Russia Gate! Spy Gate! Oh me! Oh my!

a reply to: BlueAjah

Great OP. You are getting to the heart of the situation.

Thank you -- but we'll have to see about that!

What is going on is there is a powerful force in our government that wants control, and they feel it slipping away. They are not going to let that happen, and would prefer the country fall into disarray.

Yeah, no one's going down without a fight... and without taking lots of other critters with them. I'm sure many would gladly take down the entire nation too. The desperation is thick, with every major player also part of the "investigation" one way or another, on one side or the other. But it's gotta happen.

I really fear for some of these perps. And especially their families. Desperate people do desperate things. It ain't going to be pretty.

a reply to: BlueAjah

This is the real reason why the Democrats are trying to push Nunes out of the investigation. He is on track to expose what is really going on.

Yup. They know he knows and that he will tell... and the prez will back him up all the way. I think they really fooled themselves into thinking they were invisible and invincible. No one ever warned them the bigger they are the harder they fall.

Since today is April Fools Day, and since the original source is 4chan, and since I'm not familiar with this site, I am pretty much assuming that the following is just a joke or hoax... but just in case there's something to this, I'm leaving it here for now.

John Podesta Requests Immunity For Testimony Against Hillary Clinton

There is a screen image of a document at the link, labeled "The document as it was uploaded to 4chan." It is not a true letter as it is not addressed to anyone. It simply states "Statement of Robin Kellert, Counsel to Mr. John Podesta," and basically states that Podesta is "seeking immunity" for testimony against Clinton.

I cannot find a Robin Kellert associated with Perkins Coie.

It ends with the following:

Mr. Podesta's track record of patriotic service to the United States under President Clinton and President Obama speaks for itself. His track record of openness and transparency with the American people includes Executive Order 12958, a tradition he is eager to uphold.

There is an Executive Order 12958, from Clinton in 1995:

Executive Order 12958 created new standards for the process of identifying and protecting classified information, and led to an unprecedented effort to declassify millions of pages from the U.S. diplomatic and national security history. In 1995, United States President Bill Clinton signed this Executive Order.[1]

EO 12958 was amended and effectively replaced by President George W. Bush on March 25, 2003, in Executive Order 13292 (text). EO 13292 has itself since been revoked and replaced. The current EO in effect for classified information is Executive Order 13526 (text).

ETA: VOAT covers it here.

a reply to: Boadicea

OH, my oh, my I forgot today is my wedding anniversary, hell, yes it is April fool I got married.

Oh, lord where did you got that information?

It is real? this getting muddy and muddy by the minute, but hell if this is true, you think the democrats wants that information to be out there.

No wonder they are on a Witch hunt after Trump because the real juicy issues are the ones behind the scenes.

Why we don't have more information in the news about this.

a reply to: marg6043

Happy Anniversary!!! You must be an old married woman like me... it wasn't until I read your comment that I remembered my anniversary is next week too!

As for the story, I'm keeping it in the hoax category for now. I suppose stranger things have happened. And Podesta strikes me as the type that would sell out Hillary to protect himself. But we'll have to wait and see if anything comes of it. There is absolutely nothing official about it yet. We have no idea where it was supposedly hacked from. Although the doc states they are seeking immunity from the DOJ and FBI specifically, there is nothing to indicate that the DOJ and/or FBI have actually been contacted. I can't even verify that the attorney listed is a real person.

And we have to remember, this is exactly the type of wild goose chase some of the critters would like to send us on and take our focus off the legitimate issues. They would enjoy watching us chase our own tails!

a reply to: Boadicea

Congratulations too, I been marry for 36 years, oh my, is not many like us anymore.



I did a search and it didn't flag as a hoax yet, let keep the fingers cross.

Not one mention of CIA/NSA Whistleblower Dennis Montgomery... Hmmm....

Devin Nunes, Trump and the Russia probe: A timeline

The Hill's timelines leaves a couple things out that I consider important, and I will insert these events into the timeline in red.

Saturday, March 4 -- Trump tweets about "wiretapping"
Wednesday, March 15 -- Trump tells Tucker Carlson that he will be submitting "certain things" to the House Intelligence Committee.
Monday, March 20 -- Comey tells House Intelligence Committee the bureau is investigating Trump/Russia collusion
March 21, 2017 -- Letter from Larry Klayman at Freedom Watch USA to Devin Nunes re NSA/CIA Whistleblower Dennis Montgomery's evidence of "apparent illegal and unconstitutional surveillance of prominent Americans, such as the chief justice of the Supreme Court, other justices, 156 judges, prominent businessmen, and others such as President Donald Trump." Vows to make whistleblower info public if not appropriately addressed by committee by Friday, 3/24.
Tuesday, March 21 -- Nunes views intel docs on White House grounds (Eisenhower building)
Wednesday, March 22 -- Nunes briefs Ryan on intel docs
Wednesday mid-day, March 22 -- Nunes holds press conference (“on numerous occasions, the intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition… with little apparent foreign intelligence value" and were “widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting" and "Trump transition team members were unmasked”)
Wednesday afternoon, March 22 -- Nunes briefs President Trump; In 2nd press conf, says info may have been derived from Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants; asserts “duty” to tell the prez
Thursday, March 23 -- Spicer denies info came from White House; Nunes apologizes for not sharing info with other committee members
Friday, March 24 -- Closed hearing for Comey and Rogers testimony cancelled (no reason given)
Friday, March 24 -- Nunes cancels an open hearing with Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan scheduled for March 28, citing need to interview Comey and NSA Director Mike Rogers in a closed setting.
Monday, March 27 -- Nunes tells Bloomberg source was an intelligence official, not a White House staffer.
Tuesday, March 28 -- Republicans accuse Democrats of blocking Comey and Rogers closed session testimony
Tuesday, March 28 -- Nunes says he will “never” reveal his source.
Wednesday, March 29 -- Evelyn Farkas interview claiming widespread sharing/leaking of intel on Trump/Russia by intelligence agencies
Wednesday, March 29 -- Ryan says Nunes described his source as “a whistleblower-type person.”
Thursday, March 30 -- NYT reports that Nunes’s sources were two White House officials: Ezra Cohen-Watnick, senior director for intelligence at the National Security Council, and Michael Ellis, a lawyer who works on national security at the White House Counsel’s Office and was previously counsel on the House Intelligence Committee; Schiff speculates that the White House was attempting to “launder” intelligence through the House committee. (I seriously don't even know what that means... "launder" intelligence??? I'm open to explanations if anyone has one!)
Friday, March 31 -- Schiff views materials that Nunes saw.
---------------------------

ETA: Someone correct me if I'm missing something there... but so far, from everything we have heard about who Nunes' source is, it seems that Dennis Montgomery could be that source. At least I'm not seeing anything to rule him out....

An interesting allegation regarding that closed session that was cancelled (for as yet unknown reasons):

GOP accuses Democrats of blocking closed FBI, NSA testimony on Russia

Republicans charged Tuesday that Democrats are blocking the House Intelligence Committee's investigation into Russia from moving forward by refusing to sign a letter that would officially invite FBI Director James Comey and NSA Director Adm. Mike Rogers back before the committee for closed-door testimony.

I have added the above into the timeline (in red)

originally posted by: Kettu
You want dots? You want connections? You want to see what a real conspiracy looks like?

Take a look at this seriously impressive Google doc

Uhhh...

This document’s purpose is to compile all the info I have gathered from every available source (Reddit, twitter, media, etc) on the Trump-Russia connection.

The sources for your "impressive google doc" are Reddit and Twitter!

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Boadicea

Congratulations too, I been marry for 36 years, oh my, is not many like us anymore.

Me too!!! That must have been a good week for getting married, eh?

Spicer: Trump wants Flynn to testify

Five questions investigators want to ask Michael Flynn

1. Who knew what about Flynn’s Russia contacts, and when did they know it?
2. What did Trump campaign know about Flynn’s payments from sources in Russia/Turkey?
3. What about other associates of Trump’s campaign who had contact with Russians?
4. What did the Trump campaign know about campaign aides’ past ties to Russia?
5. Did Flynn have any other foreign contacts besides Russia?

originally posted by: Boadicea

Schiff speculates that the White House was attempting to “launder” intelligence through the House committee. (I seriously don't even know what that means... "launder" intelligence??? I'm open to explanations if anyone has one!)
Friday, March 31 -- Schiff views materials that Nunes saw.

I caught that too. My take is that It's "newspeak" diversion that "suggests" wrongdoing without really making any sense. He would have a very hard time deciphering it if he was questioned about it I believe. Shifty Schiff is one very despicable weasel imo.

As per Dennis Montgomery; You might be on to something there. I hope the current DOJ is looking into that aspect.

I'm gonna have to strip Pauly Shore of his alter-ego and give it to Schiff: The Weasel

OH, Boadicea we got something in common, Spring weddings.

That is a nice time line thanks for taking the time to compiled it.

I got the feeling that all the Russia /Trump link affair is a deflection for all the illegal dealings that were going on under the Obama administration and the Hillary campaign, because they never thought that somebody else was going to win the elections.

Flynn also worries me, he may have been the sole person within the Trump camp that was already trying to make deals in order to gain favors. He did have a record after he resign from the Obama administration that shows the firm he worked for took lots of money while lobbying for Turkey and the deal was considered unconventional and unconstitutional.

Powerful people in Washington have others do their dirty work, that is why they can walk away from the mess, but littler guys get to be the fall guys while trying to do the same.

Trump is a businessman and he have his fair share of dealings, but a traitor he is not and he knows that Washington is full of dirt and corruption and that political type of corruption is no the same as the business kind.

a reply to: JAY1980

All that information is very overwhelming.

a reply to: The GUT

As per Dennis Montgomery; You might be on to something there. I hope the current DOJ is looking into that aspect.

I really hope so too... and I hope they're digging deep 'cause that's how far that rabbit hole goes!!!

Are you familiar at all with the federal cases brought against Sheriff Joe Arpaio -- and that Montgomery worked on his behalf and showed that the judges involved were all surveilled by the NSA/DOJ? Lots of funny stuff there. Here's a couple recent articles that explain there's a tie-in, and that Arpaio and Zullo (a member of Arpaio's Cold Case Posse) have contacted Trump and Congress critters and offered to testify. The articles explain it better.

Bombshell: Obama’s NSA Illegally Spied on Sheriff Arpaio’s Prosecution

Clear parallels to Obama's wiretapping of Trump

The timeline released in federal court details NSA electronic surveillance and DOJ judge-tampering in the civil rights case brought against Arpaio in 2008, involving the 2007 arrest of Manuel de Jesús Ortega Melendres, with the DOJ charging Arpaio with discriminating against Hispanics by implementing car-stop procedures DOJ considered to involve racial-profiling.

Infowars.com is currently taking steps to bring this information before the White House, Congress and the DOJ, alleging the Obama administration in prosecuting Sheriff Arpaio has engaged in extensive illegal and unconstitutional electronic surveillance undertaken by the DOJ and NSA working secretly together.

Dr. Jerome Corsi, Mike Zullo Speak Out on Dragnet Database

At 4:42 in the second hour of Sunday’s Infowars radio show, Dr. Jerome Corsi described the “law enforcement” database which reportedly shows that Donald Trump and many of his business managers had their phone calls harvested by U.S. intelligence through what is being called “Operation Dragnet” or “Project Dragnet.”

Corsi said that former Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joseph Arpaio and his former Cold Case Posse investigator, Mike Zullo, have been verifying the phone numbers from the database and finding them to be accurate.

Corsi said that he shared the database documentation with the White House last Tuesday and a limited number of congressmen. He added that Zullo and Arpaio are willing to travel to Washington to brief authorities on the records they have had in their possession since 2013 and request that the NSA release its database.

He told Jones that all of Trump’s business locations were surveilled, offices of Trump International, “his secretary,” and his ex-wife Ivana “starting in 2004.”

If I remember correctly, Trump has been a fan of Arpaio in the past, and would probably welcome Arpaio's offer if he hears about it. I guess we'll see, eh?

originally posted by: marg6043
I got the feeling that all the Russia /Trump link affair is a deflection for all the illegal dealings that were going on under the Obama administration and the Hillary campaign, because they never thought that somebody else was going to win the elections.

Yeah, they probably really had to scramble when Trump did when the election... but I guess that's standard operating procedure for these critters. The best defense is a good offense, right?

Flynn also worries me...

Me too. I'm not sorry he's out of there.

Trump is a businessman and he have his fair share of dealings, but a traitor he is not and he knows that Washington is full of dirt and corruption and that political type of corruption is no the same as the business kind.

Trump is a whole different breed. He's old school with old time values and ethics -- both for better and worse! I really hope he can and will clean out the corruption in DC. It won't be easy.

This is interesting. It doesn't really bring anything new to the table, but I think it's important to know because Gowdy has put journalists reporting classified leaks on notice:

Gowdy Reminds Comey – Obama Officials Face up to 10 Years in Prison (VIDEO)

Gowdy: Well, there have been a lot of statutes at bar in this investigation for which no one’s ever been prosecuted or convicted, and that does not keep people from discussing those statutes, namely, the Logan Act. In theory, how would reporters know a U.S. citizen made a telephone call to an agent of a foreign power?
Comey: How would they know legally?
Gowdy: Yes.
Comey: If it was declassified and then discussed in a judicial proceeding or a congressional hearing, something like that.
Gowdy: And assume none of those facts are at play, how would they know?
Comey: Someone told them who shouldn’t have told them.
Gowdy: How would a reporter know about the existence of intercepted phone calls?
Comey: Same thing. In a legitimate way, through an appropriate proceeding where there’s been declassification, and any other way in an illegitimate way.
Gowdy: How would reporters know if a transcript existed of an intercepted communication?
Comey: Same answer. The only legitimate way would be through a proceeding, appropriate proceeding. The illegitimate way would be somebody told them who shouldn’t have told them.

Which reporters/journalists (and I use those terms loosely!) actually first published classified leaks? I should have paid more attention. I'll have to do some digging and find out. And keep it in mind when hearing their future reports on the matter.


---------------------------------

ETA: Ask and ye shall receive!

12 Pieces Of Proof: The MSM Knew Obama Spied On Trump and LIED To Cover It Up

It was the Washington post, they had posted a lot of the leaks, that brings the question on how the Post get the leaks and by whom.

Is not Russia the one leaking to them, but domestically. They had leaks on Trump from what he does and who he calls since he got in the white house on day 1, if you remember.

Jeff Bezos owns the Washington post and Amazon they also in 2013 got a lucrative contract from the CIA.

So yes is a link here somewhere, The post also is the one that started the Russia/Trump link after leaking that the CIA was looking into the link between Russia, the hacking of the DNC and the 2016 elections.

From that leak it was a jump to link Russia and Trump collusion.

The Washignton post seems to be the base of how the investigations into the Russia/Trump link started, Democrats launched a campaign from this to blame Russia for their lost, interestingly during this time it was good for them that wikileaks and Anonymous sources leaked this information to the post, but now they are been call agents of Russia.

Deep down in its article, the Post notes — rather critically — that “there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.” Most importantly, the Post adds that “intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin ‘directing’ the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks.” But the purpose of both anonymous leaks is to finger the Russian government for these hacks, acting with the motive to defeat Hillary Clinton.

Needless to say, Democrats — still eager to make sense of their election loss and to find causes for it other than themselves — immediately declared these anonymous claims about what the CIA believes to be true, and, with a somewhat sweet, religious-type faith, treated these anonymous assertions as proof of what they wanted to believe all along: that Vladimir Putin was rooting for Donald Trump to win and Hillary Clinton to lose and used nefarious means to ensure that outcome. That Democrats are now venerating unverified, anonymous CIA leaks as sacred is par for the course for them this year, but it’s also a good indication of how confused and lost U.S. political culture has become in the wake of Trump’s victory.

theintercept.com...

a reply to: marg6043

I've been keeping an eye on Bezos and his Washington Post too....

Thanks for the links -- much appreciated. I have to get some dinner going soon, but I'll look forward to reading them later.

Okay, Rep Speier... gotcha...

Speier on Nunes controversy: 'Absolutely convinced it started in the Oval Office'

Rep. Jackie Speier, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said Saturday she is “absolutely convinced” the White House generated the bizarre scenario that has embroiled committee chair Rep. Devin Nunes -— in which he reportedly obtained information from administration officials regarding foreign surveillance of Trump campaign officials, and then presented it to the president."

Um... foreign surveillance??? No. Perhaps this is simply awkward composition on the writer's part, but it wasn't a foreign power spying on our president-elect/president.

"I am absolutely convinced it started in the Oval Office,'' said Speier (D-Calif.) of what she called the resulting "wild goose chase" in the three weeks since President Donald Trump launched an unfounded tweet accusing former President Barack Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower.

This representative is on the House Intelligence Committee -- the very committee charged with investigating the matter. It is her job to investigate, consider the evidence, and exonerate the innocent and bring the guilty to justice -- none of which she even addresses, much less seems at all concerned about. And if she's so worried about how that information came to be known and/or viewed, then she should be exponentially worried about the efforts to block that information from being known AND viewed by Nunes... hence the alleged "wild goose chase." She should also be demanding that the appropriate officials -- and Nunes is NOT one of them -- do what they gotta do to make those docs available to the committee.

Evelyn Farkas was very specific about her intent and efforts to get the unmasked intel to "the Hill." To the best of my understanding, that means Capitol Hill... and it would seem the Democrat congress critters in particular. Gee... I wonder what the chances are that she is one of those congress critters that received this information -- illegally -- and therefore doesn't need to see the evidence of illegal spying, unmasking and leaking... AGAIN!!!