IS WHY I KEEP THE CJ SO THAT I CAN SEE THE PREJUDICE OF THE LEFT AND THEIR CONTROL BY THE DEEP STATE AS TRUMP IS CLEANING THE SWAMP WHICH MAY JUST CONTINUE AFTER TODAY.].

12/9/2019 Inquiring eyes on FBI’s Russia probe - First of two reviews due for release today by Kevin Johnson and Kristine Phillips, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – Since the early days of the Russia investigation, President Donald Trump and his allies have called for someone to “investigate the investigators.”
    Early last year, the president got some of what he wanted: The Justice Department’s inspector general, an independent watchdog, announced a review into potential surveillance abuses by the FBI focusing on the monitoring of Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page.
    Though Trump was unhappy that his attorney general at the time did not take up the matter himself, he nonetheless touted the inspector general’s inquiry as “historic.”    The president suggested it would back up his long-held claim that the FBI perpetrated a “witch hunt” against him.
    The report is due Monday.
    But it appears the review will not be a life preserver for a president facing an impeachment inquiry.
    Now the president is hyping the promise of another investigation into the same territory.    This one is overseen directly by Attorney General William Barr and federal prosecutor John Durham of Connecticut.
    Two investigations into similar matters.    One by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, whose office typically is responsible for investigating wrongdoing at the Justice Department.    The other, conducted by the Justice Department itself, into a department it oversees: the FBI.
    At best, analysts say, the parallel investigations indicate a lack of trust in the inspector general’s work.
    At worst, analysts say, they indicate a desire to reach a conclusion pleasing to the president.
A key report reviews the FBI’s monitoring of Carter Page. CHIP SOMODEVILLA/ GETTY IMAGES
[WELL USA TODAY IS A LITTLE BETTER BUT AS YOU CAN SEE THEY ENDED THE ARTICLE AS IF BARR AND HOROWITZ ARE AT ODDS WITH EACH OTHER.].

12/9/2019 USA TODAY EXPLAINS THE INSPECTOR GENERAL’S REPORT - What to watch for in Russia report by Kristine Phillips and Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – As recently as last month, President Donald Trump accused the FBI of trying to “overthrow the presidency.”    It’s the latest in a barrage of attacks against the law enforcement agency and the former officials who launched the Russia investigation, which has cast a shadow over Trump’s presidency.
    Chief among Trump’s allegations is that political enemies in his own government improperly spied on his campaign.    Trump and his allies have called for an investigation of the investigators, whom he has accused of trying to undermine his presidency.    Monday, a long-anticipated report will be released that is expected to shed light on whether the country’s top law enforcement agency improperly spied on the campaign of a future president.
    If you’re confused about what this report deals with, you’re not alone. Between the Mueller report and investigations by various congressional committees into Trump and his administration, there’s been a lot of inquiring over the past couple of years.
    Here’s what you need to know:
Who is issuing the report?
    The report was compiled by the office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz, the Justice Department’s internal watchdog.    Inspectors general, who have a measure of independence, examine possible wrongdoing, abuse and waste in federal agencies.
    Horowitz was nominated to his post by former President Barack Obama.    Trump has called him an “Obama guy.”    But his peers have said he’s nonpartisan, and he has conducted reviews that were critical of Justice Department officials under Obama.
What will the report address?
    The report focuses on how the investigation into Russia began in the summer of 2016.    The principal question: Was the FBI’s surveillance of former Trump foreign policy adviser Carter Page legal?
    Horowitz also examined the FBI’s relationship and communication with Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer and Russia expert who compiled a now-infamous “dossier” alleging links between Russia and Trump.    The connection to Steele has been a big deal for Republicans.    Steele was hired by Fusion GPS, a research firm working for the campaign of 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.    Trump’s allies have claimed this shows the FBI was working in concert with his opponent.
    But the FBI said in its warrant applications that it viewed Steele’s information to be “credible” and that Steele was not told who paid for his research.
    Horowitz is expected to offer sharp criticism of the FBI, but he’s also expected to conclude the wiretap on Page was legal, according to people familiar with the matter.
Why is this important?
    The FBI, Democrats, the president, his Republican allies – pretty much everyone in both parties has a stake in Horowitz’s findings.    The FBI’s reputation has been under attack since it started looking into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
    For the bureau’s former leaders, the report could provide some vindication – or condemnation, depending on the level of criticism Horowitz levels.
    For Democrats, it could either dampen or fuel their momentum as they move forward with an impeachment inquiry.
    For Trump, it could either undercut or bolster his claim that the FBI conspired against him.
How did we get here?
    Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos told an Australian diplomat that the Russian government had offered damaging information about Clinton.
    The diplomat alerted the FBI, which then launched its investigation into Russia and the Trump campaign.    As part of its inquiry, the FBI sought a warrant to wiretap another Trump campaign aide:
Page.    He had lived in Moscow for several years, built relationships with Russian intelligence officers and advocated a pro-Russia foreign policy.
    The FBI believed he “has been collaborating and conspiring” with the Russian government to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.    The FBI’s surveillance of Page continued well into 2017, even months after Special Counsel Robert Mueller took over the Russia investigation.
    Republican lawmakers questioned the legality of the surveillance, pointing to the FBI’s use of Steele’s research.
    In early 2018, Republican senators asked Horowitz to conduct a review of the FBI’s investigation.
Who are the key players?
  • Carter Page.    Page joined the Trump campaign as a foreign policy adviser in March 2016.    His pro-Russia advocacy and meetings with Russian officials during the presidential race caught the attention of the FBI.
  • Michael Horowitz.    As inspector general, Horowitz has conducted several high-stakes investigations of the Justice Department and the FBI.    Under the Obama administration, his office issued a rebuke of Operation Fast and Furious, which allowed illegal gun sales to smugglers with ties to Mexican drug cartels.
  • Attorney General William Barr.    The series of events examined by Horowitz predates Barr, who became attorney general in early 2019.    But Barr has also raised questions about how the Russia investigation began.
What will happen next?
    Horowitz will discuss his findings Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chairman Lindsey Graham, a top Trump ally, announced last month.    Graham, R-S.C., has repeatedly raised questions about the FBI's surveillance in the Russia probe.
    As the inspector general’s investigation comes to an end, Trump has raised expectations about the parallel inquiry led by Barr.    That inquiry began as an administrative review but has since shifted to a criminal investigation.
The report from Michael Horowitz, Justice Department Inspector General,
probes the Russia investigation. 2017 PHOTO BY JARRAD HENDERSON/USA TODAY

12/9/2019 Dueling inquiries could mean 2 conclusions - Trump has been touting review launched by Barr by Kevin Johnson and Kristine Phillips, USA TODAY
    Two investigations into potential surveillance abuses by the FBI have been ordered: The first, the results of which are due Monday, was done by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz.    The second, which is ongoing, is overseen directly by Attorney General William Barr and federal prosecutor John Durham.
    Dueling inquiries often indicate an agency is “nervous about what the IG might find,” said New York University law professor Paul Light, who studies the work of inspectors general.    “Or there’s political pressure to come up with the finding other than what’s expected” from the inspector general.
    An inspector general’s investigation, “theoretically, is the gold standard of investigations,” Light said.    “And Horowitz, in particular, has an impeccable reputation for telling it like (he) sees it.”
    While Horowitz is expected to offer sharp criticism of the FBI in Monday’s report, he’s also expected to conclude the FBI was justified in launching its two-year inquiry into the Trump campaign and possible ties to Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.    That investigation ultimately led to Robert Mueller’s damning account of Trump’s efforts to thwart it.
    But if Horowitz’s findings fail to satisfy Trump’s desires, the Barr-Durham inquiry has been building expectations of its own.
    In late October, Trump and his Republican allies seized on news that this inquiry had shifted from an administrative review to a criminal investigation.
    Last week, The Washington Post reported that Barr had confided to associates that he disagreed with Horowitz’s anticipated finding that the FBI’s investigation was justified.    Asked about that, Trump immediately turned the spotlight to the Barr-Durham inquiry.
    “I do think the big report to wait for is going to be the Durham report,” Trump told reporters last week.    “That’s the one that people are really waiting for.”
    Who will have the last word?
    The attorney general cannot order the inspector general to alter his conclusions.    But the Barr-Durham inquiry offers another opportunity for Trump to change the narrative.
    “I can tell you that the inspector general will not have the last word,” said former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, who served in the George W. Bush administration.    “As a federal prosecutor, Mr. Durham has authority that the inspector general does not.”
    That includes the power to compel witness testimony and to impanel a grand jury to consider criminal charges.
    The FBI’s surveillance authority, particularly whether it followed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in dealing with Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page, is at the heart of Horowitz’s report.    That’s also the subject of the Barr-Durham investigation.
    Durham’s investigators have been reviewing allegations that a former FBI lawyer altered a document related to Page’s surveillance.     The inspector general provided information about the lawyer’s alleged conduct to Durham, which is one reason his investigation shifted from an administrative inquiry to a criminal one.
Trump: ‘A hunger’ for 2nd inquiry
    Though the investigations overlap, they could reach different conclusions.     Horowitz is expected to conclude the lawyer’s conduct did not change the legal basis for the Page wiretap request, while Durham’s criminal investigation is continuing.
    “You’re talking about a scope of investigation that is potentially broader than what the inspector general can do,” Mukasey said.
    Parallel investigations aren’t unprecedented, said former government officials who have worked in both Republican and Democrat administrations.    But some suggest the two inquiries indicate that the Justice Department isn’t looking for potential wrongdoing as much as it’s looking for a politically expedient outcome.
    “The modus operandi of this administration is that when they cannot dismiss somebody else’s fact-based conclusions, they create a parallel narrative,” said Joel Brenner, a former inspector general at the National Security Agency in the George W. Bush administration.    “What we are seeing here is the creation of a parallel narrative to satisfy the president’s base of support.    It’s very sad.”
    It’s possible for inspectors general to pursue “agendas” of their own that may be inappropriate or wrong, he said.
    “I just don’t think that is remotely the case with Mr. Horowitz,” he said.
    Republican lawmakers were among the earliest to urge Horowitz to review the FBI’s handling of the Russia inquiry.    It was Jeff Sessions, Trump’s first attorney general, who first confirmed the inspector general would review it.
    Even then, Trump claimed “potentially massive abuse” by the FBI and called for federal prosecutors to take up the matter.    He publicly berated Sessions’ decision to refer it to the inspector general rather than assign prosecutors. Sessions was later dismissed.
    Less than two months after Barr took over as attorney general, he revealed he would launch a review of his own.
    “Spying on a campaign is a big deal,” Barr told lawmakers during an April appearance before a Senate panel.    “I think spying did occur.    The question is whether it was adequately predicated.”
    Trump immediately announced his support for Barr’s action.    “There is a hunger for this to happen,” the president told reporters at the time.
    Does inquiry undermine Horowitz?
    Greg Brower, a former FBI deputy general counsel who also worked as an inspector general, said it’s unusual for the head of an agency to pursue an investigation into something the agency’s inspector general already is examining.
    Agency leaders, he said, typically prefer to have their watchdogs “take the heat off management and do an independent review.”    “This is unfolding in an unusual way for many reasons,” Brower said of the parallel Barr-Durham probe. He said an inquiry like it can undermine the inspector general, whose job is to conduct independent reviews of the agency.
    “To the extent that it appears to the IG that management doesn’t trust it and wants to do its own parallel investigations ... that leaves any competent IG wondering why,” Brower said.
    “The cynical view of the Durham investigation,” he said, “is that it exists simply to give the president something to talk about regardless of the outcome of the Horowitz investigation.”
    The Justice Department, in the wake of reports that Barr has expressed disagreement with Horowitz’s findings, has offered public support for the inspector general.    “The inspector general’s investigation is a credit to the Department of Justice,” spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said last week.    “His excellent work has uncovered significant information that the American people will soon be able to read for themselves.”
Attorney General William Barr is overseeing a second inquiry. USA TODAY

    The following found at https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/inspector-general-report-trump-russia-investigation/2019/12/09/d5940d88-184c-11ea-a659-7d69641c6ff7_story.html
12/9/2019 Inspector general report says FBI had ‘authorized purpose’ to investigate Trump campaign’s Russia ties but finds some wrongdoing by Karoun Demirjian, Matt Zapotosky, Ellen Nakashima and Devlin Barrett, The Washington Post
Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz appears at the launch of the
Procurement Collusion Strike Force at the Justice Department last month. (Cliff Owen/AP)
    A long-awaited Justice Department inspector general’s report examining the FBI’s investigation into possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia rebuts allegations of illegal spying and that political bias played a role in the probe begun ahead of the 2016 election, but finds serious faults in other areas, according to a copy of the document obtained by The Washington Post.
    The inspector general concludes that the FBI had an “authorized purpose” to initiate the investigation and that the bureau’s use of confidential informants was in compliance with the rules.
    Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said the inspector general had “completely demolished” some of conservatives’ assertions about the origins of the probe, though his investigators did find some problems.
    “Clearly, there was a legitimate, factual basis; in fact the FBI had a moral imperative to begin this investigation,” Blumenthal said.    In particular, he said the inspector general had rebutted claims that Trump campaign advisers were illegally surveilled or entrapped, or that political motive was “in any way a factor.”
    But the report also faults the FBI for “significant inaccuracies and omissions” in the FBI’s applications to secretly monitor a former Trump campaign adviser and asserts that agents “failed to meet the basic obligation” to ensure the applications were “scrupulously accurate.”
    “We do not speculate whether the correction of any particular misstatement or omissions, or some combination thereof, would have resulted in a different outcome,” the report asserts.    “Nevertheless, the department’s decision makers and the court should have been given complete and accurate information so that they could meaningfully evaluate probable cause before authorizing the surveillance of a US person associated with a presidential campaign.”
    President Trump has hailed Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz and U.S. Attorney John Durham who are investigating the Russia probe.
    The Justice Department inspector general is expected to release the full report later Monday.    Lawmakers and staff were allowed to begin reviewing the report ahead of its public release.
    The report, which spans more than 400 pages, concludes that the top FBI officials running the Russia investigation were not tainted by political bias and that they had information “sufficient to satisfy the low threshhold” needed to begin investigating several Trump associates in 2016, according to people familiar with drafts of the document.
    But it will also find fault with applications FBI officials prepared to surveil a former Trump campaign adviser, and it will allege that a low-level FBI lawyer doctored a document in connection with those applications, the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the document before its public release.
    Blumenthal said he has asked for reforms in how the FBI applies for such applications under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, saying that was “a legitimate area of concern.”    But he said there was “no evidence” that any FBI misconduct “had a material effect on the opening or conduct of this investigation.”    He said FBI Director Christopher A. Wray had said he was “taking steps to make sure such errors or omissions” aren’t repeated.

    The following found at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fisa-report-doj-watchdog-releases-findings-on-russia-probe-surveillance
12/9/2019 FISA report: DOJ watchdog releases findings on Russia probe surveillance by Ronn Blitzer, Brooke Singman, Fox News
Horowitz report expected to find FBI justified in probing Trump campaign, but falsified document
The Justice Department's internal watchdog is set to release a report expected to document misconduct during the
investigation into President Trump's 2016 campaign. Gregg Jarrett and Francey Hakes react.
    The Justice Department’s inspector general on Monday released the long-awaited internal review concerning the origins of the Russia investigation, revealing that while the probe's launch complied with DOJ and FBI policies, there are "significant concerns with how certain aspects of the investigation were conducted and supervised."
    Specifically, the report concluded that investigators found no intentional misconduct or political bias surrounding efforts to seek a highly controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to monitor former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in the early months of the Russia investigation -- but faulted the FBI over numerous "omissions" and "inaccuracies" in the application process.
CARTER PAGE ACCUSES DOJ OF ‘ORWELLIAN OVERREACH’ OVER EFFORT TO PREVENT HIM PREVIEWING FISA REPORT
    The IG probe identified at least 17 "significant" errors in the Page applications and said they would launch a new audit into the FISA process.
    At the same time, the report said key officials including former FBI bosses James Comey and Andrew McCabe did not act with political bias and extended a similar finding to the overall surveillance efforts targeting Page.
    “We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI’s decision to seek FISA authority on Carter Page,” the report said.
IG Horowitz to release the highly anticipated report on alleged FISA abuse
    IG Michael Horowitz and his investigators probed how the unverified anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele was used to secure the original FISA warrant for Page in October 2016, as well as other decisions at the outset of the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation of Russian election interference and the Trump campaign.
    The release comes as Washington has been consumed with the impeachment inquiry into President Trump.    The House Judiciary Committee was holding the inquiry’s latest hearing Monday, days after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Democrats are moving forward with plans to bring articles of impeachment against the president over his dealings with Ukraine.
    But the sprawling, nearly 500-page FISA report is sure to become a political football of its own, alongside the impeachment probe.
    Republicans, led by Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., have contested the FISA warrant and its subsequent renewal applications, claiming that the FBI misrepresented key evidence and omitted exculpatory information.
    Nunes blasted the FBI for not revealing that evidence used to support the warrant application came from an unverified dossier compiled by Steele as opposition research for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.    Democrats have pointed to a footnote in the warrant application that gave a general characterization of the nature of the information and how the FBI believed that it was part of an effort to get information to discredit Trump’s campaign, though it did not specifically mention Clinton or the Democratic National Committee.
    Horowitz’s team has questioned why the FBI considered Steele a credible source, and why the bureau seemed to use news reports to bolster Steele’s credibility.
    The inspector general has said his team has “reviewed over one million records and conducted over 100 interviews, including several witnesses who only recently agreed to be interviewed.”    Page, who has been vocal about his belief that he was unjustly targeted, has expressed frustration over not being interviewed for Horowitz’s investigation.    Page was never charged with a crime as a result of the surveillance.
    Trump and his Republican allies have long questioned the Justice Department’s efforts to secure the surveillance warrants.    Earlier this year, Attorney General Bill Barr said "spying" did occur against the Trump campaign during the campaign.    But critics pushed back: James Comey, who was FBI director at the time, dismissed Barr’s claims, saying he “never thought of” electronic surveillance as “spying.”
    Next, Horowitz is scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday morning to answer questions about his probe.
    The Horowitz findings come amid another, broader inquiry related to the 2016 election: Barr has assigned John Durham, the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, to conduct an inquiry into alleged misconduct and alleged improper government surveillance on the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election. That investigation is criminal in nature, and Republicans may look to it to uncover wrongdoing that the inspector general wasn’t examining.
    Ahead of the release, some of the people who worked at the FBI at the time attempted to get ahead of the report to defend their actions.    Lisa Page, the ex-FBI lawyer who carried on an extramarital affair with former FBI head of counterintelligence Peter Strzok as the two exchanged anti-Trump text messages during the investigation, recently granted an interview for a sympathetic piece at The Daily Beast, saying “there’s no fathomable way that I have committed any crime at all.”
    Meanwhile, a key FBI player during the time frame, former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, has been facing the prospect of federal charges after Horowitz faulted him in a separate inquiry over statements he made during a Hillary Clinton-related investigation.    The review found that McCabe "lacked candor" when talking with investigators, but the former FBI official has denied wrongdoing. McCabe has not been indicted.

12/9/2019 No political bias but FBI made mistakes in probe of Trump campaign: watchdog by Sarah N. Lynch, Mark Hosenball and Andy Sullivan
FILE PHOTO: U.S. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz testifies before the House Oversight and Government
Reform Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S. September 18, 2019. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Justice Department’s internal watchdog said it found numerous errors but no evidence of political bias by the FBI when it opened an investigation into contacts between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia in 2016.
    The report by Inspector General Michael Horowitz was likely to give ammunition to both Republican Trump’s supporters and his Democratic critics in the debate about the legitimacy of an investigation that clouded the first two years of his presidency.
    It will not be the last word on the subject.
    U.S. Attorney John Durham, who is running a separate criminal investigation on the origins of the Russia probe, said in a prepared statement that “we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions.”
    Attorney General William Barr, who ordered the Durham investigation, said the report showed that the FBI “launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions.”
    Horowitz found that the FBI had a legal “authorized purpose” to ask for court approval to begin surveillance of Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser.
    But Horowitz also found a total of 17 “basic and fundamental” errors and omissions in the original application and all subsequent renewals to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA).    Those errors made the case appear stronger than it was, Horowitz said.
    In particular, the report singled out an FBI lawyer who altered an email contained in a renewal of the application which claimed that Page was “not a source” to another U.S. government agency.
    In truth, Page served as a “operational contact” to another agency, which was not identified in the report.
    That lawyer was previously identified by Republican Representative Mark Meadows as Kevin Clinesmith, who is no longer with the agency.    Clinesmith, former FBI attorney Lisa Page and former special agent Peter Strzok were found last year to have exchanged text messages critical of Trump.
    Clinesmith did not immediately respond to a request for comment
.
    The FBI investigation, opened in the summer of 2016 ahead of the November election pitting Trump against Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, was taken over in May 2017 by former FBI chief Robert Mueller after Trump fired James Comey as the agency’s director.
    Mueller’s 22-month special counsel investigation detailed a Russian campaign of hacking and propaganda to sow discord in the United States, harm Clinton and boost Trump.    Mueller documented numerous contacts between Trump campaign figures and Moscow but found insufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy.
    Trump called the investigation, known within the FBI as Crossfire Hurricane, a witch hunt and assailed FBI leaders and career staffers who worked on it.
    Democrats have accused Trump of seeking to discredit a legitimate investigation that detailed extensive interactions between his campaign and Russia.
    “The FBI had an authorized purpose when it opened Crossfire Hurricane to obtain information about, or protect against, a national security or federal crime, even though the investigation also had the potential to impact constitutionally protected activity,” Horowitz’s report said.
    FBI Director Christopher Wray said he had ordered 40 steps, such as changes to its warrant applications and methods for dealing with informants, to fix problems highlighted in the report.    He said the agency would review the conduct of employees mentioned in the report.
    Horowitz said his office on Monday began a new review to further scrutinize the FBI’s compliance with its own fact-checking policies used to get applications to surveil U.S. persons in counterterrorism investigations, as well as counterintelligence probes.     Crossfire Hurricane opened on July 31, 2016, after the FBI received a tip from a foreign ally that Trump adviser George Papadopoulos suggested he had gotten offers of help from the Kremlin.     When it asked for court permission to open a wiretap on Page, Horowitz found that the FBI relied heavily on research assembled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.     While the FBI had reason to believe that Steele was reliable as it had worked with him before, the agency did not reassess his information when it sought to renew its warrants, the report said, and did not press him about who was funding his work.     Steele assembled his dossier for an opposition-research firm that was funded by the Democratic Party.    Trump’s allies say the FBI should have disclosed that fact in its warrant application.
(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; Additional reporting by Mark Hosenball, Brad Heath and Andy Sullivan; Writing by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Will Dunham, Jonathan Oatis and Grant McCool)

12/9/2019 President Trump: DOJ Inspector General’s findings far worse than expected by OAN Newsroom
The cover page of the report issued by the Department of Justice inspector general is photographed in Washington, Monday, Dec. 9, 2019.
The report on the origins of the Russia probe found no evidence of political bias, despite performance failures. (AP Photo/Jon Elswick)
    The Department of Justice Inspector General has released its report on FISA abuses by the Obama-era FBI and Justice Department in 2016.    President Trump has described the Inspector General’s findings as an attempted overthrow of the government.    While speaking at the White House Monday, the president said the report was far worse than he thought was possible.
    Although the Inspector General concluded the Russia investigation was not started out of political bias, he did outline at least 17 significant errors in the FBI’s application to spy on the Trump campaign and adviser Carter Page.    The nearly 500-page report states the FBI overstated its confidence in Christopher Steele’s reliability, and faulted the agency for inaccuracies and omissions in the application.
    Attorney General William Barr commented on the report, saying it’s now clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign.    While this was what started the Mueller investigation, a separate probe into the origins of the Russia investigation is still ongoing.
    Attorney General Barr is moving to declassify information in the Inspector General report about the man behind the anti-Trump Steele dossier.    According to a New York Times report, Barr recently authorized allowing new information about Christopher Steele in the report to be public.    The information was initially redacted in the report, however a representative from the Inspector General’s office informed Steele Sunday that the Department of Justice had decided to permit the release of the information.
Attorney General William Barr listens as President Donald Trump speaks during an event to sign
an executive order establishing the Task Force on Missing and Murdered American Indians and Alaska Natives,
in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Nov. 26, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)
    FULL REPORT: Office of the Inspector General U.S. Department of Justice – Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation
    The report also revealed the FBI used Steele to get dirt on Michael Flynn.    According to the released documents, the FBI promised Steele would be paid “significantly” for information on the former national security adviser.
    This comes as Flynn faces sentencing for allegedly lying about his involvement with Russia.    His attorneys are pushing for his sentence to be postponed.    The findings in the Inspector General’ s report could now help support Flynn’s argument that his case should be dropped because of “outrageous misconduct” by the FBI.
    President Trump said he hopes this never happens to any president ever again, and is looking forward to U.S. attorney John Durham’s” report that will be released in the near future.
RELATED: Gen. Flynn’s Lawyer Says Inspector General Report Will Have Everything

[THE FOLLOWING IS THE OPINION OF THE USA TODAY OF WHAT THEY BELIEVED TO BE ON THE IG'S REPORT].
12/10/2019 Faults found in FBI’s surveillance - But Russia probe was legally justified, inspector general says by Kevin Johnson and Kristine Phillips, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – The Justice Department’s internal watchdog found the surveillance of a former Trump campaign adviser was riddled with errors, raising questions about its justification.
    The report, released Monday by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, identified 17 inaccuracies across three surveillance applications, effectively inflating the justification for monitoring former foreign policy adviser Carter Page starting in fall 2016.
    Horowitz, however, concluded the FBI was legally justified in launching its inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. There was no “documentary or testimonial evidence that politi- cal bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI’s decision to conduct these operations,” the report said.    The 400-page report debunks claims by President Donald Trump and his allies that political bias played a role in the FBI’s decision to investigate members of the Trump campaign for possible coordination with Russia. Horowitz also said there was “no evidence” the FBI placed any undercover sources or agents in the Trump campaign or had them attend campaign events.
    The criticism of the FBI’s surveillance activities, however, is central to the report’s findings and is likely to fuel new attacks from Trump and GOP allies.
    The review, launched in March 2018 in response to requests from Republican lawmakers, examined the FBI’s decision to investigate four Trump associates and campaign aides: Page, former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
    Papadopoulos caught the attention of the FBI after he boasted to an Australian diplomat that Russia had offered political dirt on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.    The diplomat alerted the FBI.
    Page had longstanding ties to Russia and admitted meeting with Kremlin officials on a July 2016 trip to Moscow. Manafort and Flynn also have ties to Russia and traveled there.
    Horowitz also examined the FBI’s relationship with Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer who was hired by Fusion GPS, a research firm working for Clinton’s campaign.
    Steele wrote a “dossier” alleging ties between Trump and Russia.    The FBI relied on Steele’s research on Page’s activities in Russia when it sought a court-ordered surveillance of Page.
    Throughout the report, the inspector general raised questions about the management of the high-profile, politically charged investigation.    “So many basic and fundamental errors” were made by investigative teams handpicked to conduct one of the FBI’s most sensitive investigations, the report said.
    Among the most common errors in the wiretap applications for Page were the omission of important information, including some that contradicted investigators’ suspicions.
    For example, in its wiretap applications, the FBI didn’t note Page’s denial that he had been involved in revising a part of the Republican platform to be more favorable to Russia.    The FBI didn’t include Page’s denials that he had talked to allies of Russian President Vladimir Putin about lifting sanctions and giving the Trump campaign damaging information about Clinton.
    And the FBI omitted information about Steele and included inaccurate details about him.
    Those errors “made it appear as though the evidence supporting probable cause was stronger than was actually the case,” the report said.
    The decision to rely on Steele’s reporting “to help establish that Page was an agent of Russia” was supported by “FBI officials at every level,” it said.
    The inspector general found “no evidence” that FBI officials raised any concerns about the reliability of Steele’s information with top officials, including then-FBI Director James Comey.
    Horowitz singled out Bruce Ohr, an FBI lawyer and associate deputy attorney general, for additional review.    The report suggested Ohr had an inherent conflict of interest, in part because his wife was an independent contractor for Fusion GPS.    Horowitz sharply criticized Ohr for communicating with Steele during the investigation and not disclosing that to his supervisors.
    In a written response, FBI Director Christopher Wray called the report “constructive criticism that will make us stronger as an organization.”
    Attorney General William Barr, who is leading a parallel inquiry, disagreed with Horowitz’s finding that the FBI’s investigation was justified.
    Despite his criticism, Horowitz’s inquiry found the FBI’s decision to investigate Page, Papadopoulos, Flynn and Manafort followed Justice policies.
    In determining whether bias played a role, Horowitz examined text messages exchanged by Peter Strzok, a former FBI counterintelligence agent assigned to the investigation, and Lisa Page, a former FBI lawyer.
    Horowitz determined that the messages, which were hostile toward Trump, “created an appearance of bias” and “raised serious questions” about the validity of decisions involving the two.
    But Horowitz noted that Lisa Page did not play a role in the decision to investigate Trump’s campaign aides.
    Although Strzok was involved, “he was not the sole, or even the highest level decision maker,” the report said.
    Strzok’s attorney, Aitan Goelman, said the report confirms that Strzok’s “personal opinions never impacted his work as an official of the FBI.”

Contributing: Kevin McCoy, Donovan Slack, Deirdre Shesgreen and Tom Vanden Brook
Horowitz

12/10/2019 President Trump criticizes FBI Director Wray for accepting Inspector General report by OAN Newsroom
President Donald Trump listens during a roundtable on school choice in the Cabinet Room
of the White House, Monday, Dec. 9, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)
    The investigation into the Russia probe may be over, but the controversy continues.    While the president vehemently believes the 2016 FBI investigation was built on a political bias against him, not everyone involved agrees.
    “For two years, the President of the United States accused our premier law enforcement agency of treason, of trying to defeat him, of trying to stop him,” stated fired FBI Director James Comey.    “And it turns out that was all nonsense that was all lies.”
    Current FBI Director Christopher Wray also chimed in, saying “the Inspector General did not find political bias or improper motivations impacting the opening of the investigation or the decision to use certain investigative tools during the investigations.”
    The president responded by saying he did not know what report the current director of the FBI had read, while maintaining his position the FBI report was tainted by the political opinions of those involved in the investigation.
    The president’s comments come after both the former and current directors’ own statements, where they acknowledged grave mistakes were made by FBI personnel during the course of the investigation.
    “The Inspector General did find a number of instances where employees either failed to follow our policies, neglected to exercise appropriate diligence or in some other way fell short of the standard of conduct and performance that we, and that I as a director, expect of all of our employees,” said Wray.
FBI Director Christopher Wray speaks during an interview with The Associated Press,
Monday, Dec. 9, 2019, in Washington. Wray says the problems found by the Justice Department watchdog
examining the origins of the Russia probe are “unacceptable.” (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
    His comments came after the Inspector General report found 17 instances of significant errors or omissions in the applications for FISA warrants.    The president went on to say if Wray’s attitude does not change, he will be unable to fix the FBI considering it’s already tarnished reputation. Wray has admitted the bureau is taking strides to remedy the missteps made by agents during the course of the 2016 investigation.

[THE FOLLOWING IS FROM THE IG REPORT WHICH SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM TOLD EVERYONE TO READ PAGE 186-190
IF YOU HAVE BEEN READING MY FILES FOR FISA-UNDER SURVEILLANCE 2018-2019 EVERYTHING THAT I WRITTEN IS ACTUALLY COMING TRUE
AND I EXPECT TO SEE SOME PERSONS OF INTEREST TO BE FINALLY PROSECUTED AFTER THE DURHAM INVESTIGATION
AND AS SOON AS I CAN FIND WHAT THE 17 ITEMS REFERRED AS ERRORS IN THE REPORT THAT I WILL BRING THAT TO THIS PAGE]

REDACTED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE - Office of the Inspector General U.S. Department of Justice - OVERSIGHT* INTEGRITY * GUIDANCE
Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane Investigation
The following is pages are from 185-190.

    The validation report summary did not appear to assess Steele's counterintelligenc;e and election reporting.    We asked the Unit Chief of VMU (Validation SSA), about this and he told us "[w]e did not find corroboration for the [Steele election reporting]" from the holdings that VMU examined.    He explained that, within the validation context, the term "corroboration" means that the FBI has received the same information from a separate source, and added that "uncorroborated" does not mean the information is untrue or provide a basis for closing the source.    We asked why that finding did not appear in the validation report.    The Validation SSA explained that "it's not common practice for us to go in and state the negative upfront," and "what we do is we speak to what we positively find." 332 He added: "I think it is a logical way to stay within the bounds of staying with what we know.    As opposed to telling you all the things we don't know."
    The VMU's decision to not include in the validation report that it did not find corroboration for Steele's election reporting came as a surprise to the FBI officials we interviewed.    For example, Priestap told us that omitting that the "[Steele election reporting]" information was uncorroborated "defeats the whole purpose of us asking them to do the validation reporting." Priestap continued:
    [T]hat makes no sense to me.    The whole point of having a human source validation section outside of the operational divisions is to provide an absolutely independent, unbiased, completely unbiased, look at the human sources.    They have to do a report at the end. It's simply the way in which they document their findings.    It is beyond me how somebody would undertake that effort and then not document their findings in that regard.    That, to me, that goes against everytliing i stand for.    It goes against what my organization stands for, it's like you are burying the results.
    Strzok said that the validation report's lack of clarity was consistent with his past experience with VMU, and that VMU's work is "frequently ambiguous or perhaps not written with the level of precision and specificity and expertise that might be desired."    He also stated that validation reports are "rarely helpful."    Both the Intel Section Chief and Supervisory Intel Analyst said that they did not agree with the Validation SSA's conclusion that the Steele [election reporting] was "uncorroborated."    They explained that there is a distinction between facts and 331 We discuss in Chapters Five and Eight the FISA application's source characterization statement that Steele's reporting had been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings."
    332 The OIG's Audit Division recently completed a review of the FBI's CHS validation processes finding, among other things, that FBI validation personnel were discouraged from documenting conclusions from CHS validation reviews in their written reports.    The OIG report made numerous recommendations to the FBI to revise and improve the validation process.    See U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Audit of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Management of its Confidential Human Source Validation Processes, Audit Report 20-009 (November 2019), at 24-26.
185
allegations, and that it would not be appropriate to characterize all of the factual information in the Steele election reporting as "uncorroborated."333
the validation re ort included a recommendation that
    Source reporting must accurately describe the reliability of the information or its origin.
C. The FBI Identifies and Interviews the Primary Sub-Source in Early 2017
    An important aspect of the FBI's assessment of Steele's election reporting involved evaluating Steele's source network, especially whether the sub-sources had access to reliable information.    As noted in the first FISA application, Steele relied on a primary sub-source (Primary Sub-source) for information, and this Primary Sub-source used a network of sub-sources to gather the information that was relayed to Steele; Steele himself was not the originating source of any of the factual information in his reporting.    334 The FBI employed multiple methods in an effort to ascertain the identities of the sub-sources within the network, including meeting with Steele in October 2016 (prior to him being closed for cause) and conducting various investigative inquiries.    For example, the FBI determined it was plausible that at least some of the sub-sources had access to intelligence pertinent to events described in Steele's election reporting. Additionally, the FBI's evaluation of Steele's sub-sources generated some corroboration for the election reporting (primarily routine facts about dates, locations, and occupational positions that was mostly public source information).    Further, by January 2017 the FBI was able to identify and arrange a meeting with the Primary Sub-source. 335
    The FBI conducted interviews of the Primary Sub-source in January, March, and May 2017 that raised significant questions about the reliability of the Steele election reporting.    In particular, the FBI's interview with Steele's Primary Subsource in January 2017, shortly after the FBI filed the Carter Page FISA Renewal
    333 We discuss the FBI's conclusions about the reporting in Section V of this chapter.

335 Steele did not disclose the identity of the Primary Sub-source to the FBI.
186
    Application No. 1 and months prior to Renewal Application No. 2, raised doubts about the reliability of Steele's descriptions of information in his election reports.    During the FBI's January interview, at which Case Agent 1, the Supervisory Intel Analyst, and representatives of NSD were present, the Primary Sub-source told the FBI that he/she had not seen Steele's reports until they became public that month, and that he/she made statements indicating that Steele misstated or exaggerated the Primary Sub-source's statements in multiple sections of the reporting.    336 For example, the Primary Sub-source told the FBI that, while Report 80 stated that Trump's alleged sexual activities at the Ritz Carlton hotel in Moscow had been "confirmed" by a senior, western staff member at the hotel, the Primary Sub-source explained that he/she reported to Steele that Trump's alleged unorthodox sexual activity at the Ritz Carlton hotel was "rumor and speculation" and that he/she had not been able to confirm the story.    A second example provided by the Primary Sub-source was Report 134's description of a meeting allegedly held between Carter Page and Igor Sechin, the President of Rosneft, a Russian energy conglomerate.    337 Report 134 stated that, according to a "close associate" of Sechin, Sechin offered "PAGE/TRUMP's associates the brokerage of up to a 19 percent (privatized) stake in Rosneft" in return for the lifting of sanctions against the company.    338 The Primary Sub-source told the FBI that one of his/ her subsources furnished information for that part of Report 134 through a text message, but said that the sub-source never stated that Sechin had offered a brokerage interest to Page.    339 We reviewed the texts and did not find any discussion of a bribe, whether as an interest in Rosneft itself or a "brokerage."340
    336 David Laufman, then Chief of NSD's Counterintelligence and Export Control Section (CES), covered the first portion of the January interview and his Deputy Section Chief covered the remaining portions of the January interview.    Laufman told us that he negotiated with the Primary Sub-source's counsel to facilitate the FBI's interview and sought to "build a cooperative relationship that could . ..result in the Bureau's being in a position to assess the validity of information in the [Steele election reporting] resulting from [the Primary Sub-source's] activities or the collection of [his/her] sub-subsources.    So I saw my role as a broker to get that relationship consolidated."    Laufman said that the portion of the interview he attended established the line of communication with the Primary Sub-source and, as he recalled, generally covered the facts in a "superficial" way.    He said that after the completion of the interview, he never saw the FBI's written summary of the interview.
    337 According to the Supervisory Intel Analyst, the FBI was not able to prove or disprove Page's meeting with Sechin.    The Analyst explained that Page did meet with a Rosneft official-Andrey Baranov, during his July 2016 trip to Moscow and that Page told the FBI that Baranov might have mentioned the possible sale of a stake in Rosneft.    The Analyst stated that Report 134's mention of Sechin could be a "garble" for Baranov.
338 Report 134 contained differing information on the alleged bribe offered by Sechin to Page. The Report first stated that Sechin offered Page a "large stake in Rosneft in return for lifting sanctions on Russia." Later, the same report stated that Sechin had offered Page a much smaller sum of · money, "the brokerage of up to a 19 per cent (privatized) stake in Rosneft." 339 The Primary Sub-source also told the FBI at these interviews that the sub-source who rovided the information about the Carter Pag e-Sechin meeting.
    340 According to a press report prior to the date of Report 134, a 19-percent stake in Rosneft could have sold for more than $10 billion.    See https://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/08/russias-oil-qiant
187
    The Primary Sub-source was questioned again by the FBI beginning in March 2017 about the election reporting and his/her communications with Steele.    The Washington Field Office agent {WFO Agent 1) who conducted that interview and others after it told the OIG that the Primary Sub-source felt that the tenor of Steele's reports was far more "conclusive" than was justified.    The Primary Subsource also stated that he/she never expected Steele to put the Primary Subsource's statements in reports or present them as facts.    According to WFO Agent 1, the Primary Sub-source said he/she made it clear to Steele that h'e/she had no proof to support the statements from his/her sub-sources and that "it was just talk."    WFO Agent 1 said that the Primary Sub-source explained that his/ her information came from "word of mouth and hearsay;"    "conversation that [he/she] had with friends over beers;" and that some of the information, such as allegations about Trump's sexual activities, were statements he/she heard made in "jest."    341 The Primary Sub-source also told WFO Agent 1 that he/she believed that the other sub-sources exaggerated their access to information and the relevance of that information to his/her requests.    The Primary Sub-source told WFO Agent 1 that he/she "takes what [sub-sources] tell [him/ her] with 'a grain of salt."'
    In addition, the FBI interviews with the Primary Sub-source revealed that Steele did not have good insight into how many degrees of separation existed between the Primary Sub-source's sub-sources and the persons quoted in the reporting, and that it could have been multiple layers of hearsay upon hearsay.    For example, the Primary Sub-source stated to WFO Agent 1 that, in contrast to the impression left from the election reports, his/her sub-sources did not have direct access to the persons they were reporting on.    Instead, the Primary Sub-source told WFO Agent 1 that their information was "from someone else who may have had access."
    The Primary Sub-source also informed WFO Agent 1 that Steele tasked him/her after the 2016 U.S. elections to find corroboration for the election reporting and that the Primary Sub-source could find none.    According to WFO Agent 1, during an interview in May 2017, the Primary Sub-source said the corroboration was "zero."    The Primary Sub-source had reported the same conclusion to the Crossfire Hurricane team members who interviewed him/her in January 2017.
    Following the January interview with the Primary Sub-source, on February 15, 2017, Strzok forwarded by email to Priestap and others a news article referencing the Steele election reporting; Strzok commented that "recent interviews and investigation, however, reveal [Steele] may not be in a position to judge the reliability of his sub-source network."    According to the Supervisory Intel Analyst, the cause for the discrepancies between the election reporting and explanations iust-saw-its-profits-drop-75.html (accessed Dec. 8, 2019).    We discuss below the issue of Steele or the sub-sources presenting their analyses as statements of Kremlin officials or others.
    341 According to WFO Agent 1, the Primary Sub-source told him that he/she spoke with at least one staff member at the Ritz Carlton hotel in Moscow who said that there were stories concerning Trump's alleged sexual activities, not that the activities themselves had been confirmed by the staff member as stated in Report 80.
188
later provided to the FBI by Steele's Primary Sub-source and sub-sources about the reporting was difficult to discern and could be attributed to a number of factors.    These included miscommunications between Steele and the Primary Sub-source, exaggerations or misrepresentations by Steele about the information he obtained, or misrepresentations by the Primary Sub-source and/or sub-sources when questioned by the FBI about the information they conveyed to Steele or the Primary Sub-source.    342     Another factor complicating the FBI's assessment of the Steele election reporting was the Primary Sub-source's statement to the FBI that he/she believed that information presented as fact in the reporting included his/her and Steele's "analytical conclusions" and "analytical judgments," and not just reporting from sub-sources.    For example, Report 80 provides that:
    Speaking separately in June 2016, Source B (the former top-level Russian intelligence officer) asserted that TRUMP's unorthodox behavior in Russia over the years had provided the authorities there with enough embarrassing material on the now Republican presidential candidate to be able to blackmail him if they so wished.
    The Primary Sub-source told the FBI that "the ability to blackmail Trump was [the sub-source's] 'logical conclusion' rather than reporting," even though it is presented as a statement from a sub-source.    The Primary Sub-source noted another example of this practice in Report 135, which states:
    Referring back to the (surprise) sacking of Sergei IVANOV as Head of PA [Presidential Administration] in August 2016, his replacement by Anton VAINO and the appointment of former Russian premier Sergei KIRIYENKO to another senior position in the PA, the Kremlin insider repeated that this had been directly connected to the TRUMP support operation and the need to cover up now that it was being exposed by the USG and in the western media.
    Report 111 also contains similar information to Report 135, namely that Ivanov was "sacked" due to his association with the Russian's U.S. election operation.    The Primary Sub-source explained to the FBI that the connection between Ivanov's replacement and "fallout over Russia's influence efforts against the U.S. election" was the Primary Sub-source's "analytical conclusion."    The Primary Sub-source told the FBI that he/she was careful to identify his/her
189
analytical conclusions to Steele and to offer a confidence level in them (e.~ ossible vs. likel . We took note of the fact that on December 1 2016,
    The Supervisory Intel Analyst, as well as Steele, told us that blending judgments with assertions is not an appropriate way to report intelligence.    Steele told us that he would hope that his reports were clear on what a source stated, what was assumed by the source, and what was analysis.    However, Strzok told the OIG that the blending in Steele's reporting of analysis with statements from the sub-sources "posed problems" for the FBI.    Strzok explained that "to understand what the individual source said we can no longer assume this guy said all of this.    It's really [Steele] added on or [the Primary Sub-source] added on."
    As discussed in Chapter Eight, Carter Page FISA Renewal Application Nos. 2 and 3 advised the court that following the January interview with the Primary Subsource, "the FBI found the Russian-based sub-source to be truthful and cooperative."    Renewal Application Nos. 2 and 3 continued to rely on the Steele information, without any revisions or notice to the court that the Primary Subsource contradicted the Steele election reporting on key issues described in the renewal applications.    We found no evidence that the Crossfire Hurricane team ever considered whether any of the inconsistencies warranted reconsideration of the FBl's previous assessment of the reliability of the Steele election reports, or notice to 01 or the court for the subsequent renewal applications.
    D. The FBI Obtains Additional Information about the Reliability of Steele's Reporting after FISA Renewal Application No. 3
    Crossfire Hurricane team members told us that in the spring 2017 they determined that they needed to interview Steele more extensively about his election reporting and ask questions to account for new information that the Primary Sub-source had provided during his/her interview.    The Supervisory Intel Analyst explained that the team members believed that an interview With Steele "would be a good way of potentially looking to see whether or not [the Primary Sub-source] is giving us accurate information [or] did [the Primary Sub-source] tell [Steele] something different."    The FBI sought to obtain additional information about Steele's sub-sources prior to the interview and encountered some logistical delays in arranging it.    The interview ended up occurring during two days in September 2017, following the Carter Page FISA Renewal Application No. 3.
    The FBI's interview with Steele in September 2017 further highlighted discrepancies between Steele's presentation of information in the election reporting
190


12/11/2019 Sen. Graham: Serious doubts FISA courts can continue working if no legal action is taken against FBI by OAN Newsroom
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., holds up a copy of the “Steele Dossier” during a hearing with
Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2019, to look at the
Inspector General’s report on alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) recently slammed the FBI for abusing its power to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on former Trump campaign official Carter Page.    During the Department of Justice Inspector General’s hearing Wednesday, the senator said there needs to be more “checks and balances to make sure something like this never happens again.”
    The Republican lawmaker also warned Inspector General Michael Horowitz against refusing to recommend charges against the bureau for mishandling the investigation.
    Graham went on to say he has serious doubts the FISA court can continue working if nothing is done, adding that the court will “lose his support” if no corrective action is taken.
    Meanwhile, Horowitz told senators the FBI maintained surveillance on Carter Page even when its investigation into him was winding down.    While discussing his report Wednesday, Horowitz outlined 17 instances where the bureau intentionally “omitted or withheld” information in their application for FISA warrants.
Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz testifies at a Senate Judiciary Committee
on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2019, during a hearing on the Inspector General’s
report on alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
    One of the instances he touched on was the FBI learning information that undercut the credibility of the Steele dossier, which it failed to disclose to the FISA courts.    The Inspector General also said the FBI failed to include other exculpatory evidence regarding Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.

12/11/2019 Rep. Steve Scalise responds to DOJ Inspector General’s findings on FISA abuse by OAN Newsroom
Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., walks on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Dec. 3, 2019.
The Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee have released a sweeping impeachment report outlining
evidence of what it calls President Donald Trump’s wrongdoing toward Ukraine. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
    Congressman Steve Scalise (R-La.) said some people should go to jail, following the release of the Department of Justice Inspector General’s report.    The House minority whip expressed concern over the findings in an interview Tuesday.    He said anyone who abuses their power, whether it be law enforcement or lawmakers, should be held accountable.
    Rep. Scalise reiterated that the Justice Department watchdog listed 17 instances of abuse of the FISA court process by FBI officials.    The agency used uncorroborated evidence to obtain warrants used to improperly surveil the 2016 Trump campaign and its adviser Carter Page.
    “The FISA court is controversial, there are people who don’t support it,” he stated.    “It’s an effective tool against terrorism, but it’s got to be used effectively and properly…otherwise it can be abused and was abused…which means it jeopardizes our national security.”
    Scalise went on to say he hopes Attorney General William Barr takes a deeper look into the matter and follows the Inspector General’s recommendations.    He’s also calling Democrats’ impeachment inquiry a “sham,” and said it shows they are scared the American people will reelect the president in 2020.

12/11/2019 IG Horowitz: Report doesn’t vindicate anyone, doesn’t refute political biases by OAN Newsroom
Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz testifies at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing
on the Inspector General’s report on alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,
Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
    DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz said his findings on FBI FISA abuse do not vindicate anyone, contradicting earlier remarks from the agency’s former director.    During his Senate testimony on Wednesday, the DOJ watchdog outlined the misdealings his office uncovered in its review.
    Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham read several statements by James Comey, in which the former FBI head dismissed the notion the FISA warrant process was abused.    Horowitz immediately shot down Comey’s claims.
    “I think the activities we found don’t here vindicate anybody who touched this,” he said.
    Sen. Graham responded to the IG’s claim by saying people should listen to Horowitz rather than Comey.    He added what happened in this instance should never happen again.
    “What happened here is the system failed,” stated Graham.    “People at the highest level of our government took the law in their own hands.”
    He went on to say that the report does not rule out a political bias behind the Russia probe. Both Graham and Horowitz said Democrat claims the IG report did not find a bias actually contradict what the report says.
Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., center, accompanied by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, left, and Ranking Member Sen. Dianne Feinstein,
D-Calif., right, holds up a report while giving an opening statement as Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz,
center foreground, testifies at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the Inspector General’s report on
alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
    IG Horowitz emphasized that the author of the Trump-Russia dossier was biased.
    “We found in the course of this and we heard from Mr. Ohr…that he was desperate to prevent Mr. Trump’s election,” he said.
    The exchange between Graham and Horowitz suggested the separate probe by U.S. attorney John Durham could find political biases behind the actions of the FBI.


   
IT'S HAPPENING STAY TUNED AS THE INVESTIGATIONS ARE BEGINNING AND THE SWAMP IS IN THE CROSSHAIRS
What are the 17 errors found in the Horowitz report.

1. Errors in the wiretap applications for Page were the omission of important information, including some that contradicted investigators' suspicions.

2. For example, in its wiretap applications the FBI didn't note Page's denial that he had been involved in revising a part of the Republican platform to be more favorable to Russia.    The FBI didn't include Page's denials that he had talked to allies of Russian President Vladimir Putin about lifting sanctions against Russia and giving the Trump campaign damaging information about Clinton.

3. And the FBI omitted information about Steele: that he had previously exercised "poor judgment," that he had a history of pursuing people "with political risk but no intelligence value," and that he did not want Trump to become president, the report said.

4. In other cases, inaccurate information was included.    The FBI said Steele's information had historically been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings," which the inspector general found was an overstatement.    The FBI didn't corroborate Steele's account of Page's dealings with Russians but still used it in its preparation of the surveillance applications.

5. "Indeed, a significant amount of the information gathered during these operations was inconsistent with the Steele election reporting and should have been provided to Department attorneys, but was not," the report said.

6. The decision to rely on Steele’s reporting "to help establish that Page was an agent of Russia" was supported by “FBI officials at every level," the report said.    But the inspector general found no evidence” that FBI investigators raised any concerns about the reliability of Steele's information with top officials, including then-FBI Director James Comey or Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates.

7. Because the bureau's top leadership was not notified, the report said, they "authorized the FBI to seek to use this highly intrusive investigative technique targeting Carter Page based on significant omissions and inaccurate information in the initial and renewal FISA applications.”

8. Andrew McCabe, former FBI deputy director, told the Inspector General's Office that the FBI "felt strongly" that the surveillance of Page should move forward, citing national security threats, even if the bureau would later be criticized for taking such an action, the report said.

9. Horowitz also singled out Bruce Ohr, an associate deputy attorney general, for additional review.    The report suggested Ohr had an inherent conflict of interest, in part because his wife was an independent contractor for Fusion GPS.

10. The inspector general sharply criticized Ohr for communicating with Steele, even after the FBI had stopped using Steele as a source, and not disclosing that to his supervisors.    He also didn't disclose his wife's ties to Fusion GPS, the report said.

11. In a written response, FBI Director Christopher Wray characterized the report as “constructive criticism that will make us stronger as an organization.”

12.We are vested with significant authorities and it is our obligation as public servants to ensure these authorities are exercised with objectivity and integrity,” Wray said.    “Anything less falls short of the FBI’s duty to the American people.”

13. In an op-ed published in The Washington Post Monday, Comey acknowledged the mistakes identified by the inspector general, but said overall the report disproves the president's accusations that law enforcement spied on his campaign.

14. Omitted the finding from a formal FBI source validation report that Steele was suitable for continued operation but that his past contributions to the FBI's criminal program had been "minimally corroborated," and instead continued to assert in the source characterization statement that Steele's prior reporting had been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings";

15. Omitted Papadopoulos's statements to an FBI CHS in late October 2016 (after the first application was filed) denying that the Trump campaign was involved in the circumstances of the DNC email hack;

16. Omitted Joseph Mifsud's denials to the FBI that he supplied Papadopoulos with the information Papadopoulos shared with the FFG (suggesting that the campaign received an offer or suggestion of assistance from Russia) ;494 and

17. Omitted evidence or information indicating that Page played no role in the Republican platform change on Russia's annexation of Ukraine as alleged in Steele Report 95, which was inconsistent with a factual assertion relied upon to support probable cause in all four FISA applications.

    None of these inaccuracies and omissions were brought to the attention of OI before the last FISA application was filed in June 2017.    Consequently, these failures were repeated in all three renewal applications.    Further, as we discuss later, we identified 10 additional significant errors in the renewal applications.
    The failure to provide accurate and complete information to the OI Attorney concerning Page's prior relationship with another U.S. government agency (item 1 above) was particularly concerning because the OI Attorney had specifically asked the case agent in late September 2016 whether Carter Page had a current or prior relationship with the other agency.    In response to that inquiry, the case agent advised the OI Attorney that Page's relationship was "dated" (claiming it was when Page lived in Moscow in 2004-2007) and "outside scope."    This representation, however, was contrary to information that the other agency had provided to the FBI in August 2016, which stated that Page was approved as an "operational contact" of the other agency from 2008 to 2013 (after Page had left Moscow).    Moreover, rather than being "outside scope," Page's status with the other agency overlapped in time with some of the interactions between Page and known Russian intelligence officers that were relied upon in the FISA applications to establish probable cause.    Indeed, Page had provided information to the other agency about his past contacts with a Russian Intelligence Officer (Intelligence Officer 1), which were among the historical connections to Russian intelligence officers that the FBI relied upon in the first FISA application (and subsequent renewal applications).    According to the information from the other agency, an employee of the other agency had assessed that Page "candidly described his contact with" Intelligence Officer 1 to the other agency.    Thus, the FBI relied upon Page's contacts with Intelligence Officer 1, among others, in support of its probable cause statement in the FISA application, while failing to disclose to OI or the FISC that ( 1) Page had been approved as an operational contact by the other agency during a five-year period that overlapped with allegations in the FISA application, (2) Page had disclosed to the other agency contacts that he had with Intelligence Officer 1 and certain other individuals, and (3) the other agency's employee had given a positive assessment of Page's candor.
    Further, we were concerned by the FBI's inaccurate assertion in the application that Steele's prior reporting had been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings," which we were told was primarily a reference to Steele's role in the FIFA corruption investigation.    We found that the team had speculated that Steele's prior reporting had been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings without clearing the representation with Steele's handling agent, as required by the Woods Procedures.    According to the handling agent, he would not have approved the representation in the application because only "some" of Steele's prior reporting had been corroborated-most of it had notand because Steele's information was never used in a criminal proceeding.    We concluded that these failures created the inaccurate impression in the applications that at least some of Steele's past reporting had been deemed sufficiently reliable by prosecutors to use in court, and that more of his information had been corroborated than was actually the case.
    We found no evidence that the 01 Attorney, NSD supervisors, ODAG officials, or Yates were made aware of these issues before the first application was submitted to the court.    Although we also found no evidence that Corney had been made aware of these issues at the time he certified the application, as discussed in our analysis in Chapter Eleven, multiple factors made it difficult for us to precisely determine the extent of FBI leadership's knowledge as to each fact that was not shared with 01 and not included, or inaccurately stated, in the FISA applications.    These factors included, among other things, limited recollections, the inability to question Corney or refresh his recollection with relevant, classified documentation because of his lack of a security clearance, and the absence of meeting minutes that would show the specific details shared with Corney and McCabe during briefings they received, beyond the more general investigative updates that we know they were provided.
    FBI efforts to verify information in the Steele election reports, and to learn about Steele and his source network continued after Steele's closure as a CHS.    In November and December 2016, FBI officials travelled abroad and met with persons who previously had professional contacts with Steele or had knowledge of his work.    Information these FBI officials obtained about Steele was both positive and negative.    We found, however, that the information about Steele was not placed in his FBI CHS file.
    We further learned that the FBI's Validation Management Unit (VMU) completed a human source validation review of Steele in early 2017.    The VMU review found that Steele's past criminal reporting was "minimally corroborated," and included this finding in its report that was provided to the Crossfire Hurricane team.    This determination by the VMU was in tension with the source characterization statement included in the initial FISA application, which represented that Steele's prior reporting had been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings."    The VMU review also did not identify any corroboration for Steele's election reporting among the information that the Crossfire Hurricane team had collected.    However, the VMU did not include this finding in its written validation report.

Executive Summary
Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane Investigation
    Further, we were concerned by the FBI's inaccurate assertion in the application that Steele's prior reporting had been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings," which we were told was primarily a reference to Steele's role in the FIFA corruption investigation.    We found that the team had speculated that Steele's prior reporting had been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings without clearing the representation with Steele's handling agent, as required by the Woods Procedures.    According to the handling agent, he would not have approved the representation in the application because only "some" of Steele's prior reporting had been corroborated-most of it had notand because Steele's information was never used in a criminal proceeding.    We concluded that these failures created the inaccurate impression in the applications that at least some of Steele's past reporting had been deemed sufficiently reliable by prosecutors to use in court, and that more of his information had been corroborated than was actually the case.
    We found no evidence that the 01 Attorney, NSD supervisors, ODAG officials, or Yates were made aware of these issues before the first application was submitted to the court.    Although we also found no evidence that Corney had been made aware of these issues at the time he certified the application, as discussed in our analysis in Chapter Eleven, multiple factors made it difficult for us to precisely determine the extent of FBI leadership's knowledge as to each fact that was not shared with 01 and not included, or inaccurately stated, in the FISA applications.    These factors included, among other things, limited recollections, the inability to question Corney or refresh his recollection with relevant, classified documentation because of his lack of a security clearance, and the absence of meeting minutes that would show the specific details shared with Corney and McCabe during briefings they received, beyond the more general investigative updates that we know they were provided.
FBI Activities After the First FISA Application and FBI Efforts to Assess Steele's Election Reporting
    On October 31, 2016, shortly after the first FISA application was signed, an article entitled "A Veteran Spy Has Given the FBI Information Alleging a Russian Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump," was published by Mother Jones.    Steele admitted to the FBI that he was a source for the article, and the FBI closed him as a CHS for cause in November 2016.    However, as we describe below, despite having been closed for cause, the Crossfire Hurricane team continued to obtain information from Steele through Ohr, who met with the FBI on 13 occasions to pass along information he had been provided by Steele.
X
    In Chapter Six, we describe the events that followed Steele's closing as a CHS, including the FBI's receipt of information from several third parties who had acquired copies of the Steele election reports, use of information from the Steele reports in an interagency assessment of Russian interference in the U.S. 2016 elections, and continuing efforts to learn about Steele and his source network and to verify information from the reports following Steele's closure.
    Starting in December 2016, FBI staff participated in an interagency effort to assess the Russian government's intentions and actions concerning the 2016 U.S. elections.    We learned that whether and how to present Steele's reporting in the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) was a topic of significant discussion between the FBI and the other agencies participating in it.    According to FBI staff, as the interagency editing process for the ICA progressed, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) expressed concern about the lack of vetting for the Steele election reporting and asserted it did not merit inclusion in the body of the report.    An FBI Intel Section Chief told us the CIA viewed it as "internet rumor."    In contrast, as we describe in Chapter Six, the FBI, including Corney and McCabe, sought to include the reporting in the ICA.    Limited information from the Steele reporting ultimately was presented in an appendix to the ICA.
    FBI efforts to verify information in the Steele election reports, and to learn about Steele and his source network continued after Steele's closure as a CHS.    In November and December 2016, FBI officials travelled abroad and met with persons who previously had professional contacts with Steele or had knowledge of his work.    Information these FBI officials obtained about Steele was both positive and negative.    We found, however, that the information about Steele was not placed in his FBI CHS file.
    We further learned that the FBI's Validation Management Unit (VMU) completed a human source validation review of Steele in early 2017.    The VMU review found that Steele's past criminal reporting was "minimally corroborated," and included this finding in its report that was provided to the Crossfire Hurricane team.    This determination by the VMU was in tension with the source characterization statement included in the initial FISA application, which represented that Steele's prior reporting had been "corroborated and used in criminal proceedings."    The VMU review also did not identify any corroboration for Steele's election reporting among the information that the Crossfire Hurricane team had collected. However, the VMU did not include this finding in its written validation report.

    Among the most serious of the 10 additional errors we found in the renewal applications was the FBI's failure to advise OI or the court of the inconsistences, described in detail in Chapter Six, between Steele and his Primary Sub-source on the reporting relied upon in the FISA applications.    Although the Primary Sub-source's account of these communications, if true, was not consistent with and, in fact, contradicted the allegations of a "well-developed conspiracy" in Reports 95 and 102 attributed to Person 1, the FBI did not share this information with OI.    The
xii
FBI also failed to share other inconsistencies with OI, including the Primary Sub-source's account of the alleged meeting between Page and Sechin in Steele's Report 94 and his/her descriptions of the source network.    The fact that the Primary Sub-source's account contradicted key assertions attributed to his/her own sub-sources in Steele's Reports 94, 95, and 102 should have generated significant discussions between the Crossfire Hurricane team and OI prior to submitting the next FISA renewal application.    According to Evans, had OI been made aware of the information, such discussions might have included the possibility of foregoing the renewal request altogether, at least until the FBI reconciled the differences between Steele's account and the Primary Sub-source's account to the satisfaction of OI.    However, we found no evidence that the Crossfire Hurricane team ever considered whether any of the inconsistencies warranted reconsideration of the FBI's assessment of the reliability of the Steele reports or notice to OI before the subsequent renewal applications were filed.
    Instead, the second and third renewal applications provided no substantive information concerning the Primary Sub-source's interview, and offered only a brief conclusory statement that the FBI met with the Primary Sub-source "[i]n an effort to further corroborate Steele's reporting" and found the Primary Sub-source to be "truthful and cooperative."    We believe that including this statement, without also informing OI and the court that the Primary Subsource's account of events contradicted key assertions in Steele's reporting, left a misimpression that the Primary Sub-source had corroborated the Steele reporting.    Indeed, in a letter to the FISC in July 2018, before learning of these inconsistencies from us during this review, the Department defended the reliability of Steele's reporting and the FISA applications by citing, in part, to the Primary Sub-source's interview as "additional information corroborating [Steele's] reporting" and noting the FBI's determination that he/she was "truthful and cooperative."
    The renewal applications also continued to fail to include information regarding Carter Page's past relationship with another U.S. government agency, even though both 01 and members of the Crossfire Hurricane expressed concern about the possibility of a prior relationship following interviews that Page gave to news outlets in April and May 2017 stating that he had assisted other U.S. government agencies in the past.    As we describe in Chapter Eight, in June 2017, SSA 2, who was to be the affiant for Renewal Application No. 3 and had been the affiant for the first two renewals, told us that he wanted a definitive answer to whether Page....
    Since it did not mention his name I added the following information.
    Back on 3/13/2019 in my early information I did the list of Obama and Comey’s FBI People and below is one of them.
Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer, wrote anti-Trump texts with former top FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.    According to the Washington Times, Clinesmith “worked on the 2016 probe into Hillary Clinton’s email use [known as Mid-Year-Exam], then worked on the FBI’s original investigation into the Trump campaign [known as Crossfire Hurricane] and, eventually, with the special counsel’s investigation into Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign.”
    But Clinesmith, like Strzok, was let go from Mueller’s investigative team once his anti-Trump texts were uncovered by the FBI inspector general (IG), who is tasked with uncovering wrongdoing at the FBI.    “Viva le resistance,” Clinesmith said in one text.
    So as you see below it has resurfaced again at:
    The following found at https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mueller-lawyer-with-anti-trump-bias-is-ex-fbi-official-facing-fisa-criminal-investigation
11/22/2019 Mueller lawyer with anti-Trump bias is ex-FBI official facing FISA criminal investigation by Daniel Chaitin & Jerry Dunleavy, Washington Examiner
    The FBI lawyer under criminal investigation for allegedly falsifying a document related to the surveillance of a Trump campaign adviser expressed negative opinions of President Trump in messages to colleagues.
    Kevin Clinesmith, who was part of special counsel Robert Mueller's team, has been identified as the attorney who could face a criminal charge as part of U.S. Attorney John Durham's expansive criminal inquiry into the origins of the Russia investigation, according to the New York Times.
    As part of the Justice Department watchdog's now-completed investigation into alleged surveillance abuses, Clinesmith was found to have altered an email that was used by officials as they prepared an application renewal to present before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to obtain a warrant to electronically surveil Carter Page, a onetime foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign.
    Clinesmith was an attorney with the FBI’s National Security and Cyber Law Branch and worked under FBI General Counsel James Baker and Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson.    He had worked on the Clinton email investigation as well as the Trump-Russia probe.    Clinesmith was present in the FBI's meeting with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos in February 2017 in Chicago, Papadopoulos told lawmakers in 2018.    An Australian diplomat's tip about Papadopoulos claiming the Russians had damaging information about Hillary Clinton effectively prompted the FBI's counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign, called Crossfire Hurricane, in July 2016.
Columnist Salena Zito on the expanded Washington Examiner magazine
    Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz's investigators found Clinesmith falsely asserted he had documentation to back up a claim while in talks with the Justice Department about the factual basis for a FISA warrant application renewal.    He then took an email from an official from another agency that contained multiple factual assertions, added material of his own, and gave it to a fellow FBI official who was preparing an affidavit for the Page case.    Clinesmith has been described in many media reports as a “low-level attorney,” but Horowitz said he “was the primary FBI attorney assigned to [the Trump-Russia] investigation in early 2017.”
    Eagerly anticipated by Trump's allies, Howoritz's report is expected to be released to the public on Dec. 9, the inspector general announced this week.    They believe it will reveal an effort to undermine Trump's 2016 campaign in which the FBI misled the FISA court in its reliance on an unverified dossier compiled by British ex-spy Christopher Steele, whose research about Trump and his associates was partially funded by Clinton's 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the Perkins Coie law firm and Fusion GPS.

    This was put out back in September-July by John Solomon, an investigative journalist whose work over the years has exposed U.S. and FBI intelligence failures before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal scientists’ misuse of foster children and veterans in drug experiments, and numerous cases of political corruption.    He is an investigative columnist and executive vice president for video at The Hill.    AND NOW IT FINALLY LOOKS LIKE WE WILL GET TO THE POINT THAT THE CRIMINALS OF THE FORMER OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WILL BE BROUGHT TO JUSTICE FOR THEIR ACTIONS AND IF WHAT THEY ARE IT IS NOT HARD TO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS COUNTRY AND THE DEMOCRATIC INDIVIDUALS ARE SO SCREWED UP IN THEIR HEADS.
    Here is what are the documents that have the greatest chance of rocking Washington, if declassified:
  • 1.) Christopher Steele’s confidential human source reports at the FBI.    These documents, known in bureau parlance as 1023 reports, show exactly what transpired each time Steele and his FBI handlers met in the summer and fall of 2016 to discuss his anti-Trump dossier.    The big reveal, my sources say, could be the first evidence that the FBI shared sensitive information with Steele, such as the existence of the classified Crossfire Hurricane operation targeting the Trump campaign.    It would be a huge discovery if the FBI fed Trump-Russia intel to Steele in the midst of an election, especially when his ultimate opposition-research client was Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).    The FBI has released only one or two of these reports under FOIA lawsuits and they were 100 percent redacted.    The American public deserves better.
  • 2.) The 53 House Intel interviews.    House Intelligence interviewed many key players in the Russia probe and asked the DNI to declassify those interviews nearly a year ago, after sending the transcripts for review last November.    There are several big reveals, I’m told, including the first evidence that a lawyer tied to the Democratic National Committee had Russia-related contacts at the CIA.
  • 3.) The Stefan Halper documents.    It has been widely reported that European-based American academic Stefan Halper and a young assistant, Azra Turk, worked as FBI sources.    We know for sure that one or both had contact with targeted Trump aides like Carter Page and George Papadopoulos at the end of the election.    My sources tell me there may be other documents showing Halper continued working his way to the top of Trump's transition and administration, eventually reaching senior advisers like Peter Navarro inside the White House in summer 2017.    These documents would show what intelligence agencies worked with Halper, who directed his activity, how much he was paid and how long his contacts with Trump officials were directed by the U.S. government’s Russia probe.
  • 4.) The October 2016 FBI email chain.    This is a key document identified by Rep. Nunes and his investigators.    My sources say it will show exactly what concerns the FBI knew about and discussed with DOJ about using Steele’s dossier and other evidence to support a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant targeting the Trump campaign in October 2016.    If those concerns weren’t shared with FISA judges who approved the warrant, there could be major repercussions.
  • 5.) Page/Papadopoulos exculpatory statements.    Another of Nunes’ five buckets, these documents purport to show what the two Trump aides were recorded telling undercover assets or captured in intercepts insisting on their innocence.    Papadopoulos told me he told an FBI undercover source in September 2016 that the Trump campaign was not trying to obtain hacked Clinton documents from Russia and considered doing so to be treason.    If he made that statement with the FBI monitoring, and it was not disclosed to the FISA court, it could be another case of FBI or DOJ misconduct.
  • 6.) The 'Gang of Eight' briefing materials.    These were a series of classified briefings and briefing books the FBI and DOJ provided key leaders in Congress in the summer of 2018 that identify shortcomings in the Russia collusion narrative.    Of all the documents congressional leaders were shown, this is most frequently cited to me in private as having changed the minds of lawmakers who weren’t initially convinced of FISA abuses or FBI irregularities.
  • 7.) The Steele spreadsheet.    I wrote recently that the FBI kept a spreadsheet on the accuracy and reliability of every claim in the Steele dossier.    According to my sources, it showed as much as 90 percent of the claims could not be corroborated, were debunked or turned out to be open-source internet rumors.    Given Steele’s own effort to leak intel in his dossier to the media before Election Day, the public deserves to see the FBI’s final analysis of his credibility.    A document I reviewed recently showed the FBI described Steele’s information as only “minimally corroborated” and the bureau’s confidence in him as “medium.”
  • 8.) The Steele interview.    It has been reported, and confirmed, that the DOJ's inspector general (IG) interviewed the former British intelligence operative for as long as 16 hours about his contacts with the FBI while working with Clinton’s opposition research firm, Fusion GPS.    It is clear from documents already forced into the public view by lawsuits that Steele admitted in the fall of 2016 that he was desperate to defeat Trump, had a political deadline to make his dirt public, was working for the DNC/Clinton campaign and was leaking to the news media.    If he told that to the FBI and it wasn’t disclosed to the FISA court, there could be serious repercussions.
  • 9.) The redacted sections of the third FISA renewal application.    This was the last of four FISA warrants targeting the Trump campaign; it was renewed in June 2017 after special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe had started, and signed by then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.    It is the one FISA application that House Republicans have repeatedly asked to be released, and I’m told the big reveal in the currently redacted sections of the application is that it contained both misleading information and evidence of intrusive tactics used by the U.S. government to infiltrate Trump’s orbit.
  • 10.) Records of allies’ assistance.    Multiple sources have said a handful of U.S. allies overseas – possibly Great Britain, Australia and Italy – were asked to assist FBI efforts to check on Trump connections to Russia.    Members of Congress have searched recently for some key contact documents with British intelligence.    My sources say these documents might help explain Attorney General Bill Barr’s recent comments that “the use of foreign intelligence capabilities and counterintelligence capabilities against an American political campaign, to me, is unprecedented and it's a serious red line that's been crossed.”
[SO FOR WHAT WAS NOT COVERED BY THE IG REPORT WILL BE UNCOVERED BY ATTORNEY WILLAM BARR AND U.S. ATTORNEY JOHN DURHAM AND I HAVE HEARD THEY WILL HAVE THAT BY THE MIDDLE OF 2020 AND HOPEFULLY JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL ON THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES BY THE DEEP STATE AND PROBABLY THE GLOBALIST CONNECTIONS WHO ARE ATTACKING TRUMP USING ANYONE THAT THEY CAN INFLUENCE.].
    Also the decision to open Crossfire Hurricane and four individual cases on current and former members of the Trump campaign, George Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and Michael Flynn; the early investigative steps taken; and whether the openings and early steps complied with Department and FBI policies is definitely going to be looked at also.

12/14/2019 Senators push for FISA Court reform in wake of IG report by OAN Newsroom
Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., center, accompanied by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, left, and Ranking Member Sen. Dianne Feinstein,
D-Calif., right, holds up a report while giving an opening statement as Department of Justice Inspector
General Michael Horowitz, center foreground, testifies at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the Inspector General’s report on
alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
    Lawmakers are mobilizing to reform the FISA Court system.    On Thursday, Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham vowed to implement more “checks and balances” to the courts.
    “The day of reckoning is coming,” he said.
    This announcement came after Inspector General Michael Horowitz found the FBI was able to “mislead” the courts to maintain its surveillance on former Trump campaign official Carter Page.    Horowitz told senators the FBI maintained surveillance on Page even when its investigation into him was winding down.
    While discussing his report Wednesday, he outlined 17 instances where the bureau intentionally “omitted or withheld” information in their application for FISA warrants.
    One of the instances he touched on was the FBI learning information that undercut the credibility of the Steele dossier, which it failed to disclose to the FISA courts.    Horowitz also said the FBI failed to include other exculpatory evidence regarding Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.
Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz testifies at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing
on the Inspector General’s report on alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,
Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
    Following the hearing, Sen. Graham said corrective action needed to be taken for the courts to remain functioning.
    “What happened here is not a few irregularities, the system failed.    People at the highest level of our government took the law in their own hands.    When I say defraud the FISA Court, I mean it.” – Lindsey Graham, U.S. Senator (R-SC)
    The Republican lawmaker warned IG Horowitz against refusing to recommend charges against the bureau for mishandling the investigation.    Graham also said he has serious doubts the FISA court can continue working if nothing is done, adding that the court will “lose his support” if no corrective action is taken.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., holds up a copy of the “Steele Dossier” during a hearing
with Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2019,
to look at the Inspector General’s report on alleged abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
    Democrat Sen. Dick Durbin, who also sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has signaled there may be bipartisan support to reform the courts.
    Lawmakers have not yet specified when those changes could be implemented.
[Graham’s presentation was very impressive at what the report was saying and when Horowitz was questioned about it he acknowledged.    When Feinstein the "leaker lady" gave hers it was a plain jane concept denying all which is the same thing she did when the Obama administration was caught spying on Americans with the U.S. surveilance systems.].

12/15/2019 Sen. Graham invites Rudy Giuliani to testify about Ukraine trip with OAN by OAN Newsroom
In this handout photo provided by Adriii Derkach’s press office, Rudy Giuliani, an attorney for U.S President Donald Trump,
left, meets with Ukrainian lawmaker Adriii Derkach in Kyiv, Ukraine, Thursday, Dec. 5, 2019. (Adriii Derkach’s press office via AP)
    Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham has invited Rudy Giuliani to testify about his trip to Ukraine with One America News.    During a recent interview, Graham said he would be glad to talk with Giuliani so he can tell Congress what the attorney uncovered during his trip.
    However, Graham added he would only take up the attorney’s testimony after the impeachment trial ends.
    Giuliani has been leading efforts to uncover information about the Biden family’s ties to Ukraine and corruption.    He visited the White House on Friday, where he was seen leaving the West Wing.    The administration has yet to comment on the reason behind the visit, but President Trump has asked the attorney to brief GOP senators and the DOJ on his findings from last week’s trip.
    On Sunday, Giuliani announced he is preparing a report on Joe and Hunter Biden’s corruption in Ukraine.
    In a series of tweets, he argued Joe Biden used the office of vice president to protect his son Hunter’s scheme to launder dirty money from Ukraine into the U.S.
    Giuliani said the dirty money of Ukrainian oligarchs went to Latvia and Cyprus before landing in Hunter Biden’s pocket.    The attorney added Democrats are trying cover up this laundering scheme with the “impeachment hoax.”
    One America’s Chanel Rion accompanied Giuliani to Ukraine to interview former Ukrainian prosecutors and officials associated with the Democrat’s impeachment argument.
    Graham’s invitation came after he vowed to make impeachment “die quickly” when it reaches the Senate.    On Saturday, Graham said he wants Democrats to “make their case based on the record they established in the House” before putting impeachment to a vote.
    “I don’t know where this goes, but I know impeachment will be over soon,” he said.    “This thing will come to the Senate, it will die quickly and I will do everything I can to make it die quickly.”
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., on Capitol Hill in
Washington, Monday, Dec. 9, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
    He went on to discuss the results of the Mueller report and said there was never any evidence of wrongdoing by the president.
    “I supported the Mueller investigation, by the way,” said the senator.    “I didn’t know what Trump had done with the Russians, (but) what I have come to believe (is) there is no collusion.”
    Graham said he predicts the Senate will be done with its trial by mid-January.
Rudy Giuliani, center right, personal attorney for President Donald Trump, is seen leaving the West Wing
of the White House in Washington, Friday, Dec. 13, 2019. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

    Also from the IG Horowitz report regarding John Brennan and James Clapper:
    Page 77 'IV. Investigative Steps in Crossfire Hurricane Prior to Receipt of Christopher Steele Reporting on September 19 According to FBI officials, the early investigative steps taken in Crossfire Hurricane were structured to maintain a close-hold on the investigation and avoid any impact on the 2016 U.S. elections. FBI officials told us that no steps were...."
footnote: 194 Comey told us that this meeting was attended by then Chief of Staff Dennis McDonough, then National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, then Director of National Intelligence (DNI), James Clapper, then CIA Director John Brennan, and then Director of the National Security Agency Michael Rogers.
    Page 56 "We also asked Corney and McCabe about then CIA Director John Brennan's statements reported in several news articles that he provided to the FBI intelligence on Russian contacts with U.S. persons that predicated or prompted the opening of Crossfire Hurricane.    Comey told us that while Brennan shared intelligence on the overarching efforts by the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 U.S. elections, Brennan did not provide any information that predicated or prompted the FBI to open Crossfire Hurricane.    McCabe said that he did not recall Brennan providing the FBI with information before the FBI's decision to open an investigation about any U.S person potentially cooperating with Russia in the efforts to interfere with the 2016 U.S. elections.    Priestap and the Intel Section Chief also told us that Brennan did not provide the FBI any intelligence that predicated the opening of Crossfire Hurricane.    We did not find information in FBI or Department electronic communications, emails, or other documents, or through witness testimony, indicating otherwise."
    Page 179 "We asked Comey whether he recalled having any conversations with then CIA Director John Brennan or other members of the USIC about how the Steele election reports should be presented to the President.    Comey stated:
    I remember being part of a conversation, maybe more than one conversation, where the topic was how the [Steele] reporting would be integrated, if at all, into the IC assessment.    And I don't remember participating in debates about that.    I think I was just told, in, I think, in a meeting with Clapper and Brennan and Rogers [then NSA Director], that the IC analysts found it credible on its face and gravamen of it, and consistent with our other information, but not in a position where they would integrate it into the IC assessment. But they thought it was important enough and consistent enough that it ought to be part of the package in some way, and so they had come up with this idea to make an [appendix].    I remember, I don't think I was part of a debate about that, as I said, but I remember a conversation where I was told that's how it would be handled and my reaction was, okay, that's reasonable
."
[THE LIARS AND COVERUP CONTINUES AND THE SWAMP HAS BEEN BUSTED AND WE WILL KNOW MORE WHEN THE DURHAM PROCESS COMES OUT.].

    The follwoing found at https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fisa-court-slams-fbi-over-surveillance-applications-in-rare-public-order
12/17/2019 FISA court slams FBI over surveillance applications, in rare public order by Andrew O'Reilly, Bill Mears, Fox News
What is the future of the FBI following revealing IG report on FISA applications?
Reaction and analysis from Kira Davis, Tomi Lahren, and Rep. Matt Gaetz.
    In a rare public order Tuesday, the chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [FISC] strongly criticized the FBI over its surveillance-application process, giving the bureau until Jan. 10 to come up with solutions, in the wake of findings from Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz.
    The order, from the court's presiding judge Rosemary M. Collyer, came just a week after the release of Horowitz's withering report about the wiretapping of Carter Page, a former campaign adviser to President Trump.
    "The FBI's handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the [Office of Inspector General] report, was antithetical to the heightened duty of candor described above," Collyer wrote in her four-page order.    "The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable."
    Horowitz said he did not find significant evidence that FBI agents were involved in a political conspiracy to undermine Trump's candidacy in 2016.    However, the report did find numerous errors and inaccuracies used by FBI agents to obtain permission to monitor Page's phone calls and emails.
[ Rosemary Mayers Collyer, a Senior United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and currently the Presiding Judge of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
    Collyer was one of four FISA Court judges who approved a FISA warrant (issued in October 2016 and renewed several times) authorizing the wiretapping of Carter Page.    So now it is found out that there was illegal activity by the FBI, with contractors doing improper disclosures on Americans.]
    While Collyer's order did not specify exactly what reforms the FBI needed to implement to its policies for obtaining permission to wiretap people under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, the order did say that the FISA court will weigh in on whether the reforms are deemed sufficient.
    "The [FISA court] expects the government to provide complete and accurate information in every filing with the court," Collyer wrote.    "Without it, the [FISA court] cannot properly ensure that the government conducts electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes only when there is a sufficient factual basis."
    Comey admits 'significant errors' in FBI's FISA process.
    The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has dealt with some of the most sensitive matters of national security: terror threats and espionage.    Its work, for the most part, cannot be examined by the American public, by order of Congress and the president.    Its work has been mostly secret, its structure largely one-sided.
    "The most unusual thing is that there is a body of law that the court has created, but as a practitioner that is part of that law, we have between zero and some very limited knowledge of what that law is," Michael Sussmann, a former Justice Department prosecutor and current private attorney in the consumer and computer-privacy field, told Fox News.    "But, it's the fact that there is a secret law and a secret body of law that makes it the most vexing."
    Tuesday's order from the court came amid a Republican-led push to reform FISA.
    Reps. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, and Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, last week introduced the FISA Improvements Act in a bid to "stop these abuses" and effectively amend FISA by adding requirements on the FBI, the DOJ and on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which would also give Congress "critical new insight to perform oversight of the FISA powers."
    "The deceptive actions of a few high-ranking officials within the FBI and the Department of Justice have eroded public trust in our federal institutions," Stewart stated.    "They flattened internal guardrails, deceived the FISA court, and irreparably damaged the reputation of an innocent American" - a reference to Page.
    The GOP bill would mandate that amicus curiae – an impartial court advisor – be assigned to all cases where a U.S. person is involved.    It also would ensure that the DOJ disclose "any usage of unverified information in the application," and include a provision in which any FISA extensions are heard or denied by the same judge which "ensures that the government is not able to obfuscate details of an expiring order's newly gathered evidence to support renewal."
    The House voted earlier this year against a bipartisan amendment to FISA, proposed by Michigan Rep. Justin Amash -- then a Republican -- and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., which would have halted the 2020 funding for FISA's Section 702, which was authorized in 2008 as a means to monitor communications by foreign nationals outside the U.S. Amash later left the Republican Party to become an independent.
    Collyer's order was met with praise by some Republican lawmakers, including Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
    "Very pleased to see the FISA court condemn the FISA warrant application and process against Carter Page," Graham said in a statement.    "As Inspector General Horowitz’s report describes in great detail, the FISA process falsified evidence and withheld exculpatory evidence to obtain a warrant against Mr. Page on numerous occasions."
    Horowitz's report was hardly the first time the court has come under scrutiny.    In 2013, self-confessed National Security Agency [NSA] leaker Edward Snowden revealed a secret FISC order approving government collection of mass amounts of so-called metadata from telecom giant Verizon and leading Internet companies, including Microsoft, Apple, Google, Yahoo and Facebook.
    The revelations triggered debate about national security and privacy interests, and about the secretive legal process that set government surveillance in motion.    Approvals would come from a rotating panel of federal judges at the FISC, deciding whether to grant certain types of government requests -- wiretapping, data analysis and other monitoring for "foreign intelligence purposes" of suspected terrorists and spies operating in the United States.
    Horowitz: Political actors still working at FBI
    The Snowden revelations confirmed the scope of the NSA's efforts had greatly expanded -- along with the court's original mission.    No longer were FISC judges approving individual surveillance requests.    Now, in essence, they were reinterpreting the Constitution, expanding the limits of privacy and due process, critics said.
    "The laws have been secretly interpreted in a way that now allows the government to monitor the communications of all of us-- a dragnet of surveillance," said David Sobel, a senior counsel at the Electronic Freedom Foundation.    "Based on the statistics we have, the court appears to be a rubber stamp but part of the problem is because this process is secret, and because the public can't see what the court is doing or read the opinions, it is hard to assess the extent the court is asking tough questions and holding the govt.'s feet to the fire."
    Fox News' Jason Donner and Hollie McKay contributed to this report.
[JUSTICE IS COMING! And there's NOTHING that the crooked Democrats can do to stop it...not even the phony impeachment HOAX].

12/18/2019 Former Trump aide Gates sentenced to jail - Judge gives him 45-day stint despite cooperation by Kristine Phillips, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON – Former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates was sentenced Tuesday to 45 days in jail, a departure from a probation sentence prosecutor said he deserved in exchange for being a witness in the Russia investigation.
    U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said the jail sentence will be intermittent – Gates will spend weekends behind bars.    He will be on probation for three years, must pay $20,000 in fines and must do 300 hours of community service.
    Jackson said Gates’ cooperation with prosecutors was “an important public service.”    Gates testified in “three cases already and maybe more, sometimes against friends and former colleagues and partners. ... He was forthcoming about his own lies and wrongdoing.”
    But the judge said a short incarceration is “appropriate,” noting she has seen defendants from less privileged backgrounds spend more time behind bars for lesser crimes.    Incarceration, she said, should not be a punishment only for the disadvantaged.
    Gates is one of six former Trump associates and campaign aides indicted as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s efforts to meddle in the 2016 presidential election.
    Gates testified against two of them, former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and longtime Trump ally Roger Stone. Both were convicted.
    Citing Gates’ “extraordinary” cooperation, Assistant U.S. Attorney Molly Gaston agreed with defense attorneys that he should be sentenced to probation.    Gaston said it’s hard to imagine the “turbulent atmosphere” in which Gates decided to plead guilty.
    “He understood that pleading guilty would mean public testimony that would make him and his family the subject of intense scrutiny,” Gaston said at a hearing in federal court in Washington.
    Yet, Gaston said, Gates “decided to do the right thing.”
    Gates and Manafort, longtime business associates, were indicted in Washington in October 2017.    They were charged with failing to register as foreign agents for work they did for Ukraine and making false statements to investigators to conceal that work.
    The two were indicted again in February 2018 in Virginia, where Gates was charged with assisting Manafort in a years-long scheme to hide millions of dollars of income from foreign governments.    Prosecutors charged that many of their crimes were related to work they did for former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.
    “For more than a decade, Gates engaged in a range of crimes at Manafort’s direction,” prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memorandum.    “Gates, at Manafort’s direction, helped conceal the nature of their work, the income derived from it, and the overseas accounts where those funds were maintained.    Gates assisted in laundering funds to promote the scheme.”
    Over the course of four years, Gates helped Manafort hide more than $15 million from tax authorities.    Gates personally benefited from the crimes by not reporting $3 million on tax returns over several years and stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from Manafort’s overseas accounts, prosecutors said.
    Gates pleaded guilty to conspiracy and making false statements about his status as a foreign agent.    Both are felonies.
    The rest of the charges were dropped.
Contributing: Brad Heath and Kevin Johnson
Former Deputy Trump campaign aide Rick Gates leaves the federal court in Washington,
Tuesday after being sentenced to 45 days in jail. JOSE LUIS MAGANA/AP

12/18/2019 More about the OHr's and Glenn Simpson in the IG report.
    The interactions of Department attorney Bruce Ohr with Steele, the FBI, Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS, and the State Department; whether work Ohr's spouse performed for Fusion GPS implicated ethical rules applicable to Ohr; and Ohr's interactions with Department attorneys regarding the Manafort criminal case.
    The OIG also interviewed Christopher Steele and current and former employees of other U.S. government agencies.    Two witnesses, Glenn Simpson and Jonathan Winer (a former Department of State official), declined our requests for voluntary interviews, and we were unable to compel their testimony.
    The footnote stated that Steele was hired by an identified U.S. person (Glenn Simpson) to conduct research regarding "Candidate # l's" (Donald Trump) ties to Russia and that the FBI "speculates" that this U.S. person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit the Trump campaign.
    Steele's reporting was going to Clinton's presidential campaign and others, (2) Simpson was paying Steele to discuss his reporting with the media, and (3) Steele was "desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being the U.S. President."
    In Chapter Nine, we describe the interactions Department attorney Bruce Ohr had with Christopher Steele, the FBI, Glenn Simpson (the owner of Fusion GPS), and the State Department during the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.    At the time of these interactions, which took place from about July 2016 to May 2017, Ohr was an Associate Deputy Attorney General in the Office of the Deputy Attorney General (ODAG) and the Director of the Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF).
    Beginning in July 2016, at about the same time that Steele was engaging with the FBI on his election reporting, Steele contacted Ohr, who he had known since at least 2007, to discuss information from Steele's election reports.    At Steele's suggestion, Ohr also met in August 2016 with Simpson to discuss Steele's reports.    At the time, Ohr's wife, Nellie Ohr, worked at Fusion GPS as an independent contractor.    Ohr also met with Simpson in December 2016, at which time Simpson gave Ohr a thumb drive containing numerous Steele election reports that Ohr thereafter provided to the FBI.
    On October 18, 2016, after speaking with Steele that morning, Ohr met with McCabe to share Steele's and Simpson's information with him.    Thereafter, Ohr met with members of the Crossfire Hurricane team 13 times between November 21, 2016, and May 15, 2017, concerning his contacts with Steele and Simpson.    All 13 meetings occurred after the FBI had closed Steele as a CHS and, except for the November 21 meeting, each meeting was initiated at Ohr's request.    Ohr told us that he did not recall the FBI asking him to take any action regarding Steele or Simpson, but Ohr also stated that "the general instruction was to let [the FBI] know ... when I got information from Steele."    The Crossfire Hurricane team memorialized each of the meetings with Ohr as an "interview" using an FBI FD302 form.    Separately, in November 2016, Ohr met with senior State Department officials regarding Steele's election reporting.
    Department leadership, including Ohr's supervisors in ODAG and the ODAG officials who reviewed and approved the Carter Page FISA applications, were unaware of Ohr's meetings with FBI officials, Steele, Simpson, and the State Department until after Congress requested information from the Department regarding Ohr's activities in late November 2017.
    We concluded that Ohr committed consequential errors in judgment by (1) failing to advise his direct supervisors or the DAG that he was communicating with Steele and Simpson and then requesting meetings with the FBI's Deputy Director and Crossfire Hurricane team on matters that were outside of his areas of responsibility, and (2) making himself a witness in the investigation by meeting with Steele and providing Steele's information to the FBI.    As we describe in Chapter Eight, the late discovery of Ohr's meetings with the FBI prompted NSD to notify the FISC in July 2018, over a year after the final FISA renewal order was issued, of information that Ohr had provided to the FBI but that the FBI had failed to inform NSD and 01 about (and therefore was not included in the FISA applications), including that Steele was "desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being the U.S. President."

12/18/2019 Judicial Watch to attend hearing in federal court amid ongoing discovery into Hillary Clinton email scandal by OAN Newsroom
File – Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is pictured. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)
    Judicial Watch plans to attend a hearing in federal court, which will decide the direction of their Hillary Clinton discovery plan.    On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth will consider whether Judicial Watch will be allowed to question Hillary Clinton and her top aides under oath about Benghazi as well as her emails.
    The government watchdog group will also be asking the court’s permission to subpoena Google in order to gain access to the private account allegedly used by Clinton and her aides.    The president of Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton, claims they are pursuing newly discovered evidence in the case.
    Judicial Watch hopes the hearing will allow the conservative activist group to uncover substantial information concerning Clinton’s deleted emails and mishandled procedures.

12/18/2019 Horowitz: DOJ to look into possible systemic failure of FISA applications process by OAN Newsroom
Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz testifies at a Senate committee on FISA investigation
hearing, Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
    Inspector General Michael Horowitz is saying his report has not answered all questions on the FBI’s wrongdoing at the beginning of the ‘Russia hoax.’    In his Senate testimony on Wednesday, Horowitz said his office is planning to audit select FISA applications related to counterintelligence and counterterrorism probes.
    The Justice IG said he’s looking into allegations the FBI may have experienced “systemic” procedural violations in its FISA requests.
    Horowitz has not ruled out possible political biases by the Obama administration FBI. Last week, he said the bureau made at least 17 errors and omissions in its requests to spy on the 2016 Trump campaign.     “Although we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence of intentional misconduct, we also did not receive satisfactory explanations for the errors or missing information,” he said.    “That is something we would have liked to have gotten good explanations about.”
    Horowitz added his office will look and see if other FISA applications had the same violations as those related to the 2016 Trump campaign which could help understand a possible bias behind the FBIs actions.
[SO THE PROCESS STARTS TO PROVE THAT THE RUSSIAN HOAX WAS PHONEY AND CREATED BY THE DEEP STATE AS THE DEMOCRATS ARE DESPERATE THINKNG IMPEACHING TRUMP WILL STOP THAT WHICH EXPLAINS THEIR STUPIDITY TO DO AN IMPEACHMENT.].

12/19/2019 Manafort case tossed in New York by Michael R. Sisak, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    NEW YORK – A New York judge threw out state mortgage fraud charges against Paul Manafort, ruling Wednesday that the criminal case was too similar to one that has already landed President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman in federal prison.
    The decision was a blow to what had widely been seen as an attempt by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., a Democrat, to hedge against the possibility that Trump will pardon Manafort for federal crimes.    Vance’s office said it would appeal.
    Manafort, 70, was convicted last year in two federal cases stemming from his business dealings and is serving a 7 1 /2-year prison sentence.
    Judge Maxwell Wiley cited in his decision New York’s strong double jeopardy protections, which prohibit state prosecutors in most cases from bringing charges against a person who has previously been charged for the same conduct under federal law.
    “Basically, the law of double jeopardy in New York state provides a very narrow window for prosecution,” Wiley said.
    Defense lawyer Todd Blanche raised the double jeopardy issue soon after Manafort was indicted in New York in March.    He wrote in court papers seeking a dismissal that the factual overlap between the federal and state cases “is extensive – if not total.”    Manafort missed the ruling because of a heart-related condition that caused him to be moved last week to a hospital from a federal prison in Pennsylvania, two people familiar with the matter said.
    Manafort looked frail in court in June for an arraignment on the state charges.    He remained seated as he entered a not guilty plea and had to be helped out of his chair.    In March, at his sentencing in the second of the two federal cases, he used a wheelchair because of gout.
    His federal convictions stemmed from allegations that he misled the U.S. government about lucrative foreign lobbying work, hid millions of dollars from tax authorities and encouraged witnesses to lie on his behalf.
    Vance announced the state charges minutes after the March sentencing.
    The 16-count state indictment alleged Manafort gave false and misleading information in applying for residential mortgage loans, starting in 2015 and continuing until three days before Trump’s inauguration in 2017. He was also charged with falsifying business records and conspiracy.
    Manhattan prosecutors argued that the state case was viable because it covered ground that couldn’t be resolved in Manafort’s 2018 federal trial in Virginia because of a hung jury. Jurors found Manafort guilty of eight counts of tax and bank fraud but couldn’t reach a verdict on 10 others, and federal prosecutors moved to dismiss those counts.
    Manhattan prosecutors said their case differed from the federal prosecutions because mortgage fraud and falsifying business records are state crimes, but not federal crimes.
    But Wiley ruled that a result of a hung jury still counts as a prior prosecution and that differences between the state and federal charges weren’t enough to warrant an exception to the state’s double jeopardy law.
Paul Manafort missed Wednesday’s ruling because of a heart-related condition, according to sources. SETH WENIG/AP

12/19/2019 UK-U.S. treaty bans extradition of Assange, lawyer says by Michael Holden
FILE PHOTO: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange arrives at the Westminster Magistrates Court,
after he was arrested in London, Britain April 11, 2019. REUTERS/Hannah McKay/File Photo
    LONDON (Reuters) – Lawyers for Julian Assange said on Thursday they will argue that the WikiLeaks founder cannot be sent from Britain to the United States to face spying charges because a treaty between the two countries bans extradition for political offences.
    Assange, 48, faces 18 counts in the U.S. including conspiring to hack government computers and violating an espionage law. He could spend decades in prison if convicted.
    At London’s Westminster Magistrates’ Court, his lawyer Edward Fitzgerald outlined some of the evidence Assange’s team will put forward at the full extradition hearing due to start on Feb. 24, saying they could call up to 21 witnesses to testify.
    “We say that there is in the treaty a ban on being extradited for a political offense and these offences as framed and in substance are political offences,” he told the court.
    Other arguments would feature medical evidence, public denunciations by leading U.S. political figures, and details from the case of Chelsea Manning, an ex-intelligence analyst who was convicted by a U.S. Army court-martial in 2013 of espionage and other offences for leaking secret cables to WikiLeaks.
    There would also be information from an investigation led by a Spanish judge into “revelations about bugging of conversations with his lawyers” during Assange’s long stay in the Ecuadorean embassy in London.
    Assange, who appeared by videolink from prison on Thursday, is due to be interviewed by a Spanish judge when he appears in person at the same London court for a private hearing tomorrow over the allegations.
    He spent almost seven years holed up in cramped rooms at the embassy where he fled in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden where he was then wanted for questioning over allegations of rape which were later dropped.
    He was dragged from the embassy in April and jailed for 50 weeks for skipping bail before the U.S. launched its extradition request.
    Due to the mass of evidence, the full hearing to decide the extradition issue is now set to last for up to four weeks, rather than one as originally planned, Judge Vanessa Baraister said, with Fitzgerald adding it involved “difficult, important and profound” matters.
    Baraister also seemed unimpressed when Clair Dobbin, representing the U.S. authorities, asked for the case to be delayed until April, saying the lawyer earmarked for the case would not be available for the extended hearing.
    “My impression was the (U.S.) government was anxious for this case to remain on track and not to be derailed,” said Baraister, who said the next hearing would take place on Jan. 23 and the timetable would go ahead as planned.
(Editing by Stephen Addison)

12/20/2019 Wikileaks’ Assange appears in court in Spain spying investigation by Clara-Laeila Laudette
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange arrives at Westminster Magistrates Court in London, Britain, December 20, 2019. REUTERS/Henry Nicholls
    MADRID (Reuters) – Jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange appeared in a Madrid court via videolink from Britain on Friday as part of an investigation into his allegations that a Spanish firm spied on him while he lived inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
    The case, led by Spanish judge Jose de la Mata, focuses on allegations that first cameras and then microphones were installed in the embassy between June 2017 and early 2018 by Spanish private security firm Undercover Global S.L.
    An Ecuador foreign ministry spokeswoman declined to comment on the case.
    The recordings, said to have captured conversations between Assange and his lawyers, may have been distributed to parties including “authorities from Ecuador and agents from the United States,” according to court documents, which say this was done “probably on orders from U.S. intelligence.”
    A CIA spokeswoman declined to comment.
    “Finally Mr. Assange will be able to testify as a victim of this alleged spying plot which would have been orchestrated from the United States,” said Aitor Martinez, a lawyer for Assange, who testified as a witness in the case.
    During his testimony, Assange said he was unaware that cameras installed by Undercover Global were also capturing audio and suggested the surveillance likely targeted members of his legal team, according to a spokesperson for his lawyer.
    Owner and director of UC Global S.L. David Morales declined to say whether his company spied on Assange.    “All the information is confidential and it belongs to the government of Ecuador,” Morales told El Pais in July.    “We simply did a job.”
    Judge De la Mata initially detained Morales in September, and then released him on bail.
    Speaking outside the court in Westminster, former Ecuadorean consul in London Fidel Navraez accused Undercover Global of betraying Ecuador and Assange.
    “That company was contracted by Ecuador in order to protect the embassy, protect Julian Assange, protect the embassy staff … but it is a corrupt company – we know that now,” he said.
    Assange’s legal team wants to have the firm and its founder charged with crimes including violation of privacy and attorney-client privilege, money laundering, and bribery.
    Assange spent nearly seven years holed up in the embassy in order to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of rape that were dropped in November.
    He was forcibly removed from the embassy in April and jailed for 50 weeks for skipping bail in Britain before the U.S. began its extradition request.    A full extradition hearing for Assange, 48, is scheduled in February.
    Assange faces 18 counts in the United States including conspiring to hack government computers and violating an espionage law.    If convicted, he could spend decades in prison.
(Reporting by Clara-Laeila Laudette, Belen Carreno, Ashifa Kassam; Additional reporting by Alexandra Valencia in Quito; editing by Andrei Khalip and Grant McCool)

12/21/2019 FISA Court investigating former FBI lawyer responsible for warrant omissions by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Nov. 2, 2017, photo, Carter Page, former foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump’s
2016 presidential campaign, speaks with reporters following a day of questions from the House Intelligence Committee,
on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
    The FISA Court that approved the Carter Page wiretap is now investigating the former FBI lawyer who approved the Page surveillance warrants.    On Friday, declassified court documents revealed a judge ordered all matters involving Kevin Clinesmith to be identified and reassessed.
    Clinesmith is at the center of the FISA-Carter Page controversy, which stemmed from the court secretly taking surveillance of Page during his time as a Trump campaign associate.
    Inspector General Michael Horowitz found the FBI was able to “mislead” the courts to maintain its surveillance on the former Trump campaign official.    Horowitz told senators the FBI maintained surveillance on Page even when its investigation into him was winding down.
    While discussing his report Wednesday, he outlined 17 instances where the bureau intentionally “omitted or withheld” information in their application for FISA warrants.
    One of the instances he touched on was the FBI learning information that undercut the credibility of the Steele dossier, which it failed to disclose to the FISA courts.    Horowitz also said the FBI failed to include other exculpatory evidence regarding Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.
Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz looks over his papers before testifying at a Senate committee
on FISA investigation hearing, Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
[THE BIG QUESTION IS WILL CLINESMITH RAT ON HIS SUPERIORS WHO ORDERED HIM TO PUT FALSE INFORMATION IN THE FISA COURT APPLICATION TO CONTINUE THE ILLEGAL INVESTIGATION OF TRUMPS PEOPLE AS THE BIAS FROM THE FORMER OBAMA AMINISTRATION WAS DEFINITELY INVOLVED.].

12/24/2019 President Trump says he hasn’t thought about pardoning Roger Stone by OAN Newsroom
Roger Stone leaves the federal court Washington, Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2019. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
    During a press briefing on Tuesday, the president said he has not thought about granting a pardon to Republican political strategist Roger Stone.    Stone was indicted by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller earlier this year and convicted in November on seven counts, including witness tampering and making false statements.
    President Trump said the GOP operative is a nice guy, but only played a minor role in his decision to run for president and was not a part of his campaign.
    “I’ve known Roger over the years, he’s a nice guy.    A lot of people like him.    He got hit very hard, as did General Flynn and a lot of other people.    Now they’re finding out it was all a big hoax, a horrible thing.    We were spied on.    My campaign was spied on and, again, Roger Stone was not a part of the campaign.    He is somebody I’ve known over the years, but not a part of the campaign.” – Donald Trump, 45th President of the United States
    The president went on to say that Stone and General Michael Flynn were victims of what he called “dirty cops” in the FBI, allegedly paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton.

12/26/2019 Prosecutors claim Avenatti was over $15 million in debt during alleged Nike extortion by Kanishka Singh
FILE PHOTO: Attorney Michael Avenatti arrives at the United States Courthouse in the
Manhattan borough of New York City, U.S., October 8, 2019. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid
    (Reuters) – California attorney Michael Avenatti, known for representing porn actress Stormy Daniels in a lawsuit against U.S. President Donald Trump, was more than $15 million in debt when he allegedly tried to extort as much as $25 million from Nike Inc , U.S. prosecutors claimed.
    “Specifically, the Government presently estimates that the defendant’s debts at that time were, conservatively, in excess of $15 million,” prosecutors said in a filing late on Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
    In a statement to Reuters late on Wednesday, Avenatti denied those claims and dismissed them as “bogus.”
    “Any claim that I was $15 million in debt is completely bogus, ludicrous and absurd.    I can’t wait for the trial in this case, at which point the TRUTH and FACTS will come out and I will be fully exonerated,” Avenatti said in an emailed statement.
    Last week, Avenatti, 48, pleaded not guilty to an indictment accusing him of trying to extort up to $25 million from Nike by threatening to go public with claims the company made improper payments to athletes.
    The celebrity lawyer is accused by prosecutors of demanding money from the athletic wear company in exchange for agreeing to scrap a threatened news conference to discuss Nike’s alleged improper payments to elite college basketball recruits.
    A trial is scheduled for late in January.    Nike, which has denied wrongdoing, did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on Wednesday.
    Since his March 25 arrest in the Nike case, Avenatti has defended himself against a variety of criminal charges.
    He has pleaded not guilty in Manhattan to stealing about $300,000 from Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, after helping her secure a book contract.
    He has also pleaded not guilty in California to wire fraud, bank fraud and other crimes, including stealing from clients.
(Reporting by Kanishka Singh and Rama Venkat in Bengaluru; editing by Richard Pullin)
[Another example of what happens when you go against the righteousness as well as him and all the Democrats who promoted him and all their attempts to demean Kavanaugh and Trump in the future after that as they have ended up looking like idiots and Trump has excelled in many things against all odds against the DEEP STATE, Globalist attacks, and the mainstream press and all the politicians in the Democrats need to wake up before it is too late for them to be forgiven by the One GOD in heaven.].

   
Alexandra Chalupa
    The following is what is reported on google for Alexandra Chalupa and may or may not be accurate.
    Alexandra Chalupa, American consultant, is an American who was co-chair of the Democratic National Committee’s Ethnic Council.    She is also the founder of the political consulting firm Chalupa & Associates, LLC. Chalupa is a pro-Ukrainian activist.
    Chalupa is a pro-Ukrainian activist.    Prominent supporters of President Donald Trump have promoted the theory that Chalupa's past activities were part of a conspiracy between the DNC and the Ukrainian government to undermine Trump's campaign and, later, to frame the Russian government for the hacking of the DNC during the 2016 US presidential campaign.
Paul Manafort and Donald Trump
2016 Presidential Election
    In 2014, Chalupa began to research the Ukraine crisis for a pro bono client unrelated to the DNC.    The research included Paul Manafort, his work for Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, and his connections to pro-Russian oligarchs.    After Donald Trump launched his presidential campaign in 2015, she expanded her research to include Trump and his ties to Russia.
    She began warning Ukrainian-American community leaders in January 2016 that Manafort was Russian president Vladimir Putin’s "political brain for manipulating U.S. foreign policy and elections.    She also shared her concerns with a senior DNC official, saying that a connection between the Trump campaign and Russia would likely mean Manafort would become involved in the election.    Near the end of March, she visited the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, D.C., to organize an event in June highlighting female Ukrainian leaders.    While there, she shared her concerns with Ambassador Valeriy Chaly and his aide Oksana Shulyar.
    Manafort joined the Trump campaign a few days later as its convention manager.    The day after the campaign announced Manafort's joining, Chalupa briefed the DNC's communications staff on Manafort's and Trump's ties to Russia.    A week later, Chalupa met with a foreign policy legislative assistant to Representative Marcy Kaptur in a failed attempt to start a congressional investigation into Manafort's activities.
    After the election, Chalupa assisted the Clinton campaign with their efforts to force vote recounts in some states.
Ukrainian embassy
    The Ukrainian embassy assisted Chalupa with her research, though the extent and nature of the assistance are in dispute.    According to Politico, the DNC encouraged Chalupa to ask the Ukrainian embassy to arrange a call with Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko to discuss Manafort, Trump, and their connections to Russia, but the embassy declined.
    Andrii Telizhenko, a Ukrainian political officer who worked under Shulyar at the time, told Politico that she asked him to pass on to Chalupa any information he came across about connections between Trump, Manafort, and Russia.    He claimed the embassy was coordinating with Chalupa and the Clinton campaign on investigating Manafort.    In 2018, Telizhenko told the Ukrainian news site Strana.UA that Poroshenko worked with Chalupa to discredit Trump.    He began repeating the story in 2019 to U.S. right-wing media, Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and House Intelligence Committee minority chair Devin Nunes.    Both the embassy and Chalupa disputed the allegations.    Ambassador Chaly denied any wrongdoing and called Telizhenko a liar.
    Chalupa denied that the DNC asked her to collect information from the embassy.
Intimidation campaign
    In late April 2016, Chalupa began receiving daily administrative alerts from Yahoo! warning her that state actors were attempting to break into her email account.    After two weeks of daily alerts, she informed the DNC about the hacking attempts.    That email became public when WikiLeaks published stolen DNC emails in July.    The alerts continued into 2017.
    In June 2016, someone broke into and searched her car, but left everything behind.    She became convinced it was Russia-linked when two more family cars were broken into and ransacked but nothing was stolen.    A few days later, a woman "wearing white flowers in her hair" tried to break into Chalupa's home.    She mentioned the incident to Shulyar, who told her it resembled intimidation campaigns used against foreigners in Russia.
    Chalupa began receiving death threats in the second half of 2016.
FEC complaints
    The conservative watchdog group Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust filed a complaint against Chalupa and the DNC with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in August 2017.    The complaint alleges that the research assistance the Ukrainian embassy provided to her during the 2016 election campaign was an illegal campaign contribution to the DNC because of her work for them at the time.
    The pro-Trump super PAC Committee to Defend the President filed a similar FEC complaint against the DNC in September 2019, alleging that the DNC ordered Chalupa to investigate Manafort and Trump.    Like the 2017 complaint, it is largely a mischaracterization of the 2017 Politico article detailing her research efforts.
Calls for DOJ investigation
    U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley urged the Department of Justice (DOJ) on two occasions to investigate alleged coordination between Chalupa and the Ukrainian government to interfere in the 2016 election.    In July 2017, he sent a letter in his capacity as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.    Grassley and Senator Ron Johnson sent a second letter in September 2019 in their capacities as the chairs of the Senate Finance and Homeland Security Committees.    Both letters cite the 2017 Politico article as evidence.
Impeachment Inquiry
    During the US Congress' 2019 Impeachment Inquiry hearings, House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes several times cited Alexandra Chalupa as a fact witness that committee chairman Adam Schiff refused to bring before the committee.    Chalupa responded that she would welcome the opportunity to testify and push back against the Republican narrative about her involvement with Ukrainian officials.
    There is no evidence that Ukrainian embassy officials helped Chalupa in any significant way or that the DNC used any information obtained by Chalupa to aid Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign against Trump.

    I have added the above information as I plan to add a special article regarding Rudy Giuliani's special edition on One America Newsroom's presentation by Chanel Rion called "Revealed: Ukranian Witnesses Destroy Schiff's Case" aired on 12/14/2019 Part I, Part II, Part III for 3 hours, exposing the biggest coverup in political history; sworn testimony from Rudy Giuliani and Ukranian witnesses that are being prevented from giving information on corruption which includes Joe Biden and Hunter Biden.
    I am planning to do a full review of that subject in my future file FISA-UnderSurveillance2020
.

12/27/2019 Durham investigation puts CIA Director Gina Haspel on notice by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this Sept. 24, 2018, file photo, CIA Director Gina Haspel addresses
the audience in Louisville, Ky. (AP Photo/Timothy D. Easley, File)
    CIA Director Gina Haspel is the latest Intelligence official to reportedly be dragged into John Durham’s investigation of the Russia probe.    On Friday, Politico reported Haspel may have information on former CIA Director John Brennan, who served under the Obama administration.
    That information could help Durham learn whether the CIA used unauthorized surveillance on 2016 Trump campaign officials.
    Haspel has a controversial history of protecting the agency from political scrutiny and has rarely made public statements about ongoing intelligence matters.
    “Over the past year, our leadership team has taken steps to improve CIA’s ability to tackle the many challenges we face, and our efforts are beginning to pay off,” she stated.    “We’ve devoted more time, money and creativity to our effort against some of our nation’s toughest adversaries.”
    Haspel was the head of the CIA’s London bureau in 2016, when suspected informant Joseph Mifsud allegedly told Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos about Russia obtaining Hillary Clinton’s emails.    She was reportedly briefed on the matter, but referred it to the FBI.
[THE FOLLOWING IS WHAT SHE SAID ON 10/13/2018 SO DID SHE BRING ANY OF THIS TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL HOROWITZ.].
CIA Director Gina Haspel addresses the audience as part of the McConnell Center Distinguished Speaker Series
at the University of Louisville, Monday, Sept. 24, 2018, in Louisville, Ky. (AP Photo/Timothy D. Easley)
    “Our work requires secrecy, and secrecy in turn requires a profound degree of trust from the American people,” stated the CIA director.    “That’s why our agency abides by and embraces an oversight structure that includes the congressional intelligence committees, the FISA court, and our own independent inspector general.”
    Haspel also highlighted her commitment to keeping the CIA accountable to the American people by ensuring transparency and full compliance with congressional oversight.

12/28/2019 Joe Biden says he will not comply with Senate subpoena to testify by OAN Newsroom
FILE – In this May 18, 2019 file photo, Democratic presidential candidate, former Vice President Joe Biden,
speaks during a campaign rally at Eakins Oval in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)
    Joe Biden is saying he will not take the stand in the upcoming impeachment trial. During an interview on Friday, Biden said he would not comply with a subpoena to testify.
    The Biden family and their business dealings with Ukraine are at the center of the impeachment inquiry.    However, the former vice president claimed if he testifies, the focus will be taken off President Trump, who will then get away with alleged wrongdoing.
    “This is all about a diversion.    We play his game all the time, he’s done it his whole career.    This is a technique he uses all the time, he’s a chronic liar.” – Joe Biden, Former Vice President of the United States
    He later took to Twitter to clarify his remarks, stating that there is no “legal basis for Republican subpoenas for my testimony in the impeachment trial.”
    It’s unclear exactly when the trial will start, but it was projected to begin in January 2020.    The House has yet to transfer the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
[Everyone now knows what Quid Pro Joe has done it is on video of him committing extortion by threatening if Ukraine did not fire prosecution Shokin who is investigating Burisma and his son Hunter Biden or he would not give them the taxpayers billion dollars, and he is still denying it and it has not been shown on mainstream television stations, but I bet it will be on during the elections if he runs against Trump and we will see who is the chronic liar and thinks he will get away with actual wrongdoing.].

12/28/2019 President Trump highlights OAN report on Paul Pelosi, Jr. potential corruption in Ukraine by OAN Newsroom
President Donald Trump takes the stage at the Turning Point USA Student Action Summit at the Palm Beach County
Convention Center in West Palm Beach, Fla., Saturday, Dec. 21, 2019. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
    President Trump is highlighting OAN’s report on how House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s son may be involved in a Ukrainian corruption scandal.    The president took to Twitter on Friday to share the report, which detailed how Pelosi and her son Paul might face corruption allegations involving Ukraine.
    He called Pelosi “Crazy Nancy” and said the report is “big stuff.”
    Among other things, the report revealed videos of Paul Pelosi Jr.’s 2017 trip to the country, which are currently being removed online.
    These accusations are similar to those against former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, who allegedly earned $156 million from corruption schemes in Ukraine.
    President Trump shared an additional OAN report on Friday, in which Ukrainian officials testified on Democrat interference in the 2016 elections.    He thanked One America News for “incredible reporting” and slammed mainstream media for not doing “the same.”
    Watch more of Chanel Rion’s special report here: OAN’s Chanel Rion Gives Debriefing On Ukraine Trip

12/30/2019 Rep. Joe Kennedy talks about concerns over family members profiting off of elected officials by OAN Newsroom
    A Democrat lawmaker is warning his colleagues against using relatives to make profit gains.    On Sunday, Massachusetts Rep. Joe Kennedy said he understands the concerns about Hunter Biden’s high position at a Ukraine energy company, while his father was vice president.
    Kennedy, the grandson of Robert F. Kennedy, went on to say all politicians should be looked at equally as President Trump’s children run businesses at the same time their father holds the presidency.
    The Democrat lawmaker also said he knows first-hand the responsibility that comes with holding a public office.    He added that Biden testifying would be the right thing to do if he was subpoenaed.
Rep. Joe Kennedy, D-Mass., speaks as the House of Representatives debates the articles of impeachment
against President Donald Trump at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2019. (House Television via AP)
    “It is certainly worth putting that out there, and worth trying to make sure that there is not any sort of profit that is going to be earned by close relatives being in office,” he stated, “And insuring that there is a very clear delineation, so others aren’t profiting off it.”
    Kennedy’s remarks come amid the 39-year-old’s bid for a seat in the Senate against a fellow Democrat in the 2020 general elections.
[At least Kennedy acknowledge that Quid Pro Joe is involved in something illegal and Biden cannot admit he did anything wrong because he is in denial that he got caught doing something illegal even if it is on video].

12/30/2019 Report: IRS placed tax lien on Hunter Biden over thousands in unpaid taxes from 2015 by OAN Newsroom
Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden, left, listens to former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack
speak during a community event, Saturday, Dec. 21, 2019, in Ottumwa, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)
    A report recently revealed that the IRS issued a tax lien against Hunter Biden over thousands of dollars in unpaid taxes.    According to a report from the Daily Caller Sunday, the agency placed the lien in November 2018 seeking over$112,000 in unpaid taxes from 2015.
    Biden notably worked with Ukrainian energy firm Burisma at the time, where he was reportedly paid upwards of $50,000 of a month.    It is unclear if he has paid the tax debt.    In a court filing earlier this year, however, Biden said that he had not had a monthly income since May.
    This comes as presidential candidate Joe Biden was pressed over money he and his son allegedly made in Ukraine during a recent campaign event.
FILE – Hunter Biden waits for the start of the his father’s, Vice President Joe Biden’s,
debate at Centre College in Danville, Ky. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)
    “Excuse me, Mr. Biden — how much money did you make in Ukraine with your son?” asked a heckler at his rally in Milford, New Hampshire on Sunday.
    In a court filing in his paternity case earlier this month, Hunter Biden was accused of failing to provide basic information about his finances.
[QUID PRO JOE AND HIS INEXPERIENCED SON ARE BUSTED NOW FOR DOING WHAT THE DEMS ARE TRYING TO IMPEACH TRUMP ON.].

12/31/2019 Measle cases reach 1300 in the United States in 2019
31 States in the United States have had the Measles outbreak with 1300 cases
and still the CDC will not admit it was caused by illegal aliens entering our country
illegally spreading measles and whatever other diseases they brought with them

This page created on 10/1/2019, and updated by 10/31/2019, 11/30/2019, 12/31/2019.
Or return to the Table of Contents - Chapter Eight or
Or return to the Astronomical Events To Appear Between 2014 Through 2017 A.D. or
Or return to the Beast That Came Out Of The Sea or
2011-2022 ????? Unknown future of the Sixth group of Twelve years
Or return to FISA- Under Surveillance in 2018
Or return to FISA- Under Surveillance in 2019 January-March
Or return to FISA- Under Surveillance in 2019 April-June. Or return to FISA- Under Surveillance in 2019 July-September.