Category Archives: Dept of Justice

AG William Barr’s letter to Congress on Mueller Report

After nearly two years and untold millions of taxpayer dollars, the long-awaited Mueller report was delivered to Attorney General William Barr last Friday, March 22, 2019.

The report finds no Trump/Russia collusion nor that President Trump committed crimes. Of course, that won’t stop the Demon Party from undertaking yet more investigations, which some leading Demonrats are already vowing.

The Mueller Report is not yet made public, but below is AG Barr’s summary letter of the report’s “principal conclusions” to the chairmen (Sen. Lindsey Graham, Rep. Jerrold Nadler) and ranking members (Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rep. Doug Collins) of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees.

I had a hell of time finding the letter in text format to copy and post here. You can also read the letter in PDF here.

The Attorney General

Washington, DC.
March 24, 2019

Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member
Collins:

As a supplement to the notification provided on Friday, March 22, 2019, I am writing today to advise you of the principal conclusions reached by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller and to inform you about the status of my initial review of the report he has prepared.

The Special Counsel’s Report

On Friday, the Special Counsel submitted to me a “confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions” he has reached, as required by 28 CPR. This report is entitled “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.” Although my review is ongoing, I believe that it is in the public interest to describe the report and to summarize the principal conclusions reached by the Special Counsel and the results of his investigation.

The report explains that the Special Counsel and his staff thoroughly investigated allegations that members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, and others associated with it, conspired with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, or sought to obstruct the related federal investigations. In the report, the Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.

The Special Counsel obtained a number of indictments and convictions of individuals and entities in connection with his investigation, all of which have been publicly disclosed. During the course of his investigation, the Special Counsel also referred several matters to other offices for further action. The report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public. Below, I summarize the principal conclusions set out in the Special Counsel’s report.

Russian Interference in the 2016 US. Presidential Election. The Special Counsel’s report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel’s investigation was whether any Americans including individuals associated with the Trump campaign joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”¹

_________________

¹In assessing potential conspiracy charges, the Special Counsel also considered whether members of the Trump campaign “coordinated” with Russian election interference activities. The Special Counsel defined “coordination” as an agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference.

_________________

The Special Counsel’s investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

The second element involved the Russian government’s efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

Obstruction of Justice. The report’s second part addresses a number of actions by the President most of which have been the subject of public reporting that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

The Special Counsel’s decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel’s office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel’s obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.2

_________________

² See A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. 222 (2000).

_________________

In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,” and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President’s actions, many of which took place in public View, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department’s principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Status of the Department’s Review

The relevant regulations contemplate that the Special Counsel’s report will be a “confidential report” to the Attorney General. See Office of Special Counsel, 64 Fed. Reg. 37,038, 37,040-41 (July 9, 1999). As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel’s report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.

Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel and my initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or could be subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure which imposes restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to “matter[s] occurring before [a] grand jury.” Fed. R. Crim. P. Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6(e) material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain circumstances. See, e. g. 18 U.S.C. 401(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for their intended criminal justice function.

Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the 6(e) material that by law cannot be made public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all 6(e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible. Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.

* * *

As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that “the Attorney General may determine that public release of” notifications to your respective Committees “would be in the public interest.” 28 CPR. I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.

Sincerely,

William P. Barr
Attorney General

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Happy Sunday: Mueller report finds no Trump/Russia collusion nor that President Trump committed crimes

Breaking report from Twitchy. There is a tweet in the Twitchy link to the letter that the DoJ sent to the Judiciary Committee.

There was never a doubt in my mind that President Trump colluded or committed a crime. I did doubt whether or not Mueller could complete an unbiased investigation.

And now we know.

Happy Sunday demorats!

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

A real conspiracy: Wealthy Americans conspire with coaches, university & college entrance test administrators to rig admissions into elite universities

A friend, R., admonished and ordered me not to send him any posts on Sandy Hook after I sent him my January 8, 2019 post, “More evidence that Sandy Hook Elementary School had moved to Monroe, CT before the shooting massacre,” with documentary evidence from Wolfgang Halbig showing Sandy Hook Elementary School had moved to Chalk Hill Middle School in nearby Monroe, Connecticut, months before the December 14, 2012 mass shooting.

Instead of disputing my post with evidence or reasoning, R. called me an agent of Satan for trafficking in conspiracy theories, which he dismisses because he doesn’t believe in conspiracies and because so many conspiracy theories implicate Jews.

An aside: R., who was adopted as an infant by a childless German immigrant couple, recently learnt from a DNA-testing company that he is part Jewish, never mind the fact that we have good evidence that the results of these commercial DNA ancestry tests are unreliable. (See “DNA ancestry companies fake African ancestry for white people” and “Twins get some ‘mystifying’ results when they put 5 DNA ancestry kits to the test“.) R. actually said in an email before we ceased all communication, that he believes it’s his Jewish ancestry that accounts for why he’s so smart and got a Ph.D., whereas his (adopted) parents never went to college. Curiously, his dumb but hardworking and frugal parents managed to accumulate considerable financial assets from owning and operating a small business.

This post is about a very real conspiracy — by very wealthy Americans conspiring to rig college admissions so that their children get into élite universities, not on their own merits, but via bribes, fake college entrance test scores and fake athleticism. The bribe payments, in tens of thousands and millions of dollars per parent, were funneled into a fake non-profit so that the parents could claim them as charitable donations on their tax returns. All of which means this college admissions scam is also a scam perpetrated on U.S. tax payers.

To top it off, the ring leader of this very real conspiracy, William Singer, is Jewish.

Singer had already pleaded guilty and is helping the FBI gather incriminating evidence against his co-conspirators.

On Tuesday, March 12, 2019, 50 wealthy Americans — including Hollywood actresses Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin, were charged in the largest college cheating “conspiracy” ever prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Below is the DOJ press release:

Dozens of individuals involved in a nationwide conspiracy that facilitated cheating on college entrance exams and the admission of students to elite universities as purported athletic recruits were arrested by federal agents in multiple states this morning and charged in federal court in Boston. Athletic coaches from Yale, Stanford, USC, Wake Forest and Georgetown, among others, are implicated, as well as parents and exam administrators.

William “Rick” Singer, 58, of Newport Beach, Calif., was charged with racketeering conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy and obstruction of justice. Singer owned and operated the Edge College & Career Network LLC (“The Key”) – a for-profit college counseling and preparation business – and served as the CEO of the Key Worldwide Foundation (KWF) – a non-profit corporation that he established as a purported charity.

Between approximately 2011 and February 2019, Singer allegedly conspired with dozens of parents, athletic coaches, a university athletics administrator, and others, to use bribery and other forms of fraud to secure the admission of students to colleges and universities including Yale University, Georgetown University, Stanford University, the University of Southern California, and Wake Forest University, among others. Also charged for their involvement in the scheme are 33 parents and 13 coaches and associates of Singer’s businesses, including two SAT and ACT test administrators.

Also charged is John Vandemoer, the head sailing coach at Stanford University, Rudolph “Rudy” Meredith, the former head soccer coach at Yale University, and Mark Riddell, a counselor at a private school in Bradenton, Fla.

The DOJ press release then describes three groups of conspiracies:

(1) College Entrance Exam Cheating Conspiracy:

  • Singer instructed his clients to ask for extended time for their children on the SAT and ACT college entrance exams, by claiming the children have learning disabilities in order to obtain the required medical documentation.
  • Once the extended time was granted, the parents asked that the location of the exams be changed to one of two test centers: a public high school in Houston, Texas, or a private college preparatory school in West Hollywood, Calif.
  • At those test centers, Singer had established relationships with test administrators Niki Williams and Igor Dvorskiy, respectively, who accepted bribes of as much as $10,000 per test to facilitate the cheating scheme by having a third individual, typically Mark Riddell, to take the exams in place of the students, to give the students the correct answers during the exams, or to correct the students’ answers after they completed the exams.
  • Singer typically paid Ridell $10,000 for each student’s test.
  • The parents paid Singer between $15,000 and $75,000 per test, with the payments structured as purported donations to Singer’s tax-exempt Key Worldwide Foundation charity.

(2) College Recruitment Conspiracy:

  • Parents paid Singer, under the guise of charitable donations to his KWF non-profit, approximately $25 million to bribe coaches and university administrators to designate their children as purported athletic recruits, thereby facilitating the children’s’ admission to those universities.
  •  Singer directed employees of The Key and the KWF non-profit to create falsified athletic “profiles” for these children — with fake honors, fake elite teams that they purportedly played on, and staged photos of the children engaged in athletic activity, such as using a rowing machine or purportedly playing water polo.
  • The fake athletic profiles were then submitted to the universities in support of the students’ applications.

(3) Tax Fraud Conspiracy:

  • Beginning around 2013, Singer had parents disguise bribe payments as charitable contributions to his tax-exempt non-profit Key Worldwide Foundaton (KWF), thereby enabling the clients to deduct the bribes from their federal income taxes.
  • KWF employee Steven Masera or another employee then mailed letters from the KWF to the parentss expressing thanks for their purported charitable contributions. The letter stated: “Your generosity will allow us to move forward with our plans to provide educational and self-enrichment programs to disadvantaged youth,” and falsely indicated that “no good or services were exchanged” for the donations. The parents then filed personal tax returns that falsely reported the payment to the KWF as charitable donations.

Below are the 50 individuals charged in the college admissions conspiracy:

  1. William Rick Singer, 58, of Newport Beach, Calif., owner of the Edge College & Career Network and CEO of the Key Worldwide Foundation, was charged in an Information with racketeering conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy, conspiracy to defraud the United States, and obstruction of justice.  He is scheduled to plead guilty in Boston before U.S. District Court Judge Rya W. Zobel on March 12, 2019, at 2:30 p.m.;
  2. Mark Riddell, 36, of Palmetto, Fla., was charged in an Information with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud as well as conspiracy to commit money laundering;
  3. Rudolph “Rudy” Meredith, 51, of Madison, Conn., the former head women’s soccer coach at Yale University, was charged in an Information with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and honest services wire fraud as well as honest services wire fraud;
  4. John Vandemoer, 41, of Stanford, Calif., the former sailing coach at Stanford University, was charged in an Information with racketeering conspiracy and is expected to plead guilty in Boston before U.S. District Court Judge Rya W. Zobel on March 12, 2019, at 3:00 p.m.;
  5. David Sidoo, 59, of Vancouver, Canada, was charged in an indictment with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud. Sidoo was arrested on Friday, March 8th in San Jose, Calif., and appeared in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on March 11, 2019. A date for his initial appearance in federal court in Boston has not yet been scheduled.

The following defendants were charged in an indictment with racketeering conspiracy:

  1. Igor Dvorskiy, 52, of Sherman Oaks, Calif., director of a private elementary and high school in Los Angeles and a test administrator for the College Board and ACT;
  2. Gordon Ernst, 52, of Chevy Chase, Md., former head coach of men and women’s tennis at Georgetown University;
  3. William Ferguson, 48, of Winston-Salem, N.C., former women’s volleyball coach at Wake Forest University;
  4. Martin Fox, 62, of Houston, Texas, president of a private tennis academy in Houston;
  5. Donna Heinel, 57, of Long Beach, Calif., the senior associate athletic director at the University of Southern California;
  6. Laura Janke, 36, of North Hollywood, Calif., former assistant coach of women’s soccer at the University of Southern California;
  7. Ali Khoroshahin, 49, of Fountain Valley, Calif., former head coach of women’s soccer at the University of Southern California;
  8. Steven Masera, 69, of Folsom, Calif., accountant and financial officer for the Edge College & Career Network and the Key Worldwide Foundation;
  9. Jorge Salcedo, 46, of Los Angeles, Calif., former head coach of men’s soccer at the University of California at Los Angeles;
  10. Mikaela Sanford, 32, of Folsom, Calif., employee of the Edge College & Career Network and the Key Worldwide Foundation;
  11. Jovan Vavic, 57, of Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif., former water polo coach at the University of Southern California; and
  12. Niki Williams, 44, of Houston, Texas, assistant teacher at a Houston high school and test administrator for the College Board and ACT.

The following defendant was charged in a criminal complaint with conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud:

  1. Michael Center, 54, of Austin Texas, head coach of men’s tennis at the University of Texas at Austin.

The following defendants are some of the parents involved in the conspiracy, who were charged in a criminal complaint with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud:

  1. Gregory Abbott, 68, of New York, N.Y., the founder and chairman of a food and beverage packaging company;
  2. Marcia Abbott, 59, of New York, N.Y.;
  3. Gamal Abdelaziz, 62, of Las Vegas, Nev., the former senior executive of a resort and casino operator in Macau, China;
  4. Diane Blake, 55, of San Francisco, Calif., an executive at a retail merchandising firm;
  5. Todd Blake, 53, of San Francisco, Calif., an entrepreneur and investor;
  6. Jane Buckingham, 50, of Beverly Hills, Calif., the CEO of a boutique marketing company;
  7. Gordon Caplan, 52, of Greenwich, Conn., co-chairman of an international law firm based in New York City;
  8. I-Hin “Joey” Chen, 64, of Newport Beach, Calif., operates a provider of warehousing and related services for the shipping industry;
  9. Amy Colburn, 59, of Palo Alto, Calif.;
  10. Gregory Colburn, 61, of Palo Alto, Calif.;
  11. Robert Flaxman, 62, of Laguna Beach, Calif., founder and CEO of real estate development firm;
  12. Mossimo Giannulli, 55, of Los Angeles, Calif., fashion designer;
  13. Elizabeth Henriquez, 56, of Atherton, Calif.;
  14. Manuel Henriquez, 55, of Atherton, Calif., founder, chairman and CEO of a publicly traded specialty finance company;
  15. Douglas Hodge, 61, of Laguna Beach, Calif., former CEO of investment management company;
  16. Felicity Huffman, 56, of Los Angeles, Calif., an actress on TV’s Desperate Housewives, and her spouse, actor William H. Macy, made a phony charitable contribution of $15,000 to have someone take the college entrance exam for her eldest daughter;
  17. Agustin Huneeus Jr., 53, of San Francisco, Calif., owner of wine vineyards;
  18. Bruce Isackson, 61, of Hillsborough, Calif., president of a real estate development firm;
  19. Davina Isackson, 55, of Hillsborough, Calif.;
  20. Michelle Janavs, 48, of Newport Coast, Calif., former executive of a large food manufacturer;
  21. Elisabeth Kimmel, 54, of Las Vegas, Nev., owner and president of a media company;
  22. Marjorie Klapper, 50, of Menlo Park, Calif., co-owner of jewelry business;
  23. Lori Loughlin, 54, of Los Angeles, Calif., an actress on the Netflix’s comedy Fuller House, and her fashion designer husband, Mossimo Giannulli of the Mossimo clothing line, paid $500,000 in bribe to have their two daughters recruited to the USC crew team, even though they had not previously participated in crew sports. On March 14, the Hallmark Channel severed ties with Loughlin; on March 16, Netflix decided to drop Loughlin from Fuller House;
  24. Toby MacFarlane, 56, of Del Mar, Calif., former senior executive at a title insurance company;
  25. William McGlashan Jr., 55, of Mill Valley, Calif., senior executive at a global equity firm;
  26. Marci Palatella, 63, of Healdsburg, Calif., CEO of a liquor distribution company;
  27. Peter Jan Sartorio, 53, of Menlo Park, Calif., packaged food entrepreneur;
  28. Stephen Semprevivo, 53, of Los Angeles, Calif., executive at privately held provider of outsourced sales teams;
  29. Devin Sloane, 53, of Los Angeles, Calif., founder and CEO of provider of drinking and wastewater systems;
  30. John Wilson, 59, of Hyannis Port, Mass., founder and CEO of private equity and real estate development firm;
  31. Homayoun Zadeh, 57, of Calabasas, Calif., an associate professor of dentistry; and
  32. Robert Zangrillo, 52, of Miami, Fla., founder and CEO of private investment firm.

If found guilty, here are the sentences for the above 50 defendants, based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors:

  • The charge of racketeering conspiracy provides for a sentence of no greater than 20 years in prison, three years of supervised release, a fine of $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss, whichever is greater and restitution.
  • The charge of conspiracy to commit money laundering provides for a sentence of up to 20 years in prison, up to three years of supervised release, and a fine of not more than $500,000 or twice the value of the property involved in the money laundering.
  • The charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States provides for a sentence of no greater than five years in prison, up to three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000.
  • The charge of obstruction of justice provides for a sentence of no greater than 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000.
  • The charges of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud, and of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and honest services wire fraud, provide for a sentence of no greater than 20 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a fine of 250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss, whichever is greater.

Separated at birth: Parkland’s David Hogg (l) and Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza (r)

Star Political reports that the admission into Harvard University of David Hogg, a prominent anti-gun activist who became famous as a “survivor” of the Parkland school shooting on February 14, 2018, is now being questioned because:

  • The average SAT score of Harvard’s own admission statistics is 250 points higher than Hogg’s 1270 SAT score. According to ThoughtCo, although a combined SAT score of roughly 1400 will make you competitive at nearly any U.S. college or university, Harvard Univerisity is more demanding, being an exceptionally selective school with an acceptance rate of just 5% in 2017, the lowest rate among all U.S. universities. A 1400 SAT score is on the lower end of Harvard’s accepted student range.
  • Hogg was rejected by several lower-level universities compared to Harvard, including four University of California campuses where he had submitted applications — UCLA, UCSD, UCSB and UC Irvine.

Hogg being a “survivor” of the Parkland school shooting should also be questioned because, according to his own words, he was at home and got on his bike when he heard about the shooting. See “Parkland anomalies: David Hogg was at home during school shooting; interviewed girl before shooting”.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Rep. Devin Nunes is preparing criminal referrals re. FBI & FISA to Attorney General Barr

Is this another false hope?

A criminal referral or recommendation is a notice to a prosecutory body, recommending criminal investigation or prosecution of one or more entities for crimes which fall into that body’s jurisdiction.

In the U.S. federal government, agencies that investigate crimes — including the House Intelligence Committee — typically refer cases to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for prosecution at its discretion. The U.S. attorney general heads the DOJ.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), 45, is a farmer with a Master’s degree in agriculture from Cal Poly, who became a politician. His grandparents were immigrants from the Azores, a tiny group of islands more than 800 miles off the coast of Portugal. (See “The Devin Nunes You Don’t Know“)

Nunes is that rare politician who has not sought to exploit his public office for financial gain. Unlike corrupt politicians like Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee with a 2015 net worth of $3.5 million, Nunes’ net worth in 2016 and 2015 was estimated at only $158,001. (Heavy.com)

Congressman Nunes was the chair of the House Intelligence Committee for four years until January 3, 2019. He lost the chairmanship because Americans in the 2018 midterm elections voted a Democratic majority to the House of Representatives. Since then, Nunes still serves on the committee as the senior Republican.

On January 30, 2019, during an interview on Fox News, Nunes said he plans to make criminal referrals as part of an investigation into political bias in the FBI, and that even though he is no longer chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and Democrats have taken control of the House and the committee, that won’t stop GOP investigators from making headway:

“A lot of people think just because Republicans are out of power that we are not conducting an investigation. We still are. Whether or not people will come in and interview with us, we don’t have gavels, we don’t have subpoena power. But we will still be trying to interview people and we will still be making criminal referrals.”

One person who has already been criminally referred to the Justice Department was former UK spook Christopher Steele, the  author of the fake “Russian hooker” Trump dossier. Steele was criminally referred in January 2018 by then-chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and now-committee chair Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) who succeeded Grassley.

Nunes said on January 30 that to this day Congress has not heard any updates from the DOJ on the Steele referral. Referring to Trump’s AG nominee William Barr, Nunes said it will take a new attorney general to come in and “clean” up before any real progress can be made. (Washington Examiner)

On February 14, 2019, Trump nominee William Barr succeeded Jeff Sessions as the 85th U.S. attorney general.

See Deplorable Patriot’s post, “Attorney General William Barr jumps into the fire“.

On March 1, 2019, at CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference), Nunes told OANN (0:30 mark):

“We’re still continuing to get to the bottom of what was happening to the Department of Justice and the FBI, trying to make sure that everyone there is held accountable…either through the courts or otherwise…. We’ll be making criminal referrals on a whole host of topics, most importantly probably lying and misleading Congress.”

Five days later, on March 6, 2019, Nunes once again said he’ll be making criminal referrals. He told Fox News’ Sean Hannity (0:03 mark):

We are preparing a criminal referral that we will present to the attorney general at the appropriate time…for many crimes. The obvious ones that you would know about would be lying to Congress. But we will also be looking at FISA [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] abuse and all the other matters that we have been looking into. It will probably be one large referral….

We’re probably going to be prepared in the next two to three, four weeks — one of the things that’s coming up. So don’t mind all the shiny balls that you see running around Congress here — the so-called new investigations [by current House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff (D-CA)]. Just ignore that.

What you should be out looking for is next week. On March 14, the federal judge down in Florida has ordered the release of depositions by Christopher Steele, who is supposedly the author of the dossier, and David Kramer, who pled the Fifth to this committee. who we know was handling and moving the dossier around to press outlets…. We [House Intelligence Commitee] had not ever interviewed Christopher Steele, and we don’t know what David Kramer would say because he pled the Fifth. So this could be critical. It may be nothing, but it could be critical for our referral. “

Note: David J. Kramer was nominated by President George W. Bush to be U.S. assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights, and labor, which he was from 2008 to January 20, 2009. Kramer is currently the senior director for human rights and human freedoms at the (John) McCain Institute, which is funded by the Saudis, Rothschilds, and George Soros. Kramer is a central player in how the fake Trump dossier made its way to the FBI in late 2016. He has invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to testify in connection with questions from the House Intelligence Committee about the anti-Trump dossier’s alleged Russian sources. (Fox News)

Sean Hannity said at the end of his interview with Rep. Nunes (2:16 mark):

“Finally, things are happening, which I’ve been telling you it will.”

Do you believe, too, that things are finally happening?

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was an informant for Robert Mueller’s FBI

Jeffrey Epstein, 66, is a billionaire and notorious pedophile who owns a private island (Little Saint James) in the Caribbean, to which he’d flown Bill Clinton (Hillary, too), Prince Andrew, and homosexual pederast actor Kevin Spacey many times, as shown by flight logs of Epstein’s private Boeing 727. The plane is nicknamed the Lolita Express, and reportedly is outfitted with a bed where passengers had group sex with young girls.

See “Flight logs show Bill Clinton flew on sex offender’s jet much more than previously known” and “Source: FBI has evidence Hillary visited ‘Orgy Island’

In the case of Bill Clinton, flight records show he’d flown on Epstein’s plane at least 26 times.

Donald Trump also has ties to Epstein. As reported by The Daily Wire:

  • Trump called Epstein a “terrific guy” and “a lot of fun to be with” who “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.” (New York Magazine)
  • Trump was in Epstein’s “little black book,” which was stolen by a former employee in 2004. The book listed “14 phone numbers including emergency numbers, car numbers, and numbers to Trump’s security guard and houseman.”
  • Jeffrey Epstein’s brother, Mark, testified in 2009 that Trump flew on Jeffrey’s private jet at least once. Message pads seized from Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion indicate that Trump called Epstein twice in November of 2004. (Vice)
  • In 2010, while under oath, Epstein admitted to “socializing” with Trump, but pled the fifth to Trump attending sex parties with underage girls. (Vice)
  • In April 2016, a woman in California, “Katie Johnson”, filed a $100 million lawsuit against Trump, accusing him of raping her more than 20 years ago when she was just 13 years old and threatening to harm her and her family.” The lawsuit also names Epstein for alleged sexual misconduct and threats. (Independent) The lawsuit was dismissed over technical filing errors (the address listed in court documents was a foreclosed home that has been vacant since its owner died), with the plaintiff failing in her attempt to avoid incurring the cost of the litigation. (Radar Online) “Johnson” filed a second lawsuit, which she also dropped after failing to show up at a press conference, claiming threats to her life.

For his part, through his attorney Alan Garten, Trump said he has “no relationship” with Epstein other than Epstein having frequented Trump’s Mar-A-Lago in Miami. Garten said: “A lot of people hung out there, including Jeffrey Epstein. That is the only connection.” (Daily Wire)

Born in Brooklyn, New York, to a middle class Jewish family, Epstein somehow managed to become a billionaire. He worked as an options trader at Bear Stearns early in his career and then formed his own financial management firm, J. Epstein & Co., managing the assets of clients with more than $1 billion in net worth.

The FBI received accounts from about 40 under age girls who said they had been molested by Epstein. Despite this, in June 2008, the government agreed to allow Epstein to plead guilty to just one count of soliciting prostitution from an underage girl under Florida state law, for which he served 13 months in prison. He is a registered sex offender.

While in jail, Epstein received liberal work release privileges that required him to spend little time in a cell. Six days a week, he was picked up at the jail by his private driver and driven to an office in downtown West Palm Beach, where he spent up to 12 hours a day greeting friends, lawyers and several young women who were named by federal prosecutors as participants in his sex trafficking scheme.

Julie K. Brown reports for The Miami Herald, Feb. 7, 2019, that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has reportedly opened an investigation into the conduct of DOJ attorneys in the case, and whether they committed “professional misconduct” in their working relationship with Epstein’s attorneys.

The probe was opened in response to a request lodged by Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who raised questions about the case after reading the Miami Herald‘s 3-part series on how then-US attorney for the Southern District of Florida Alexander Acosta, 50, whom President Trump appointed secretary of labor, and other DOJ attorneys worked with defense attorneys to cut a lenient plea deal for Epstein back in 2008.

Reporting for The Miami Herald, Julie Brown writes:

Epstein, 66, could have faced a possible life sentence for sex trafficking, but instead was secretly granted federal immunity, along with others who were part of the conspiracy, some of whom were named, others not.

Epstein was suspected by the FBI of running an international sex trafficking operation involving minors, and federal prosecutors had drafted a 53-page indictment that was shelved after Acosta signed off on a non-prosecution agreement in September 2007.

The reason for Jeffrey Epstein being secretly granted federal immunity? — He was an informant for the FBI, the director of which at the time is none other than Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller. Mueller, 74, was Director of the FBI from September 2001 to September 2013.

As Julie Brown reported on November 28, 2018:

The Herald learned that, as part of the plea deal, Epstein provided what the government called “valuable consideration” for unspecified information he supplied to federal investigators. While the documents obtained by the Herald don’t detail what the information was, Epstein’s sex crime case happened just as the country’s subprime mortgage market collapsed, ushering in the 2008 global financial crisis.

Records show that Epstein was a key federal witness in the criminal prosecution of two prominent executives with Bear Stearns, the global investment brokerage that failed in 2008, who were accused of corporate securities fraud. Epstein was one of the largest investors in the hedge fund managed by the executives, who were later acquitted. It is not known what role, if any, the case played in Epstein’s plea negotiations.

H/t Maziel

See also “Chilling images of children from surveillance cameras on Jeffrey Epstein’s pedo island”.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Tuesday Funnies!

. . . and political truth memes.

This gives new meaning to the expression “narrow escape”:

H/t Auntie Lulu

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

NY district judge bars citizenship question from 2020 census due to not following proper administrative procedure

Judge Furman

Take a wild guess as to who appointed the judge who made this decision…

From Seattle Times: A federal judge blocked the Trump administration Tuesday from asking about citizenship status on the 2020 census, the first major ruling in cases contending that officials ramrodded the question through for Republican political purposes to intentionally undercount immigrants.

In a 277-page decision that won’t be the final word on the issue, Judge Jesse M. Furman ruled that while such a question would be constitutional, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had added it arbitrarily and not followed proper administrative procedures.

“He failed to consider several important aspects of the problem; alternately ignored, cherry-picked, or badly misconstrued the evidence in the record before him; acted irrationally both in light of that evidence and his own stated decisional criteria; and failed to justify significant departures from past policies and practices,” Furman wrote.

Ross’ explanations for his decision were “unsupported by, or even counter to, the evidence before the agency,” the judge said.

Among other things, the judge said, Ross didn’t follow a law requiring that he give Congress three years notice of any plan to add a question about citizenship to the census.

The ruling came in cases in which 18 states, the District of Columbia, and 15 big cities or counties, and immigrants’ rights groups argued that the Commerce Department, which designs the census, had failed to properly analyze the effect the question would have on households where immigrants live.

A trial on a separate suit on the same issue, filed by the state of California, is underway in San Francisco. The U.S. Supreme Court is also poised to address the issue Feb. 19, meaning the legal issue is far from decided for good.
“We are disappointed and are still reviewing the ruling,” Justice Department spokeswoman Kelly Laco said in a statement.

In the New York case, the plaintiffs accused the administration of Republican President Donald Trump of adding the question to intentionally discourage immigrants from participating, which could lead to a population undercount — and possibly fewer seats in Congress — in places that tend to vote Democratic.

Even people in the U.S. legally, they said, might dodge the census questionnaire out of fears they could be targeted by a hostile administration.

Read the whole story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

DOJ rule will reclassify bump stocks as machine guns in de facto ban

Are they also going to ban belt loops?

From US News: The Justice Department on Tuesday issued its final rule to ban bump stocks, making them illegal to own or sell.

The reform, the first major gun-control action in recent years and the first of the Trump administration, comes after several recent mass shootings – including one in Las Vegas at a country music festival carried out by a shooter using bump stocks.

A senior Justice Department official said that anyone who currently has bump stocks, a firearm accessory that allows guns to fire as quickly as automatic machine guns, has 90 days to turn them into the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or destroy them, The Wall Street Journal reported. According to the official, tens of thousands of bump stocks are in America, but it is difficult to know an exact number.

According to the Journal, acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker signed and submitted a regulation banning the devices on Tuesday, and it is expected to be published this week.

The ATF in 2010 has approved the accessory, saying it was not like machine guns, which are banned under federal law. However, following a spate of deadly shootings, an increase in gun-control activism and calls for stricter gun laws, President Donald Trump called on the Justice Department to prohibit their use.

Justice Department officials on Tuesday reclassified bump stocks as illegal machine guns, because they “convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machine gun” by allowing “the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter,” the Journal reported.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Hypocrite: James Comey discussed sensitive FBI business on private email

Shocker, not. Seemed this was SOP for members of Obama’s administration.

From NY Post: Fired FBI chief James Comey used his private Gmail account hundreds of times to conduct government business — and at least seven of those messages were deemed so sensitive by the Justice Department that they declined to release them.

The former top G-man repeatedly claimed he only used his private account for “incidental” purposes and never for anything that was classified — and that appears to be true.

But Justice acknowledged in response to a Freedom of Information request that Comey and his chief of staff discussed government business on about 1,200 pages of messages, 156 of which were obtained by The Post.

The Cause of Action Institute, a conservative watchdog group, filed a Freedom of Information lawsuit for Comey’s Gmail correspondence involving his work for the bureau.

The Justice Department responded that there were an eye-popping 1,200 pages of messages for Comey and his chief of staff that met the criteria.

Justice released 156 of them but refused to hand over seven emails because they would “disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions.” And another 363 pages of emails were withheld because they discussed privileged agency communications or out of personal privacy concerns.

Cause of Action’s CEO slammed the former top G-man for minimizing the work he did using his private account. “Using private email to conduct official government business endangers transparency and accountability, and that is why we sued the Department of Justice,” said John Vecchione.

“We’re deeply concerned that the FBI withheld numerous emails citing FOIA’s law enforcement exemption. This runs counter to Comey’s statements that his use of email was incidental and never involved any sensitive matters.

In one email on Oct. 7, 2015, Comey seems to recognize the hypocrisy of the FBI investigating Hillary Clinton’s email practices while he’s exchanging FBI info on his own private account because his government account was down.

Two days after complaining that his “mobile is not sending emails,” Comey asked an aide that the testimony he was to deliver to the Senate be sent on his private account — calling it an “embarrassing” situation.

“He [aide] will need to send to personal email I suppose,” Comey wrote. “Embarrassing for us.”

Lisa Rosenberg, executive director of Open the Government, a nonpartisan coalition that advocates for government transparency, said Comey’s practice of using personal email while investigating Clinton reeks of a double standard.

“It’s just so transparently hypocritical to have one standard for a person you are investigating and an entirely different standard for yourself when you are the one who’s enforcing the law,” Rosenberg said.

The inspector general at Justice previously slammed Comey for using his personal account for FBI business, saying it was “inconsistent” with government policy. But Comey claimed his private email use was “incidental” and only used for word processing a “public speech or public email.” He said he wasn’t sending “anything remotely classified” on Gmail and that his use was “a totally different thing” from Clinton’s.

Experts told The Post there was a clear disconnect between what Comey said he was using his personal email for and what the Justice Department concluded he was doing after vetting his emails.

If the Justice Department accurately withheld his emails for the legal reasons cited, Comey would have been talking about substantive government business and active law enforcement matters. “He can’t have it both ways,” Rosenberg said.

“Either he used his personal email for things that were public or would be in the public domain, or he used it to discuss internal policies, investigations, etc. that might or might not be appropriately withheld under FOIA.”

A rep for Comey said he had no comment.

The 156 email pages that were released mark the first wave from Justice, with more expected soon.

The emails obtained by The Post span from 2013 to 2017, and many are heavily redacted.

In the messages, Comey discusses speeches and public statements with his aides and other routine business. There are also emails about pressing concerns like a threat of a mass shooting at a Chicago school in May 2016, changes on his protective detail and helping two American teachers with their visa processes in December 2013.

The emails show that Comey used personal email throughout his investigation into Clinton and even talked about it.

He emailed Sept. 30, 2015, to his then-Chief of Staff James Rybicki, a Fox News article link about Russian hackers trying to access Clinton’s server. “Need to be sure our colleagues across the street don’t think I actually said most of the stuff they attribute to me,” the email said.

Read the whole story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

DOJ begins criminal investigation of Pennsylvania pedophile priests

The sexual abuse of minors is not just immoral and a grave sin, it is a criminal offense.

In the wake of the August 14 release of the Pennsylvania Grand Jury’s report on the sexual abuse of more than 1,000 child victims by over 300 predator priests, and the coverup of those crimes by bishops, including Cardinal Donald Wuerl (who was Bishop of Pittsburgh from 1988 to 2006) — which is a conspiracy — some U.S. dioceses have either made public or announced they will make public the names of pedophile priests.

But not the Diocese of Fresno in California where the bishop dithers.

As reported by the Fresno Bee, October 17, 2018, Bishop Armando X. Ochoa is “working” with a review board to “determine” what information the Roman Catholic Diocese of Fresno “may” release about area priests accused of sexual misconduct, including “the possibility” of publicly identifying those priests by name.

Bishop Ochoa can dither all he wants, but soon it’ll no longer be his option.

On Oct. 18, the U.S. Department of Justice served subpoenas for “documentation and files” to 6 of Pennsylvania’s 8 dioceses in a state-wide move by federal authorities to investigate sexual abuse of minors by Catholic clergy.

A senior Church official told CNA the investigation concerns the federal crimes of transporting minors across state lines to abuse them, and the production or distribution of illegal (child) pornography, including electronically.

There are speculations that a federal investigation might focus on charges related to institutional cover-ups or conspiracy, perhaps seeking to build a case under the federal RICO laws meant for dealing with organized crime.

The news of a federal investigation in Pennsylvania raises the possibility that similar probes could also be launched in other states. In the meanwhile, state-led investigations into clerical sexual abuse are currently underway in several states including Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey, Missouri, and New York. (Catholic News Agency)

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0