POLITICS - Draining The "Intelligence" Swamp (17350 views)

From:	WEBELIAHU	7/11/17 7:23 AM
To:	All	(39 of 933)

7552.39 in reply to 7552.38

July 11, 2017

"Four of the seven memos Comey kept of his conversations with Trump were marked "secret" or "confidential," the report noted...According to FBI policy, agents are prohibited from releasing classified material or information regarding ongoing agency investigations without written permission, and documents created as part of official duties are considered government property."

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/trump-tweet-comey-leaks/2017/07/10/id/800724/

Trump: Comey Leak 'So Illegal'

President Donald Trump early Monday accused former FBI Director James Comey of breaking the law by leaking classified information to the media.

During his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8, Comey admitted asking a friend from Columbia Law School to leak information from one of his memos to The New York Times in hopes of spurring a special counsel to investigate whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia during last year's election.

Four of the seven memos Comey kept of his conversations with Trump were marked "secret" or "confidential," the report noted. Comey, though, testified that he considered the memos to be his own personal property, not that of the government.

"So, you didn't consider your memo or your sense of that conversation to be a government document?" Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., had asked Comey during the June 8 testimony. "You considered it to be, somehow, your own personal document that you could share to the media as you wanted through a friend?"

"Correct," Comey answered. "I understood this to be my recollection recorded of my conversation with the president. As a private citizen, I thought it important to get it out."

However, he also hinted his memos could have contained classified information, but that he "immediately prepared an unclassified memo of the conversation."

According to FBI policy, agents are prohibited from releasing classified material or information regarding ongoing agency investigations without written permission, and documents created as part of official duties are considered government property.

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	7/23/17 7:33 AM
To:	All	(40 of 933)

7552.40 in reply to 7552.39

July 23, 2017

Trump unleashes long Twitter tirade day after staff shakeup

President Donald Trump embarked on an early-morning Twitter barrage Saturday that blasted “obstructionist” Democrats, complained about “intelligence leaks,” and called for investigations into “the many Hillary Clinton and Comey crimes.”

“ObamaCare is dead and the Democrats are obstructionists, no ideas or votes, only obstruction,” he wrote at 8:23 am. “It is solely up to the 52 Republican Senators!”

The 10-post tweetstorm, issued over two hours, touched on a half-dozen disparate topics, including the ongoing health care debate in Congress, headlines in the New York Times and Washington Post, and Clinton’s “deleted (& acid washed) … 33,000 e-mails”.

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	8/4/17 1:09 PM
To:	All	(41 of 933)

7552.41 in reply to 7552.40

August 4, 2017

"And Sessions said the department has already charged four people with unlawfully disclosing classified material or concealing their contacts with foreign intelligence officers."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/08/04/jeff-sessions-justice-department-triples-number-leak-investigations/539476001/

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announces broad crackdown on leaks

WASHINGTON – Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a broad crackdown on unauthorized disclosures of classified information Friday, demanding that the "culture of leaking must stop."

Since January, Sessions said the Justice Department has “more than tripled" the number of active leak investigations compared to the number pending at the end of the Obama administration.

The Justice Department has already received nearly as many criminal referrals involving unauthorized disclosures of classified information than in the previous three years combined. And Sessions said the department has already charged four people with unlawfully disclosing classified material or concealing their contacts with foreign intelligence officers.

"I have this warning for would-be leakers: Don't do it," Sessions said. "I strongly agree with the president and condemn in the strongest terms the staggering number of leaks," he said.

Sessions also offered a warning to the press, saying that prosecutors have launched a review of Justice Department policy related to subpoenas involving media organizations.

"We respect the important role that the press has and we give them respect, but it is not unlimited," Sessions said. "They cannot place lives at risk with impunity."

Sessions also denounced high-profile leaks about Trump's conversations with foreign leaders.

On Thursday, The Washington Post published complete transcripts of Trump's first calls with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

The announcement comes just days President Trump called on Sessions to be much tougher on the leaks from intelligence agencies, which he said last week "are leaking like rarely have they ever leaked before at a very important level. We cannot have that happen."

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	8/6/17 7:32 AM
To:	All	(42 of 933)

7552.42 in reply to 7552.41

August 6, 2017

"The Justice Department is also reviewing its policy on issuing subpoenas to reporters, Sessions revealed."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/jeff-sessions-warns-government-leakers-you-will-be-prosecuted/article/2630628

Jeff Sessions warns government leakers: You 'will be prosecuted'

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Friday that the Justice Department is ramping up steps to investigate and prosecute government leakers, a day after transcripts of President Trump's calls with two foreign leaders were leaked to the Washington Post.

"Criminals who would illegally use their access to our most sensitive information to endanger our national security are in fact being investigated, and will be prosecuted," he said in a press conference.

Sessions stressed that his department doesn't confirm or deny specific investigations, but made it clear there are many more leak investigations happening today than there were less than a year ago.

Since January, Sessions said the department "has more than tripled the number of active leak investigations" compared to the number pending at the end of the Obama administration.

The Justice Department has also received nearly as many criminal referrals "involving disclosures of classified information as we've received in the previous three years combined," Sessions said, revealing that the department has already charged four people with unlawfully disclosing classified information.

Only one of those charges has been announced by the Justice Department: 25-year-old government contractor Reality Leigh Winner, a former NSA contractor who is accused of leaking information regarding Russia's attempts to hack voting systems.

Sessions also stressed repeatedly that a way to solve the problem is to change the culture in government, which routinely leaks information.

"Prevention is what is required. An investigation of a leak is too late, really. The damage is done," he said. "This culture of leaking must stop.

"I have this warning for would-be leakers: Don't do it," Sessions added.

The Justice Department is also reviewing its policy on issuing subpoenas to reporters, Sessions revealed.

Sessions was joined by Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and National Counterintelligence and Security Center Director William Evanina from the Justice Department headquarters on Friday in Washington.

Sessions said he had directed Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray to be more involved with investigations into leaks by actively monitoring every single one.

Sessions also directed the National Security Division and U.S. attorneys to prioritize cases involving the criminal leaks of classified information, and said the FBI would be creating a new counterintelligence unit to oversee that task.

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	8/8/17 7:17 AM
To:	All	(43 of 933)

7552.43 in reply to 7552.42

August 8, 2017

"One former senior U.S. official intimately familiar with the national security infrastructure told the Free Beacon that Power would have little reason to be requesting such information, particularly information that included in raw intelligence reports related to Trump and his team."

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/former-u-n-amb-power-unmasked-hundreds-last-year-obama-admin/

Former U.N. Amb. Power Unmasked ‘Hundreds’ In Final Year Of Obama Admin

Congress moves closer to detailing potentially illicit national security leaks

Former United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power is believed to have made "hundreds" of unmasking requests to identify individuals named in classified intelligence community reports related to Trump and his presidential transition team, according to multiple sources who said the behavior is unprecedented for an official in her position.

Power was first identified by the Washington Free Beacon last month as a central figure in a congressional investigation into efforts by senior Obama administration officials to obtain classified intelligence information in what many allege was an effort to undermine President Donald Trump and his incoming national security team.

Power is believed to be the anonymous official responsible for "hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama administration," according to current and former U.S. officials who spoke to the Free Beacon about the ongoing investigation.

Efforts by the former Obama administration to obtain the names of Trump allies included in raw intelligence reports have fueled speculation that subsequent leaks to the press were orchestrated by the former administration and its allies in a bid to damage the current White House and smear Trump's most senior confidantes.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R., Calif.), chair of the House Intelligence Committee, which is handling the probe, petitioned Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats last week to request his help in addressing the unmasking issue.

Nunes disclosed in his letter that the former Obama administration had "easy access" to sensitive classified information and that they may have used it to "achieve partisan political purposes, including the selective, anonymous leaking of such information."

Congressional investigators uncovered that "one official [whose] position has no apparent intelligence-related function"—now believed to be Power—"made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama administration."

Little justification was provided for the request of this sensitive classified information, which government insiders described as outside the purview of a U.N. ambassador.

"Of those requests, only one offered a justification that was not boilerplate and articulated why that specific official required the personal information for the performance of his or her official duties," according to Nunes.

One former senior U.S. official intimately familiar with the national security infrastructure told the Free Beacon that Power would have little reason to be requesting such information, particularly information that included in raw intelligence reports related to Trump and his team.

"Asking for an unmasking is rare at the [National Security Council] or the State Department. It is frankly shocking that anyone would be asking for dozens, and if there are really hundreds it is indefensible," said the former official. "It does make me wonder why [National Security Agency] didn't stop her [Power], by questioning this practice and getting the head of NSA to raise it with the president or the national security adviser."

In addition to Power, the House Intelligence Committee has subpoenaed former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and other top officials as part of its investigation into these leaks.

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	8/8/17 7:23 AM
To:	All	(44 of 933)

7552.44 in reply to 7552.43

August 8, 2017

"It should be neither “astounding” nor “unheard of” for people to be held accountable for their actions, regardless of their exalted position."

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/08/02/gregg-jarrett-second-special-counsel-must-investigate-clinton-comey-lynch-and-others.html

Gregg Jarrett: A second special counsel must investigate Clinton, Comey, Lynch and others

There was a time, not so long ago, when candidate Donald Trump vowed, if elected, to have his attorney general appoint a special counsel to reopen the Hillary Clinton investigation and, if warranted, bring criminal charges against her.

It never happened, of course. And the president has only himself to blame.

President-elect Trump had a change of heart after winning the election, signaling that his new administration would let bygones be bygones, explaining that Clinton had “suffered” enough. It appeared to be an act of graciousness, the law be damned. Trump should have been reminded of the proverb that no good deed will be left unpunished.

Belatedly, the president has experienced another change of heart. Under siege by a special counsel who seems to have gone rogue, Trump is reversing himself and wants the Clinton investigation reexamined. Remember the campaign chants? If prosecuted and convicted, “lock her up”.

There is something fundamentally unfair when a special counsel is appointed to investigate the winner of a presidential contest, but not the loser.

Perhaps the president is guilty of a shameless subterfuge. Or, more likely, he genuinely feels he is innocent of any wrongdoing, yet Clinton is not. It’s that fairness thing.

But the law cares not a whit about Trump’s desires and motives. It is not fickle, as politicians are prone to be. If you commit a crime, you should be brought to the dock. Period.

Try telling that immutable fact to the media. They will howl in perfect harmony.

The media believes Clinton is entitled to a “get out of jail free” card. Politics, as it intersects the law, is nothing more than a game like “Monopoly”. Don’t you see? Clinton failed in her bid to become president, so she is somehow exempt from abiding by the law.

Apparently, that is how the Washington Post envisions it. In a recent story, the newspaper justified it this way:

“Trump’s suggestion that his top law enforcement official investigate a former political rival is astounding, and even his allies have said in the past that such a move would be unheard of in the United States.”

By this reasoning, I could rob a bank, run for president but be excused from investigation and/or prosecution upon losing. Really?

Since when do you receive a “get out of jail free” card simply because you are a defeated political rival? Could all manner of crimes be committed by a candidate without fear of legal consequences because of a paucity of votes on election day? Where is that statute written? I can’t seem to locate it.

It should be neither “astounding” nor “unheard of” for people to be held accountable for their actions, regardless of their exalted position.

Theodore Roosevelt popularized the long-held principle in democracy that “no one is above the law”. Yet, there now appears to be an exception to the rule of law as it applies to Clinton. Let’s call it the “Clinton Exclusion”.

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	8/8/17 7:26 AM
To:	All	(45 of 933)

7552.45 in reply to 7552.44

August 8, 2017

"Toensing says the most important thing to come out of the Sessions-Coats press conference is the warning that journalists will get subpoenaed if necessary to expose those responsible for the leaks. She says they don’t need to be prosecuted to assist an investigation."

And they can be jailed for contempt of court if they refuse to answer questions.

http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/former-prosecutor-leaks-absolutely-prosecutable/#WppQlElLWk0QhOVA.99

Former prosecutor: Leaks 'absolutely prosecutable'

'Washington Post is affecting President Trump's ability to do his job'

Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats announced a joint effort Friday to track down and prosecute those leaking classified information to the media.

Former federal prosecutor Victoria Toensing says this problem can be addressed by putting the media on notice, limiting the number of people who see key documents and rooting out Obama holdovers from the National Security Council staff.

Toensing also urged caution before jumping to conclusions over Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s assembling of a grand jury into the Russia probe, but she fears serious mission creep is afoot and wonders why there still isn’t a grand jury investigating Hillary Clinton over her email scandal or examining the actions of the Clinton Foundation.

The issue of leaks jumped to the forefront again this week, after the Washington Post published classified transcripts of President Trump’s conversations with other world leaders during the first days of his administration.

Toensing says there is clear-cut criminal activity involved.

“It is absolutely prosecutable. It is a leak of classified information. What the Washington Post is doing is affecting President Trump’s ability to do his job, because the Washington Post is absolutely committed to bringing down this presidency,” said Toensing.

“You know ‘Democracy Dies in Darkness,’ their new label, their new motto? Well, democracy dies in fake news, in publishing classified information, which provides no news value. What did we learn in the publishing of that transcript? Nothing,” said Toensing.

Toensing says the most important thing to come out of the Sessions-Coats press conference is the warning that journalists will get subpoenaed if necessary to expose those responsible for the leaks. She says they don’t need to be prosecuted to assist an investigation.

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	9/1/17 7:25 AM
To:	All	(46 of 933)

7552.46 in reply to 7552.45

September 1, 2017

We are getting ever closer to the heart of the government swamp.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-fbi-fights-public-release-of-trump-dossier-info/article/2633048

FBI fights public release of Trump dossier info

Senate investigators have had problems getting the FBI to reveal information about the Trump dossier. They're not the only ones. Outside groups filing Freedom of Information Act requests are running up against a stone wall when it comes to the dossier.

On March 8, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request for documents regarding the bureau's contacts with Christopher Steele, the former British spy who dug for dirt in Russia on candidate Donald Trump in the months before the 2016 presidential election. Steele's effort was commissioned by the oppo research firm Fusion GPS, which at the time was being paid by still-unidentified Democrats who supported Hillary Clinton. Just weeks before the election, the FBI reportedly agreed to support Steele's oppo project — an extraordinary action in the midst of a campaign which Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said raised "questions about the FBI's independence from politics."

So Judicial Watch asked the Justice Department for: Any and all records of communications between any official, employee, or representative of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Mr. Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer and the owner of the private firm Orbis Business Intelligence. Any and all records regarding, concerning, or related to the proposed, planned, or actual payment of any funds to Mr. Steele and/or Orbis Business Intelligence. Any and all records produced in preparation for, during, or pursuant to any meetings or telephonic conversations between any official, employee, or representative of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Mr. Christopher Steele and/or any employee or representative of Orbis Business Intelligence.

The idea was that the records would shed light on the basic questions regarding the dossier. Just what did the FBI do? Why? And — this is very important to Grassley — did the FBI ever use the "salacious and unverified" (the words of former FBI Director James Comey) information in the dossier as a basis for applying for warrants to put Americans under surveillance?

The Justice Department's response to Judicial Watch was simple: No. And not just no: The Department would not even confirm or deny whether any such documents or communications even existed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The problem, of course, is that the FBI has already acknowledged the existence of a counterintelligence investigation into the Trump-Russia affair. Comey himself did it in Hill testimony on March 20, noting that it is not the Justice Department's usual practice to confirm such things, but the Trump-Russia matter was of such great public importance that Comey decided to go ahead.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for the dossier itself, in public testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8, Comey specifically discussed briefing President-elect Trump on its contents in January.

And of course, the dossier, in all its "salacious and unverified" glory, was published in full by Buzzfeed.

Finally, the Justice Department appointed Robert Mueller to serve as the special counsel in the case. The department announced the appointment publicly and released the document outlining Mueller's responsibilities.

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	9/8/17 7:20 AM
To:	All	(47 of 933)

7552.47 in reply to 7552.46

September 8, 2017

"It was Comey who, when he was fired by Trump, took government documents he had assembled as FBI chief in meetings with Trump. He gave them to a friend to release to the media in his hope that that would trigger the appointment of a special counsel..."

http://www.wnd.com/2017/09/fbi-doj-subpoenaed-to-turn-over-russia-evidence/#FE9Qd0wD6ydAim2T.99

FBI, DOJ subpoenaed to turn over Russia evidence

Investigative agencies in bull's-eye of congressional review of so-called 'dossier'

The FBI and the Department of Justice usually are the ones who decide who gets a subpoena demanding evidence for an investigation.

Not this time.

This time, they are receiving subpoenas demanding that they turn over information.

It all involves that apparently fictitious Russian “dossier” that made outlandish claims about Donald Trump, and was used to smear him during the presidential campaign. The case is under investigation by the House Intelligence Committee, which recently subpoenaed both the FBI and the Department of Justice for information.

Byron York at the Washington Examiner reported that the committee gave both agencies until Sept. 14 to comply. So far, they have not done so.

Commented John Hinderaker at Powerlineblog: “There is some reason to believe that the FBI was enlisted to support the Hillary Clinton campaign by promoting, and perhaps paying for, the fake Russian dossier. If that is true, it is a major scandal. The FBI and DOJ are still not cooperating in the committee’s investigation.”

The FBI, of course, through then-Chief James Comey, was the group that “cleared” Clinton of possible charges for her “extremely careless” handling of national security secrets that were sent over her private, unsecured email system she set up in her home when she was secretary of state.

Also, the DOJ, through then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, met with Bill Clinton on the tarmac at an Arizona airport, for a private meeting, just as those charges were being considered by the FBI.

The issue before the committee is the salacious and unverified dossier that alleges Russia corroborated with President Trump to rig the presidential election.

The committee is also intent on revealing details pertaining to the FBI’s relationship with the author of the dossier, Christopher Steele, and the bureau’s possible support of opposition research against Trump during the presidential race.

Committee investigators began requesting information from the FBI and Justice Department in May, sending multiple letters to the bureau and DOJ regarding the Trump-Russia affair.

The dossier is comprised of a batch of short memos produced between June and December 2016 by Steele, a former British MI6 agent, and handed to Comey.

It was Comey who, when he was fired by Trump, took government documents he had assembled as FBI chief in meetings with Trump. He gave them to a friend to release to the media in his hope that that would trigger the appointment of a special counsel to look into the Russia claims.

The left-leaning website BuzzFeed published the collection of reports online on Jan. 10, just 10 days before Trump’s inauguration.

One of the reports even alleged Trump engaged in “perverted sexual acts” that were “arranged/monitored” by the Russian intelligence, including hiring prostitutes to urinate on the bed that former President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama had slept on at the Moscow Ritz-Carlton, out of supposed hatred for them. The report claimed a video existed of the alleged incident, but no proof has surfaced to date.

Trump has dismissed the claims as “fake news."

Reply Options

From:	WEBELIAHU	9/13/17 7:54 AM
To:	All	(48 of 933)

7552.48 in reply to 7552.47

September 13, 2017

"Mueller must be removed “along with his conflicted staff, and then referred to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia for criminal prosecution.”

http://www.wnd.com/2017/09/new-push-to-oust-mueller-as-special-counsel/#KOPXOo073iMFBu3W.99

New push to oust Mueller as special counsel

Former federal prosecutor says he 'must be removed' then charged

A former Justice Department prosecutor has filed an ethics complaint with the DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility seeking the removal and prosecution of Special Counsel Robert Mueller over leaks resulting from his grand jury investigation into allegations Russia colluded with the Trump campaign in 2016.

Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch, explained in his complaint that the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility and the inspector general are “charged with investigating and remedying unethical and illegal behavior by the special counsel and other DOJ lawyers and staff.”

“Special Counsel Mueller derives his office and powers from the DOJ, as he was appointed, strangely, by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.”

Klayman charged Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Rosenstein have “failed and apparently refuse to properly police the illegal grand jury leaks and conflicts of interest of Special Counsel Mueller – putting their own personal, political and professional interests before all else – the job falls upon Freedom Watch and OPR and the IG to represent the interests of the American people for truth and justice.”

“If OPR and the IG themselves fail to take action, Freedom Watch will file a court complaint to force them to take appropriate action,” Klayman said.

He said Mueller must be removed “along with his conflicted staff, and then referred to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia for criminal prosecution.”

The complaint cites a number of leaks of confidential information.

Klayman said Mueller’s staff members are mostly Democratic donors and Clinton supporters who in their positions of trust have “illegally leaked grand jury information to harm President Trump, his family and former and president colleagues.”

Meanwhile, ABC News reported this week, citing sources familiar with the matter, Mueller told the White House he wants to interview at least six current and former White House aides as part of his Russ

Klayman’s letter, to Robin Ashton of the OPR and Michael Horowitz of the IG’s office, calls on them to “thoroughly investigate the torrent of leaks.”

Citing the rules and ethics requirements for the DOJ, Klayman noted in the complaint: “Rarely in our memory has such a shocking river of leaks been so great in quantity, so flagrant and brazen, and so extensive and continuous. The purpose of the [DOJ] rules against leaks of information obtained during criminal investigations includes the fear of deterring cooperation of witnesses with investigators upon seeing their ‘confidential’ discussions with DOJ personnel are splashed upon the pages of the Washington Post or the New York Times and other anti-Trump ‘friendly media.’

“The damage done to DOJ for years to come involving all legal matters, not just this one, in convincing complaining witnesses and factual witness that they cannot trust DOJ personnel to adhere to the department’s own rules and safeguard their confidences is incalculable.”

Further, such leaks “pollute the jury pool,” should a case derive from the investigation.

Mueller was appointed in May by Rosenstein, Klayman noted, “for the purpose of upholding the appearance of integrity in the public view.”

“Unfortunately, Mr. Mueller and those he has hired have failed not only in presenting a public appearance above reproach but in adhering to the legal, regulatory, and ethical requirements of their appointment.”

Klayman noted Mueller has convened two grand juries for his investigation, but federal rules demand grand jurors, interpreters, court reporters, prosecutors and others “must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury.”

Wrote Klayman in the complaint: “While it is often difficult by nature to know prior to an investigation who is responsible for leaks, a pattern of a persistent torrent of leaks, considering their nature, makes it clear that the majority of these leaks are coming from special counsel Robert Mueller and his staff, most of whom are suffering from serious conflicts of interest.”

Reply Options

Navigate this discussion: 1-8 9-18 19-28 29-38 39-48 49-58 59-68 ... 909-918 919-928 929-933

Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.