Chris Wray: The “R” After His Name Stands for ‘Reprobate.’

HO HUM. ANOTHER DAY, another Congressional hearing (this time the House Judiciary Committee), another pol off the hook. Such was the case again on Wednesday when F.B.I. Director Christopher Wray (a Republican—sort of) took the hot seat.

Of course not all members were adversarial, like Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), whose name Zoe Lofgren may ring a bell from managing one of 45th President Donald Trump’s impeachments. Lofgren accused her G.O.P. colleagues of “engaging in conspiracy theories” to delegitimize the the Bureau “without any evidence,” a favorite blame-game among her ilk.

She’s wrong, of course, but why let the truth stand in the way of an untrue accusation? She just doesn’t remember the recent opinion in Missouri v. Biden or the findings from the Twitter Files that fly in what should be the very red faces of the bureaucrats who so enthusiastically censored any opposing views. Writing for The Federalist, Tristan Justice helpfully has provided Rep. Lofgren with the mounting pile of evidence to this effect, here. 

On questioning, Wray simply blew Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) off on the topic of Jan. 6th. He dismissed the notion that undercover agents were involved in any way by calling the allegation “ludicrous.” (There were, and it’s been well documented.)

The fact he refused to answer anything further may have told the Committee everything they needed to know. While it can be true the F.B.I. must, at times, keep matters of ‘humint’ under wraps, one would think that time has come and gone even though American citizens still sit in a D.C. jail awaiting trial. When Rep.  Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) asked Wray, “How many individuals that were FBI employees were in the Jan. 6th entry of the Capitol?” Wray replied, I really need to be careful here about were we have or have not used confidential human sources.” And so it went.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) inquired about the agency’s attempt to locate a suspected pipe bomber who had left devices at both the DNC and RNC Thomas Massie on Jan. 6th.  About two months ago, Massie and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) asked to be briefed on the F.B.I.’s failure to track the suspect’s vehicle down after it had been identified. Massie and Jordan had been tipped off by a whistleblower that the F.B.I. was derelict in its duty in failing to follow up on perfectly good leads. In a characteristic noncommital answer, Wray said he didn’t talk about ongoing investigations. Fair enough, perhaps, but as Massie pointed out, it’s been 900 days.

Based on a new interim report issued on Monday by the House Judiciary’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, it appears that the F.B.I. colluded with the Security Service of Ukrainian to flag social media posts of Americans for ‘partners’ in Silicon Valley to censor to further the government’s desired narrative. (More here.)

Wray’s response to inquiries into this was just that the Ukrainian Security Service had been a “longstanding good partner” of the F.B.I., despite the fact it has been found to be notoriously compromised by the Kremlin. (Russian collusion, anyone?) The full interim report is here.

Remarkably, Wray admitted to surveillance of Catholic parishes in the U.S. that prefer Latin masses. Apparently a F.B.I. Special Agent named Kyle Seraphin disclosed that the Richmond Division thought it could prevent ‘white supremacy’ by doing so. House Republicans wrote to Wray about this in April. Jordan asked Wray, “Do you think priests should be informants inside the church?”” Wray conceded the fact the F.B.I. may have engaged in such surveillance, but seemed to suggest it was all okay because it didn’t result in any investigative action.

Then there was the Bureau’s raid on and arrest of a ‘pro-life’ activist, ultimately acquitted. Wray said he wouldn’t “second-guess” the agents on the ground. Roy asked if that wasn’t exactly what his job was.

When Wray was asked if he thought the D.O.J. should rescind a memo it issued targeting concerned parents at school board meetings, Wray passed the buck to the A.G., but said the F.B.I. conducted itself properly. An interim staff report by House Republicans on the Judiciary Committee in March concluded there was no legitimate basis to have done this.

Wray also admitted the F.B.I. got Americans’ records from Bank of America without a warrant, and apparently, other banks, as a routine practice. Again, it was a whistleblower who revealed they had a “huge list” of Americans’ financial transactions on credit and debit cards used near the Capitol around Jan. 6th.

Massie asked about similar overly-broad records regarding gun purchases. Wray said he thought it was legal for business ‘partners’ to report or share info with the agency.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) read a transcript of Hunter Biden’s email threat to get paid that referenced Joe. Gaetz asked Wray if it wounded like a shake-down to him. Wray demurred in answering. When asked if he was protecting the Bidens, Wray said, “absolutely not.”

That is inconsistent with reports of at least two whistleblowers, one of whom is facing the wrath of the U.S. government. Dual American-Israeli citizen, Dr. Gal Luft, worked for CEFC, the same company as Hunter did, and did the same type of work. Hunter used the F.B.I. to leak classified data to C.C.P.-linked CEFC for kickbacks. Luft did not. Both violated Foreign Agents Registration Act. One was indicted this week. The other lives freely at the White House.

When a U.S. Attorney Obstructs Justice…

AT LEAST SO FAR, U.S. Attorney John Durham has been unresponsive to attorneys’ request to preserve evidence in the Seth Rich case. Rich was the Democratic National Committee staffer who was murdered in Washington, D.C. back in the summer of 2016. The evidence was slated to be destroyed by April 28th the attorneys learned on April 6th, according to a report by the Gateway Pundit, despite them having requested months ago it be preserved. 

Meanwhile, John Durham is refusing to respond to their request. 

Attorney Ty Clevenger sent a letter to Durham reiterating the request. It read: 

“On October 12, 2020, I sent a letter to you and then-Attorney General William Barr about the need to preserve evidence related to the origins of the “Russian collusion” investigation. Neither you nor anyone else at the Department of Justice responded to the letter.

“Yesterday I learned that the evidence is due to be destroyed not later than April 28, 2021 pursuant to a protective order. I urge you again to take steps to secure the evidence and prevent its destruction, in no small part because I believe the public has a right to know what it reveals. I cannot discuss the exact nature of the evidence, however, because of the restrictions in the protective order.

”If another lawyer informed me about the evidence that was relevant to one of my cases, I cannot imagine sticking my head in the sand the way you have. Like President Trump, I’ve come to suspect that you and Mr. Barr were acting in bad faith, and that you appeased President Trump with the pretense of a legitimate investigation even as you were ‘running out the clock.’ That said, please feel free to prove me wrong.”

Perhaps Durham is honoring this legitimate request and just hasn’t confirmed it with Clevenger, but at the glacial pace Durham is known to work, destroyed evidence could very well become a fait d’accompli, to the detriment of the Rich case. And given the lackadaisical attitude of today’s federal judiciary, one cannot expect anything more than a toothless scolding of the offending bar member. 

And yes, the feds have oodles of evidence in the case. Clevenger has already shown this. It’s thought that Rich leaked D.N.C. emails to WikiLeaks and was murdered for it. This murder was then labeled a robbery, even though nothing at all appeared stolen.

Veritas Shrugged.

The extradition trial of WikiLeaks’ founder, Julian Assange, continues via video-link (due to the coronavirus pandemic) in London with little press coverage in the U.S., ostensibly because there is a plethora of more important gaslighting for the American press to entertain. 

One can, however, get regular and detailed reports from Consortium News, as well as blog updates via RSS from Craig Murray, a former diplomat turned political activist, and whistleblower, beginning with Day One of the resumed trial on September 7th, here. Australian media obviously documents their citizen’s plight. Al Jazeera and RT News are covering the story, as well, often with syndicated opinion pieces penned by U.K.-based Australian journalist and documentary filmmaker, John Pilger.

Assange’s extradition hearing was originally expected to continue for another three weeks, but it got off to such a slow start, that timetable seems doubtful. Furthermore, neither party is likely to accept this judge’s ruling — the case will surely be appealed. Too much is at stake.

One of the most interesting developments in the case is a statement, admitted into evidence, from Jennifer Robinson, Assange’s barrister, claiming then-congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) and Trump associate Charles Johnson offered Assange a pardon from the new president if Assange would disclose the name(s) of who leaked Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks. These leaks were damaging to political opponent Hillary Clinton, and Rohrabacher allegedly wanted to clarify once and for all that they did not come from Russia or Russian hackers to help Trump win the 2016 election. 

The offer, Robinson said, was made at a meeting on August 15, 2017 at the Ecuadorean embassy in London where Assange had sought and received asylum. Unbeknownst to Assange, he was under investigation by a grand jury in the United States. Robinson said Rohrabacher claimed he was presenting Assange a “win-win situation.” Robinson added Assange did not name his source. 

A White House spokesman responded to Robinson’s statement by denying the president even knew Rohrabacher beyond his name, and stating Trump had never spoken to him about the subject of WikiLeaks or Assange, adding it was probably just another “never-ending hoax and total lie from the D.N.C.” U.S. intelligence agencies have steadfastly adhered to the notion that Russians were behind the D.N.C. leak in a puzzling effort to foil Clinton’s ambitions for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, though it never really made much sense to anyone who gave the idea even a modicum of thought. 

Presumably, because of Assange’s unwillingness to participate in the “win-win situation,” the full force of the U.S. government was marshaled against the publisher of some of the world’s — and America’s — most embarrassing secrets. Assange now faces extradition to face an 18-count indictment across the hostile pond in a high-stakes federal district court trial.

For his part, Trump faced immediate and intense scrutiny for alleged “collusion” with Russia to win the presidency, though he, his campaign, and administration, along with Russia itself, denied any such relationship. Even after a lengthy investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller, such “collusion” was never found, and the whole notion has been debunked in all quarters, except for those Deep Staters pathologically and perpetually hostile to the president for whatever reason(s). 

If this statement by Robinson was true, it would mean Trump had Rohrabacher approach Assange four months after Mueller’s appointment (and almost a year before the sealed indictment issued), unless, of course, the congressman was acting on his own initiative and without the president’s knowledge or consent. 

As Robinson said, Rohrabacher and Johnson wanted them “to believe they were acting on behalf of the president,” and that they would have an audience with him upon their return to discuss the prevention of Assange’s indictment and extradition with him. Apparently the two men claimed the situation was souring Russo-American relations and it would be in the best interests of both states, as well as the president’s, if the matter could be clarified once and for all. 

James Lewis Q.C. for the U.S. government neither confirmed nor denied such an approach was made. Rohrabacher, in a statement back in February, admitted to meeting Assange, but denied offering Assange anything or ever speaking to the president about it. He said he simply said he’d pass along any information to Trump that Assange was willing to provide and ask about a pardon at that point. 

The extradition trial continues while Assange gambles on his fate in high-security Belmarsh prison in London and Trump holds the cards, awaiting election results in the high-luxe White House in Washington, D.C. 

Just where freedom of the press and truthful reporting fits into the story is anyone’s guess.

F.U., Trump! I’d Rather Burn in Hell!

Riots. Threats. Vandalism. Arson. Explosions. Looting. Assaults. Shootings. Violence in a number of American cities continues unabated, presumably as planned. You see, there are people with a vested interest in having civil unrest and internal terrorism within the contiguous states so as to, they think, get Orange Man Bad out of White House Good. 

You might think it’s those pesky Russians, but Russians make better scapegoats than grizzly bears in the West today. There are instigators and provocateurs, such as the toxic George Soros and his well-financed Black Lives Matter and Antifa, but others are just puppets for an entitled and frightened political class here at home. One such example is Portland, OR’s mayor, Ted Wheeler, who, on Friday, released an open letter to the President telling him to, in essence, take his offer of help and shove it. The rude, factually-incorrect F.U. letter can be read here.

As he has with other hot spots, President Trump again offered the mayor help of federal law enforcement to help quell the violence engulfing the homes and businesses of innocent Portlanders. Wheeler seems to think it was a threat. Portland has been under siege by violent and destructive rioters for 94 nights and counting. Thus, Wheeler’s letter is nothing less than staggering.

Trump had sent federal law enforcement into Portland to secure federal buildings there, but left after assurances the property was secured. That turned out to be a false sense of security. Violence reemerged quickly.

Interestingly, but unsurprisingly, a number of the violent rioters seem to be from out-of-state. The latest unrest is in Kenosha, WI, which ultimately,  did take some help from Washington, D.C., but presidential hopeful Joe Biden was noticeably not talking about it at the convention. 

Super Tuesday: Senility or Socialism?

Super Tuesday was primary day for Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia.  American Samoa has its caucus that day even though as a territory, it will not participate in the general election in November.  

To Pardon or Not to Pardon, That Is the Question for Trump.

Variations of this Julian Assange/Dana Rohrabacher story have been circulating all week; history will judge the “truthiness” of them.

When Voir Dire Fails, Try, Try Again.

President Trump’s former informal advisor Roger Stone was convicted on November 15, 2019 for process crimes in the Trump-Russia-collusion hoax, to wit, lying to Congress, witness tampering, and obstructing the House investigation, after a jury trial. 

If he has his way, he’ll be retried.  

With the D.N.C., Tricks That Are Old Are New Again.

Image: credit.

Michael Moore is fit to be tied.

Other Democrats should be if they’re not.

The Democrat National Party is apparently anything but forward-looking and open to new ideas, let alone, new candidates.

I.G. Report on FISA Abuses is Done; Awaiting Classification Review

 

The Inspector General’s FISA abuse investigation is officially complete, pending classification review.

It’s taken a while, but at long last, the Department of Justice Inspector General’s report on FISA abuses by the Justice Department and FBI is done.  I.G. Michael Horowitz sent word to Attorney General William Barr on Thursday.

The Washington Examiner reports, “Horowitz said in a letter to congressional leaders that his team is in the ‘process of finalizing our report by providing a draft of our factual findings to the Department and FBI for classification determination and marking.’ Once redactions are made and the report is returned to the inspector general, Horowitz’s team will ‘proceed with our usual process for preparing final draft public and classified reports, and ensuring that appropriate reviews occur for accuracy and comment purposes.’”  

The investigation examined the FISA application and three renewals from October 2016 to surveil Carter Page, a Trump campaign advisor.  They relied on an unverified “dossier” with alleged dirt on candidate Donald Trump that was generated by former British spy Christopher Steele, who had been hired by opposition research firm Fusion GPS and funded by Hillary Clinton and the DNC. 

Unfortunately, this obvious bias and conflict of interest was kept hidden from the FISA court, who made decisions on erroneous or misleading informmation.  These FISA filings were approved by the  top echelon at the FBI and Justice Department.  This would include former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein (who appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller to be special counsel a month earlier), among others.

In his letter, Horowitz stated, “As I noted in my June correspondence to you, my direction to our team has been to follow the evidence wherever it leads and to complete the review as quickly as possible. Consistent with this guidance, the team has reviewed over one million records and conducted over 100 interviews, including several of witnesses who only recently agreed to be interviewed.”

Hopefully the classification process will not be dilatory due to political concerns from the left.  This needs to be made public, post haste.

 

The Russian Federation Will Sure Sleep Easier Tonight.

In just another of the Democrats’ desperate ploys to de-legitimize the President, the DNC had filed suit against the Trump campaign last year for its alleged complicity in Russian “hacking” in the 2016 election in federal district court.

And finally on August 1st, it was dismissed by Judge John Koeltl, a Clinton appointee.

Styled “Democratic National Committee v. The Russian Federation et al.” in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the defendants
included the Trump campaign, Donald Trump, Jr., Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, George Papadopolous, Richard Gates, Roger Stone, the Russian Federation, various Russians, Joseph Mifsud, WikiLeaks, and Julian Assange.

At issue was the DNC’s assertion that the Russian Federation hacked the DNC computers and stole its emails in the 2016 campaign, and the other defendants were somehow tangentially involved.

For starters, the Russian Federation is protected from suit by sovereign immunity. The remaining defendants’ involvement the judge found to be “entirely divorced from the facts.” Thus, he granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In other words, failure to state a cause of action. A copy of his order can be read here. He clearly wasn’t impressed.

Indeed.

The judge gave the plaintiff two bites at the apple in order to amend the complaint accordingly, but even the two shinier apples were still rotten to the core and have now been tossed.

Good riddance.

This was an attempt to use the judicial system as a vehicle for intimidation and public relations. Plaintiff’s counsel probably should be sanctioned for even bringing it, although admittedly, that’s a drastic response courts usually aren’t keen on issuing.