This report by Sundance at The Conservative Treehouse lays it out perfectly. First, look at the above picture – “[T]his is the image the people running the White House presented to the world.” Next, watch the video clip below:
Aside from the remarkable Tubal Cain, I mean “Two Ball” chin Biden is newly sporting, along with the modern day equivalent of a powder blue 1970s leisure suit which may or may not serve as the resident’s pajamas, the low energy, stumbling, bumbling, cognitively impaired, and barely audible Biden mumbles his way through a statement about the savage slaughter of innocent civilians in Israel. He’s aboard Air Force One, returning from a mandatory meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu. Note that Secretry of State Anthony Blinken is standing in the shadows behind Biden in this cringeworthy moment of elder abuse.
While one may argue about whether this is Biden #1, #2, or #3, this video clip perfectly exhibits the portrayal of our national weakness on the world stage, and should serve as a reminder that stolen elections have consequences. Stated differently, the fact that we, as a people, allowed the 2020 election to be stolen has consequences to world events.
It’s not just bad, but worse than you think.
From the Conservative Treehouse article, here is the most important aspect that most people are failing to realize – aptly piinted out by Sundance:
“The people using the disposable one-term Biden want a “broader regional conflict,” and the people in the region like Abdullah, Sisi and MbS are very clear-eyed on who is actually in control.
There is an alignment of interests within the goals of the ideologues and the goals of the WEF multinationals.
The Muslim Brotherhood ideology and the WEF financial interests are in alignment, and the Zookeepers are well aware.
Israel has never been more at risk.”
Sundance, The Conservative Treehouse [Emphasis mine]
Read the linked article and note the origins of the Hamas attack on Israel to understand the dynamics that are setting the stage not just for a regional war, but for a World War. It’s comiing, compliments of the neocons and neo-Liberals who bow at the alter of globalism.
By Douglas J. Hagmann
Robert Mueller was precisely the right person for the job of Special Counsel. Just as his appointment was not by accident, neither was his selection. It was necessary and calculated, but for all of the wrong reasons. His task was not to investigate but to obfuscate. His job was to deflect and divert American’s attention away from the actual criminals and criminality of not just the last eight years, but for the previous generation.
Moreover, he had the entire resources of the federal government at his disposal and used them with ruthless efficiency as he had done throughout his career.
A stroke of his pen could upend and potentially destroy the lives of anyone in his sights. Just ask my friend Dr. Jerome Corsi, or Roger Stone, with whom I’ve been acquainted and worked or General Michael Flynn. Their lives have been forever changed by his insidious and unnecessary tactics of Deep State sanctioned terrorism under the guise of a legitimate investigation.
It was never a legitimate investigation. It was political payback and harassment in spades ordered by the upper echelon of a rogue “permanent state.” Robert Mueller was just their errand boy.
I don’t recall exactly how I became acquainted with Louisiana State Senator John Milkovich, but the more I got to know him the more I liked him, despite us never meeting face to face. I found myself agreeing with his well-researched positions on numerous Constitutional issues, from the positions of our Founding Fathers to the creation of this massive surveillance state under which we now live. The fingerprints of Robert Mueller can be found all over the unconstitutional attacks on our personal freedoms if only people will do the research as John Milkovich has done.
Even more interesting is that John Milkovich is a registered Democrat holding the 38th Congressional seat in his home state of Louisiana. Meanwhile, I’m a registered Republican with a general disdain of all politicians of all stripes. As we’ve seen for some time now, however, the Republican-Democrat designation is itself a false and misleading paradigm.
It is at this juncture that I suspect I connected with John Milkovich, as he understands that truth is not necessarily subjective to political party affiliations or designations on political forms. We’ve seen countless examples of this by members of both political parties. Despite the opposing political labels, I suspect that my idea for America is much more aligned with Senator Milkovich than Paul Ryan, for example. So too is our quest to seek the truth of a matter.
There is an epic disconnect between the Robert Mueller described by the Mass Media and Officialdom as a model of public propriety, and the Robert Mueller documented by independent researchers; a chronic Collaborator, with a career characterized by cover-ups, corruption and unconscionable conduct – an ever-willing instrument of Deep State dissimulation.” – John Milkovich, Louisiana State Senator; Robert Mueller, Errand Boy For The New World Order
Although the final report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller has not been made publicly available, Attorney General William Barr provided a concise four-page summary of its contents to members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on March 24, 2019. On its face, this executive summary is sufficient to conclude that neither President Trump nor any member of his staff were compromised by any foreign powers before, during or after the 2016 US Presidential election.
It should be therefore a natural reaction, particularly for those who put their full faith and confidence in Robert Mueller’s credibility, integrity and investigative abilities to breathe a sigh of relief upon learning of his findings. Instead, we are witnessing the exact opposite reaction from the Democratic Socialists. In a convoluted twist of logic, they are actually upset by the results that our President is indeed loyal to the United States and our best interests.
Regardless of the report itself, there is something much deeper and far more profound that must be addressed. It exists at the very heart of a considerably greater issue that few are discussing, which is the impetus for the creation of the Special Counsel investigation and the selection of Robert Mueller. It is here where we will find the answers to questions that need to be asked and answers that must be provided and memorialized.
Understanding the role of Robert Mueller in his position as Special Counsel must be viewed through the investigative lens of John Milkovich. Senator Milkovich provides the vital background information necessary to understand why Robert Mueller was selected for this position.
For those reasons, it was an honor to have Senator John Milkovich join The Hagmann Report on Friday, March 29, 2019.
Watch/Listen to the interview HERE.
· His book is available through his website HERE or on Amazon.
By Peter Barry Chowka
Robert Francis (aka Beto) O’Rourke finally – as expected – officially declared that he is running for President.
Early in the morning of Thursday, March 14, O’Rourke issued a 3-minute video with his wife holding his hand as she sat at his side on a comfy couch as he declared his intention to challenge President Trump for the nation’s top job.
O’Rourke was an obscure, inconsequential, three-term member of Congress from El Paso, Texas. He ran for a U.S. Senate seat in 2018 against incumbent Sen. Ted Cruz and lost by three points. His ability to supposedly come across as “authentic,” and his ability to raise $80 million for his race against Cruz, put him on the left wing media’s map as a potential contender for the 2020 presidential race. Beto brings to mind what George Burns is reported to have said: “Sincerity – if you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”
O’Rouke’s “look” – his appearance and affect – call to mind the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy. In fact, O’Rourke looks like he could easily transition to acting and playing Robert F. Kennedy in a TV movie.
And, in terms of icing on the cake, his birth name is Robert Francis O’Rourke. Robert Kennedy’s was Robert FrancisKennedy.
O’Rourke also reminds me of Barack Hussein (aka Barry Sotero) Obama: Another empty suit cut-out of limited achievement who nonetheless could be made to appeal to the dumbed down electorate as an “authentic,” hipster candidate. In other words, he might be a “White Obama.”
One of the most irksome comments in O’Rourke’s announcement video was this:
“If immigration is a problem, it’s the best possible problem for this country to have.”
Shortly before O’Rourke’s video announcement went online, I was watching Fox News, which reported on the latest murder of an American woman allegedly after a home invasion by an illegal immigrant – a violent, feral gang member – who had been arrested multiple times for violent crimes after invading the USA but was never turned over to ICE for deportation because of California’s sick Sanctuary State policy.
Thomas Lifson, the founder, publisher, and editor of American Thinker, nailed O’Rourke in his article that was published shortly after O’Rourke’s announcement of his candidacy and which made use of my photo assembly of RFK and Beto. Highly recommended.
Peter Barry Chowka writes about politics, media, popular culture, and health care for American Thinker and other publications. Peter’s new Web site is http://peter.media. Follow him on Twitter at @pchowka.
By Douglas J. Hagmann
I know Dr. Jerome Corsi personally and can assure readers that he is NOT suicidal. Please note the emphasis on the “NOT.” Oh, and neither am I. It’s sad that in America today such a “disclaimer” is advisable, even if it is done somewhat tongue-in-cheek (or perhaps not). Considering the statistical anomalies surrounding the mortality rates of whistleblowers, witnesses and others related to certain members of the “Deep State” and their operatives, it just seemed appropriate to write.
Now that the obligatory formalities are complete, I wish to share with you a story of political persecution in America taking place in real time by the front-line offense of the Deep State or the permanent bureaucracy doing the dirty work of the seemingly untouchable elite.
Earlier this year and only a few short months before Special Counsel Robert Mueller began his campaign of harassment and intimidation against my friend and professional colleague Dr. Jerome Corsi, we shared breakfast at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. We spoke about a number of things, including the ongoing assault against President Donald Trump by what is commonly referenced as the “Deep State.”
Our breakfast conversation was sobering as we discussed a number of things, including his most recent book, Killing The Deep State, and the blowback it was causing.
Dr. Corsi is a Harvard educated Ph.D., a well-known investigative journalist and a prolific author. He has authored 20 books since 2004, including two New York Times bestsellers. It is interesting to note that the information contained in one book in particular, written by Dr. Corsi and published on May 17, 2011 titled Where’s The Birth Certificate? would apparently become relevant to the questioning he was forced to endure by Aaaron Zelinsky, one of Robert Mueller’s “angry Democrats” and not coincidentally, a former assistant US attorney under Rod Rosenstein. Also lacking in coincidence, perhaps, is that Zelinsky is a staunch Democrat and a frequent contributor to the Leftist publication Huffington Post.
In addition to Aaron Zelinsky, Dr. Corsi was subjected to interrogation, ridicule and was even mocked as detailed in a recent hit piece published in The Rolling Stone by Jeannie Rhee, a former Deputy Attorney General under Obama and a die-hard Hillary Clinton supporter. Even more disturbing and ironic is that Rhee was Hillary Clinton’s lawyer just three years ago, representing her in her legal e-mail troubles.
During our time together, we discussed censorship by the big tech giants of conservative truthtellers, as well as his thoughts about what might be on the horizon for anyone daring enough to take on the Democratic-Socialists embedded inside American government.
At that time, I shared my concern about the blowback he was experiencing, which I posited was payback for not just his latest book, but his years of shining the searing spotlight of truth on many high-profile denizens of the DC swamp. He said nothing to suggest that he disagreed. One thing that seemed certain during our time together is that much greater political payback seemed to be in the offing. And it was. In spades.
Dr. Corsi had already been under attack for what he had already accomplished, exposing the criminality of the members of the permanent state who protect their own, regardless of political party. The public will likely never know the price he’s already paid for his investigative tenacity, for he is too much of a gentleman to tell. Those who know him and who are familiar with the tactics of the Deep State, however, know the price is high and the toll it takes, personally and professionally.
During our breakfast, I wanted to share some information with Dr. Corsi that resided on my cellular telephone I carried at the time. Eric “The Tech” previously set up one of my email accounts on the device, and I struggled to find the information as I had over 100,000 emails—many unopened. I told to Dr. Corsi that I only carried a cell phone when out of town and was not very proficient in its use. More importantly, I complained that I would never be able to get though all of those emails and showed him my phone with the ominous six-digit number in red.
I showed Dr. Corsi the intimidating number clearly visible on my screen. He looked at my phone, shook his head and said that he once had the same problem. He advised me to do what he had done—delete them and start over. “You’ll never get through all of those,” he stated. “You’ve got to start over. They’ll [the large number of emails] slow down your system. That’s what I had to do.”
I never thought that his innocuous and practical advice, based on his own experience, would later be twisted by the Mueller inquisition team and some in the corporate media to suggest that he engaged in some type of nefarious tactic to destroy evidence. For the record, he never insisted that any emails he deleted were about yoga or upcoming family nuptials.
Despite being strapped for time, Dr. Corsi was kind enough to show me and Hagmann Report Production Manager Eric “The Tech” around the historical National Press Club, occasionally musing about the genuine and legendary journalists of years past, the venue’s rich history and its evolving role in American politics. He did so with a sense of professional pride. Times have certainly changed.
Before going our separate ways, I again congratulated him on the popularity of his book, suggesting that it was the Magnum Opus of his works. I chided him about putting himself “out there” as a target himself by that book in particular. Dr. Corsi detailed the brazen political conflicts of Robert Mueller and the Special Counsel team of prosecutors, from the unresolved Uranium One criminal conspiracy to the larger issue of the all-out war being waged against President Trump by the Marxist-Stalinist-Maoist Left inside the U.S., the complicit members of the #NeverTrump movement on both sides of the political divide and the #FakeNews media.
At that time, I had no idea just how difficult things would become for Dr. Corsi.
Just three days before his 72nd birthday this year, Dr. Jerome Corsi was subpoenaed by the Mueller Special Counsel. According to published reports, the Special Counsel was searching for emails that would link Dr. Corsi to Julian Assange and Roger Stone that somehow affected the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election in favor of President Trump.
As most Americans know, Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel by Rod Rosenstein to investigate alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 Presidential election. The former FBI Director assumed that role on May 17, 2017 and immediately assembled his team of 18 attorneys, occasionally referred to as “angry Democrats” by President Trump. The political and ideological conflicts of the Muller team—and Mueller himself – to act as an objective body are undeniable to everyone except the Left.
So how is it possible that Dr. Jerome Corsi, who has never been to Russia, has never knowingly or wittingly been in contact with any Russian spy, operative or agent, has never had any contact with Julian Assange of Wikileaks was subpoenaed by “Team Mueller?” More importantly, how is it possible that this well-respected and lifelong law-abiding 72-year-old Harvard educated Ph.D. is suddenly being accused of lying under oath to federal investigators?
The short answer is expertly illustrated in yet another book by Ms. Sidney Powell titled Licensed To Lie, Exposing Corruption In The Department of Justice. Although former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell and her book are unrelated to Dr. Corsi or his current situation, she is the person credited with originating the phrase “creeps on a mission” as it refers to Robert Mueller, a prosecutor accused of “mission creep” by far exceeding his investigative mandate and the Machiavellian tactics used against his targets. Her book details a disturbing pattern of persecution rather than prosecution by some of the same DoJ officials all too familiar to us.
A slightly longer answer to the question about how Dr. Corsi became Robert Mueller’s latest political punching bag stems from a simple email that turned into a relatively short email thread. The initial email was sent by political strategist Roger Stone to Dr. Corsi on or about July 25, 2016 pertaining to Julian Assange of Wikileaks and the breach of the DNC server, including Clinton and Clinton Foundations related emails.
Upon learning that Roger Stone queried Dr. Corsi about Wikileaks possession of the DNC emails, Dr. Corsi was contacted by the Special Counsel about his knowledge of the DNC emails, including and especially emails to and from Hillary Clinton confidante and campaign manager John Podesta.
The email from Roger Stone to Dr. Corsi was over two-years old when Mueller’s prosecutors confronted Dr. Corsi about it, was one of many thousands of emails he voluntarily provided to the Special Counsel. Despite deleting this and countless other emails long-ago to free up his system and retire the computer that had broken down, he assisted in retrieving the emails from the “time capsule” he used as a back-up.
Clearly, Dr. Corsi was willing to cooperate as he had nothing to hide.
In fact, rather than immediately using Bleach-Bit to erase his data or using a hammer to smash his devices, he willingly provided investigators with his laptop computer, back-up “time machine” hard drive that archived all of his computer activity dating back to 2015, as well as his cellphone. He also gave investigators all of his usernames and passwords to all of his email and social media accounts, and his Verizon cell and text message accounts. Dr. Corsi even assisted the FBI and Special Counsel investigators in downloading his emails and postings.
After providing his hardware and communications, he began speaking with investigators on or about September 18, 2018. His cooperation sparked an inquisition that lasted some 40 hours over the span of two months. It involved three of Mueller’s top prosecutors and an army of FBI agents, up to nine government officials at a time, who questioned Dr. Corsi with his attorney, David Gray.
On the very first day of questioning and without the ability (or given the opportunity) to reference his 2016 communications, Dr. Corsi asserts that he simply forgot about the email exchange in question. When given the opportunity to review the correspondence, he immediately corrected the record with the team of prosecutors. They were seemingly satisfied until Dr. Corsi could not legitimately give them what they really wanted—a connection between the DNC server breach, Wikileaks, Roger Stone, anyone within the Donald Trump campaign, and ultimately President Donald Trump.
It was an investigation in search of a crime—any crime—that would serve to destroy a duly elected President, and Dr. Corsi suddenly found himself in the middle of it.
When the prosecutors realized that Dr. Corsi had nothing of value to provide, things got uglier. They were no longer satisfied with his explanation that he simply forgot the two-year-old email exchange and threatened him with felony perjury charges and potentially a lengthy prison sentence. In fact, a prison sentence that could amount to life in prison considering his age and overall health, the latter obviously impacted by the weight of unchecked government harassment.
He could, however, make his life much easier by signing a plea deal admitting that he lied under oath to investigators. Investigators made it clear to Dr. Corsi that by refusing to capitulate and plead to a lie, he was facing potential felony charges, financial ruin to the point of personal bankruptcy and imprisonment. Stated differently, Special Counsel Mueller and his crew of Clinton confidantes and Deep State hacks were serving up a heaping helping of political payback for Dr. Corsi’s decades-long work of exposing Deep State corruption.
It should also be noted that an ancillary issue had arisen during the inquisition which Dr. Corsi described as worthy of the Gestapo or KGB. During the course of his investigation of the Wikileaks-DNC-Podesta matter, Dr. Corsi had determined that Assange was withholding the emails to and from John Podesta that Corsi reasoned would be released at a more strategic time—in late October 2016. It was a deduction based on his extensive research and investigation, a fact that Mueller’s top investigators, including and especially Clinton friend Jeannie Rhee, found too bitter a pill to swallow.
It was here that Dr. Corsi’s research and investigative acumen and arguably, his Christian faith was openly mocked. As previously noted, an article published by The Rolling Stone on November 29, 2018 titled Jerome Corsi Doesn’t Understand Why Mueller Isn’t Accepting His ‘Divine Intervention’ Defense ridiculed Dr. Corsi for using his decades-long experience in investigative journalism to outsmart and overshadow Mueller’s “best.”
It became obvious to Dr. Corsi that he was the latest in the crosshairs of a desperate, rogue and out-of-control Special Counsel that is “completely rigged and politically driven.” Despite the extreme anguish to himself and his family, the incessant ridicule by a complicit media, and facing financial ruin and the possibility of spending the rest of his life in prison because he “will not plead to a lie,” Dr. Corsi is refusing to back down.
In fact, Dr. Corsi is going on the offensive. He’s filing charges against the Special Counsel and has documented the hell he’s endured by the permanent state’s weaponized Department of “Justice” in a forthcoming book, Silent No More: How I Became a Political Prisoner of Mueller’s “Witch Hunt.”
“Rather than conducting an honest investigation, Mueller’s Special Prosecutors reinforced a prefabricated narrative aiming to charge President Trump with Treason.” His book “exposes the inner workings of this governmental escapade, and clearly states why Mueller has no case against the President. Dr. Corsi creates a compelling case indicating that the entire matter is an investigation in search of a crime—to force lying testimony from witnesses if that’s what it takes to achieve Deep State political objectives.”
In recent televised interviews, Dr. Corsi explains the events in exquisite detail to Tucker Carlson:
On Sean Hannity:
And on NBC:
It is abundantly clear that the Mueller Special Counsel are, to cite former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell, indeed “creeps on a mission.”
As the pushback by Dr. Corsi intensifies and more people are awakened to the truth through his efforts, remember that he is not prone to suicide.
By Peter Barry Chowka
In the opening monologue of her weekly Fox News program Justice w/ Judge Jeanine on Saturday evening, Jeanine Pirro offered one of the more concise, on target, and passionate analyses of the Inspector General’s Report on the DOJ and the FBI that I have heard or read. It hit the nail on the head in describing the report as a “whitewash” and in putting it in the broader context of the ongoing power of the Deep State to protect the guilty.
Pirro is a former New York state judge, prosecutor, and Republican politician. After retiring from her legal career, she has emerged as one of the most articulate and successful cable news hosts and analysts. Since January 2011, she has hosted Justice w/ Judge Jeanine on the Fox News Channel on Saturdays from 9-10 P.M. E.T./P.T. The program is regularly the highest-rated cable news program on Saturdays.
Two days after the release of the IG report, this is some of what Pirro had to say in her opening statement (transcribed by the author):
I’m worried. I’m really worried. This report is nothing more than a whitewash of the Deep State by the Deep State itself. There are great people in the FBI, men and women, and I have had the honor of working with them. But they’re embarrassed because they know how bad Comey and company destroyed America’s confidence in that esteemed FBI.
And there are great people in government, many of whom you have seen on this show. Congressmen Mark DeSantis, Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, Devin Nunes, Lee Zeldin, Matt Gaetz, Andy Biggs and Senators Lindsey Graham, Ron Johnson, and Chuck Grassley. These people are fighting the Deep State as obstructionist Democrats like Pelosi, Schumer, and Schiff stare into the cameras and turn truth on its head.
They’re not real Democrats – they’re demon rats. That’s what I said – demon rats. And until the Republicans learn to fight like they do, and go with a narrative that no one veers from, they [the Democrats] and socialism will run amok in this country.
We need people in Washington who believe in truth and justice and are not offended by the term “law and order.” And [who] believe in consequences. This is not a banana republic. This is the United States of America with a justice system that needs to be protected. And it’s time for those people who are not interested in supporting President Trump to get out of his way. And that means you, Jeff Sessions. It’s time for you to put on your big-boy pants and start acting like the AG. And if you can’t get on board with this president, then get the hell out of his way.
And let me be clear to all of you critics: I’m not looking for that job. I’m an ordinary American who was brought up to believe in truth and justice. And like thousands and hundreds of thousands of men and women in law enforcement, we’re just damned embarrassed and hang our heads in shame with the likes of Comey and his cabal as well as the impotent Inspector General’s report which is nothing more than proof the Deep State is alive and well in Washington, D.C.
Pirro’s entire 10-minute opening statement monologue on June 16 can be watched here courtesy of Fox News. A transcript of Pirro’s June 16 program including her entire opening monologue can be viewed here.
Peter Barry Chowka is a veteran reporter and analyst of news on national politics, media, and popular culture. He is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. Follow Peter on Twitter at @pchowka.
By Peter Barry Chowka
On Special Report with Bret Baier on Thursday evening at 6 PM ET, House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) were interviewed by Bret Baier about their reaction to the Inspector General’s report on the FBI that was finally released earlier on Thursday. Shortly after the broadcast ended, Fox News provided a transcript of the segment.
The video of the Gowdy – Goodlatte – Baier interview can be watched here.
BRET BAIER, FOX NEWS HOST: Let’s get reaction now from the chairmen of two major House committees looking into all of this. Trey Gowdy is chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and Bob Goodlatte chairs the House Judiciary Committee.
Gentlemen, thanks for being here.
Chairman Gowdy, first to you. Just of broad overview, what strikes you about this report? What hits you when you look at the 568 pages?
REP. TREY GOWDY (R-SC), CHAIRMAN, HOUSE OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE: Just what a dark day it is for the FBI and the DOJ, two institutions of our country desperately needs and we desperately have to be able to have confidence in them. And this level of bias and animus, not only did they want to stop the Trump campaign, he wanted to stop the Trump presidency. This is an FBI —
BAIER: You’re talking about Peter Strzok.
GOWDY: Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who was on Hillary Clinton’s investigation and arguably the lead Russia investigator not only wanted to stop his campaign, but once he wanted, got on the Mueller probe because he wanted to impeach him. That is a level of animus and bias that everyone should reject.
And, Chris Wray, I’m sorry, you’re wrong. Chris, there are consequences. The consequences are that your fellow citizens question whether or not they can have confidence in the world’s premier law enforcement agency and that’s coming from someone who has defended them a lot throughout his career. This was a bitterly disappointing report.
BAIER: Chairman Goodlatte?
REP. BOB GOODLATTE (R-VA), CHAIRMAN, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well, first of all, this report shows that there was special treatment given to Hillary Clinton in the investigation of her case. There is not a standard procedures followed in investigating her, and there was special treatment given. There is no doubt that this was not a proper process and the report shows time and time again how Director Comey and others made mistakes, errors in judgment, or deliberate. People can draw their own conclusions. But it was on improperly handled.
And as Trey said, you then put that up against how the investigation has been handled into the so-called Trump-Russia collusion, and you have contrast that is shocking in terms of how they handled one presidential campaign compared to another. It’s got to be investigated further, changes have to be made. I will compliment Director Wray on some of the personnel changes that have been made, I will compliment him on say that there are some sobering lessons learned from this. We need to see changes made so that in 2020, we don’t see another presidential campaign handled like this.
BAIER: So, when you hear Republicans and people that have been looking into this and say, this 568 pages is — there is just not a lot they are, or that Horowitz left something on the table, how do you respond to that?
GOODLATTE: This is a very thorough investigation. He takes minutia and examines each piece carefully, draws his conclusions, and I commend him. I think it’s a well-done report.
Now, I never expected him to find every single thing as some critics have said, but he did find all kinds of irregularities there. When you couple that with the Strzok page text, including this new one that has come out recently where part of it was redacted, by the way, and we only recently learned the whole sentence about how —
BAIER: The second part —
GOODBLATTE: — he was going to stop Donald Trump from being president of the United States. That is improper for the FBI. And quite frankly, this is the world’s premier law enforcement organization and it’s besmirching the reputation of tens of thousands of brave men and women who keep us safe, prevent terrorist attacks and fight crime every single day. And a handful of people in the hierarchy of the organizations have caused serious damage.
BAIER: All right. Let’s put up the August 8th, 2016, that is the one where Page says Trump is never going to be president, right? Right? And Strzok texts back, that part was redacted in the documents you received. No, no, he’s not. We’ll stop it.
Here’s another part that we believe. November 22nd, 2016, FBI attorney one, isn’t making rethink your commitment to the Trump administration? I think that’s Lisa Page. Attorney two, hell no, viva le resistance. And we believe that’s Peter Strzok.
Let me play this sound bite, Congressman Gowdy, from Jim Comey, in his interview here in SPECIAL REPORT. I asked about the Strzok-Page texts, and if he knew now what he knew then, what he would do.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: I’d have removed both of them from any contact with significant investigations —
BAIER: So, shouldn’t their work —
COMEY: — including, including those involving anybody connected to President Trump, but beyond that. It’s such poor judgment.
BAIER: So, shouldn’t their work product then be questioned?
COMEY: Sure, it’s a reasonable to ask. They were bad-mouthing everybody, including candidate Trump.
BAIER: So, Peter Strzok interviews Hillary Clinton, deals with the Bleach Bit and of the server, and Cheryl Mills, all of that, interviews Michael Flynn and he’s integral in this whole case.
COMEY: But he’s one of many other people involved in all the things you just ticked off. When I saw the text, I was deeply disappointed in them, but I never saw any bias.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BAIER: Any bias.
GOWDY: Well, he’s not reading the same texts I’m reading. I mean, Peter Strzok said that the vote should be 100 million to zero. He can’t think of a single solitary American that should vote for Donald Trump to be president. He said he’ll stop it as a candidate. He talked about impeachment once he won.
Actually, Director Comey unwittingly just prove the point of the question you asked him on follow-up. Would you have kept him on investigation had you known what you know now? And he said no. OK, why not?
Because bias is that insidious, that is that pervasive. It colors your ability to do what we need the FBI to do, which is to be fair and fact-centric. So, of course, you’re going to fire him the day you learn.
In my head, I go back. When did you start working on the case? That’s when you should have been fired.
So, whatever he did on either of these investigations, Bret, it has to be viewed through the prism that he can’t think of a single solitary person that should vote for this man to be president.
BAIER: So, Strzok’s attorney says this was taken out of context. It didn’t affect his decisions. Some people say, what happens in the context of those texts, did they know something about the Russia information, and that’s what they are referring to? Do you think that this changes at all in context, or in a vacuum, it’s just damning?
GOWDY: It changes a lot going forward, because I don’t know how my fellow citizens are going to be able to have confidence — I mean, Russia did something to our country in 2016. It was serious, it deserved to be investigated and it deserved to be investigated by a fair FBI agent who was not talking about impeaching the person that he was investigating.
His lawyer is just wrong, that by a state impact something. He was so hyper-focused on Trump that he ignored at the Weiner-Abedin emails and it caused Jim Comey to have to send a letter a month later than he should have sent it.
The other point, Bret, is this: why is it our job to prove that Strzok’s is biased in his decision-making? I got a better idea, Strzok, you come before Congress, you come before the American public and prove to us that your manifest animus towards Donald Trump did not affect your decision.
BAIER: Let me ask one more question. Hold on one second. OK, go ahead.
GOODLATTE: But Trey said — because Trey is exactly right, we have been requesting that he be produced as a witness for quite some time. And if that agreement is not reached, we will shortly issue a subpoena for him to appear.
BAIER: Speaking of that, there are also documents that you want that you still haven’t received. I mean, this process is going on —
GOODLATTE: We have set up a better process. We’re making progress. We actually have a room down at the Department of Justice where they are producing tens of thousands of documents and are investigators are producing those, identifying the ones that we want produced. They are producing them.
So, we’re making progress in that regard, but we also have other documents they have not produced and that we are making progress on that. We have meetings coming up shortly on how to get those additional documents requested, produced. It’s — the American people have a right to know. The Congress is their representatives, these documents have to be produced. There is no reason not to produce them.
BAIER: Chairman Gowdy, the last time you talked about the FBI inner workings, it was about this allegation of spygate and all of that. You said at the time, that you thought that the president and others thought the FBI was doing what he was supposed to be doing. In the context of this, and you are animated about what you’re learning out of this I.G. report.
Does it change your perspective of how this is all progress even when it comes to the Russia investigation?
GOWDY: Bret, I’m animated because Russia tried to undermine the fundamentals of our democracy in 2016. And I think anyone who heard what any law enforcement agency heard in summer of 2016, every one of my fellow citizens would say, you go find out whether that’s true or not. You go find out whether or not a foreign, hostile country is going to mess with our election.
What my fellow citizens also expect is for the agent that does the follow-up to be free of taint and bias, like 99 percent of the FBI agents are. It just so happens that the one picked to follow up and lead the Russian investigation has manifest animus and can think of a single person to vote for Donald Trump. So, those two are inextricably intertwined.
Most of my fellow citizens would say, yes, I want to know what Russia was doing to us in 2016, but also want the person that’s finding out, is investigating it to be free of bias and free of taint.
BAIER: And they would say, Mueller, fire that guy.
GOWDY: And he did fire him. And God only knows what damage he was done before Mueller fired him. This is what’s so pervasive about bias, Bret, it doesn’t matter what Mueller comes up with. Some people are going to believe that Strzok’s level of animus was so high that you can’t remove the taint. That’s why bias is so destructive in a justice system.
BAIER: Chairman Goodlatte, this is what I hear, on email, on Twitter, on Facebook, they hear us reporting on these 568 pages and they have been waiting for months and months. And they hear what is coming out of it, who is going to pay for something that was done wrong in their mind. And investigation after investigation, it seems like it comes to a head and then nothing happens.
GOODLATTE: Absolutely. Hundreds of classified emails, or handled improperly in violation of the law, and no one has been held accountable in that regard. Now, we see that the whole process of that investigation was handled with extreme bias and a whole host of questionable actions, and people need to be held accountable. Some of those people are no longer employed at the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice, that’s a good thing.
But we’re going to continue to follow through until we’re sure that changes have been made so that these things can’t occur in the future and we don’t have a 2020 that looks anything at all like 2016 in terms of this kind of mishandling of investigations of the highest level of importance, when you’re talking about the two candidates for president of the United States.
So, Trey and I are going to have a joint hearing next Tuesday where we’ll have the inspector general and we’ll be able to go into this 560-page report and ask manifold questions. The following week, we have already requested the deputy attorney general of the United States, Mr. Rosenstein, and the FBI Director Christopher Wray to come forward and talk to us and answer our questions based upon that report.
BAIER: All right. Other quick nuggets here, in this I.G. report, it says definitively that Hillary Clinton’s emails were hacked by foreign actors of some kind.
GOWDY: Let me tell you why that’s important, because when —
BAIER: Despite all the denials. I mean, we went through all of the stages that it wasn’t happening.
GOWDY: Well, we got a little window into that when Jim Comey — one of Jim Comey’s original memo drafts had that language in there and it was edited out. Let me tell you why it’s important. There are two reasons they cite for not prosecuting Hillary Clinton. Number one, that she didn’t have specific general intent, and number two, she didn’t expose it to foreign actors.
We now know one of those reasons is bogus. And had they done a good job of interviewing her, had they not made up their mind six weeks before they went to interview her, perhaps I could have found evidence of an intent to commit a crime.
But they didn’t look for it. They made up their mind before they ever interviewed her about, but — that is really important that Horowitz, and others, some of our colleagues that unlocked the fact that those emails were exposed to foreign actors.
BAIER: Most of the rank-and-file FBI agents thought, if I did this, I’d be prosecuted. That’s in the I.G. report.
GOODLATTE: Absolutely. And we found other precedents where people were prosecuted for similar actions, contrary to what the FBI director concluded.
BAIER: The Weiner investigation case was slow-walked?
GOWDY: No question, because Peter Strzok was so obsessed with Donald Trump in the fall of 2016, they sat on emails, and by the time Comey got to ‘em and sent the letter, we were on the eve of an election. But in September when they learned about this, he did nothing because he was hyper-focused on Trump.
GOODLATTE: And if I were a Democrat or an independent or any American, I’d be concerned about how Director Comey handled that aspect of it, which is also criticized by the inspector general. Why would you handle the way you release that information?
BAIER: Let me play that sound bite.
GOODLATTE: Days before —
BAIER: Let me play that.
GOODLATTE: — the election.
BAIER: This is SOT 1 from Jim Comey.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BAIER: Weeks went by without any action.
COMEY: I do know that New York and FBI headquarters became aware that there may be a connection between Weiner’s laptop and the Clinton investigation, weeks before it was brought to me for decision. I don’t know whether they could have moved faster, and why the delay.
BAIER: So, was it the threat that the New York agents were going to leak that it existed really what drove you to the not concealed part?
COMEY: I don’t know why there was — if there was a slow activity, why it was slow for those first couple of weeks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BAIER: There was at least one agent who says that he knows that they wouldn’t be prosecuted anyway.
GOWDY: Well, I — a couple of points on what Director Comey said. He used the word “index”, he didn’t properly index the fact that Huma Abedin was married to Anthony Weiner. He may have be the only person in the western hemisphere that did not know they were married. That’s one of his excuses.
It took a prosecutor or an agent from the Southern District of New York called into Washington specifically saying, what in the hell are you doing and what is taking so long? That’s what finally got him to move. McCabe wasn’t moving and Strzok wasn’t moving.
BAIER: Some of Strzok and Page’s text messages may still be missing. I.G. says that.
GOODLATTE: We’ll keep looking for them. He’s actually done a good job. He’s the one who found the first big batch of missing text messages, and made those available back to the department, which made them available to us.
But yes, I think we have actually benefited in a multitude of ways from this investigation. It’s filled and a piece of the puzzle but it also resulted in more information coming to us just in the last few days and weeks when you think about that.
BAIER: All right, wrap this up. Winner and loser in this I.G. report in your mind?
GOODLATTE: Well, unfortunately, I think that Trey is right, that the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a whole is a loser and I hope that Christopher Wray is taking his sobering lesson to heart that he can do great things to restore the public’s trust in this very important organization, which we all should trust. And I think 99 percent of the time, we should. Absolutely.
GOWDY: The winner is Michael Horowitz, because he proves that you can be fair, fact-centric and conduct a series of investigation. The loser is every one of my fellow citizens who wants an FBI and a Department of Justice that they can believe in. All of us have all lost when we have a department and a bureau that we cannot have confidence in.
BAIER: Chairman Gowdy, Chairman Goodlatte, we appreciate your time and will continue to follow-up.
GOWDY: Thanks.
GOODLATTE: Thanks, Bret.
BAIER: Thank you.
Peter Barry Chowka is a veteran reporter and analyst of news on national politics, media, and popular culture. He is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. Follow Peter on Twitter at @pchowka.
By Peter Barry Chowka
EXCLUSIVE: On his Fox News program Friday night, June 1, 2018, Sean Hannity made a startling comment. For the past year, Hannity, the #1 host on cable television news, has been doggedly pursuing the truth about the attempts of the previous administration and the Deep State to block and then to negate the election of Donald Trump in 2016. A variety of “kill shots” have been aimed at Hannity’s reputation during the past year, with the intent of having him removed from the air. To date, none of these efforts has succeeded.
On Friday, before he broke major new news with the help of journalists John Solomon and Sara Carter, Hannity stopped and directly addressed his audience. From the program’s transcript:
SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: And by the way, great news for me tonight. Pay close attention. Remember when Senator Chuck Schumer said that you better not mess with the Intel Community because they will get you six ways to Sunday? This is great news for me. Best-selling author, Jerome Corsi, he’s the author of this book out now in book stores, on Amazon.com, BarnesandNoble.com. It’s called “Killing the Deep State.”
You might remember him. He was back — remember, the group against John Kerry, Vietnam Vets for Truth? He was one of them. He’s saying that yours truly, that I, Sean Hannity, am the next target of the deep state.
Wow. Isn’t it so great to know that these corrupt officials with their backs against the wall that are desperate people, who do desperate things, and people that have the most powerful tools of intelligence, are now going after me? OK. Really? So sadly, after all we have learned, now we have Jerome Corsi’s prediction. It doesn’t surprise me. Isn’t that sad? Are we the United States of America, or are we going to be the former Soviet Union or are we going to be Venezuela? I promise you this one thing, I’m never stopping ever.
Here to help break down this damming new report, is “The Hill’s” John Solomon.
John, good to see you, sir.
JOHN SOLOMON, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF DIGITAL VIDEO, THE HILL: Good to see you.
HANNITY: Quick question. Do you think that Corsi could be right?
SOLOMON: I don’t know. I hope not. I hope that people stay within the law at all times. Right? You don’t want to see —
(CROSSTALK)
HANNITY: Haven’t you been told by people that you – certain things were happening to you?
SOLOMON: There are times people have raised questions about reporters like myself surveilled. And in the past, the FBI did illegally intercept my mail 10 years ago. There’s a public record of the FBI apologizing to me for taking my mail after I broke all the stories about what the FBI knew before 9/11.
HANNITY: Yes. That’s pretty scary. Again, if that is the case, if people who are trying to get to the truth and exposing corruption then become targets of the deep state and those that have these tools of intelligence, you can say good-bye to the Constitution. It doesn’t exist.
(CROSSTALK)
HANNITY: And by the way –
(CROSSTALK)
HANNITY: – you might have been unmasked, right?
SOLOMON: Don’t know. I don’t have evidence of it. And I try –
(CROSSTALK)
HANNITY: You’ve been told it.
SOLOMON: Yes, I got a report.
Peter Barry Chowka is a veteran reporter and analyst of news on national politics, media, and popular culture. He is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. Follow Peter on Twitter at @pchowka.
