- Trump’s lawyers and aides are scouring the professional and political backgrounds of 15 investigators hired by the special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, looking for conflicts of interest they could use to discredit the investigation — or even build a case to fire Mr. Mueller or get some members of his team recused, according to three people with knowledge of the research effort.
In a New York Times interview, President Trump warned Mueller would be crossing a red line if his family’s finances were probed after Bloomberg came out with a report outlining Mueller’s plan to investigation the Trump Organization.
The Washington Post now claims that President Trump’s legal team are exploring ways to “scale back” Mueller’s investigation. Trump’s team are now digging up dirt on Mueller’s attorneys
Unless Trump will remove all the Democrat snakes around him, he will continue to face fabricated scandals left and right. Democrats have been in bed with the Russians and the Soviets for decades and yet here’s Trump being accused of what the Democrats have been doing since Russia became communist in 1917.
As per the Washington Post:
Some of President Trump’s lawyers are exploring ways to limit or undercut special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s Russia investigation, building a case against what they allege are his conflicts of interest and discussing the president’s authority to grant pardons, according to people familiar with the effort.
Trump has asked his advisers about his power to pardon aides, family members and even himself in connection with the probe, according to one of those people. A second person said Trump’s lawyers have been discussing the president’s pardoning powers among themselves.
Trump’s legal team declined to comment on the issue. But one adviser said the president has simply expressed a curiosity in understanding the reach of his pardoning authority, as well as the limits of Mueller’s investigation.
“This is not in the context of, ‘I can’t wait to pardon myself,” a close adviser said.
With the Russia investigation continuing to widen, Trump’s lawyers are working to corral the probe and question the propriety of the special counsel’s work. They are actively compiling a list of Mueller’s alleged potential conflicts of interest, which they say could serve as a way to stymie his work, according to several of Trump’s legal advisers.
A conflict of interest is one of the possible grounds that can be cited by an attorney general to remove a special counsel from office under Justice Department regulations that set rules for the job.
Per The New York Times:
President Trump’s lawyers and aides are scouring the professional and political backgrounds of investigators hired by the special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, looking for conflicts of interest they could use to discredit the investigation — or even build a case to fire Mr. Mueller or get some members of his team recused, according to three people with knowledge of the research effort.
The search for potential conflicts is wide-ranging. It includes scrutinizing donations to Democratic candidates, investigators’ past clients and Mr. Mueller’s relationship with James B. Comey, whose firing as F.B.I. director is part of the special counsel’s investigation.
NPR is a look at the 13 out of 15 attorneys Mueller hired who will investigate Trump.
The Gateway Pundit researched the attorneys earlier today:
- Rush Atkinson, an attorney on detail from the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section at the Department of Justice
— Donated $200 to Clinton in 2016
- Peter Carr – DOJ spokesman under Barack Obama.
- Andrew Goldstein, a public corruption prosecutor on detail from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York
— Worked under Trump-basher Preet Bharara in the liberal New York southern district.
- Adam Jed, an appellate attorney on detail from DOJ’s Civil Division.
— Defended Obamacare at the DOJ.
- Rober Mueller – Special Counsel Team leader.— Best friend to fired leaker James Comey.
- Lisa Page, an attorney on detail from the FBI’s Office of the General Counsel and a former trial attorney with the Criminal Division’s Organized Crime and Gang Section
— Investigated Ukrainian oligarch Dmitry Firtash, a one-time business partner of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, at the DOJ.
- Elizabeth Prelogar, an appellate attorney on detail from the Office of the Solicitor General.
–Fluent in Russian; former law clerk to Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan.
- James Quarles, a former partner at WilmerHale and a former assistant special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force.
–Former assistant special prosecutor on the Watergate Special Prosecution Force.
- Jeannie Rhee, a former partner at WilmerHale who has served in the Office of Legal Counsel at DOJ and as an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia.
— Rhee is a Clinton Foundation Lawyer and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel under Barack Obama.
- Brandon Van Grack, an attorney on detail from the Justice Department’s National Security Division.
— Led a grand jury inquiry in Northern Virginia scrutinizing former Trump associate Michael Flynn’s foreign lobbying.
- Andrew Weissmann, who is on detail from the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and who has served as general counsel at the FBI and as an assistant U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York.
— Weissmann donated $2,300 to the Obama Victory Fund in 2008, $2,000 to the DNC in 2006 and at least $2,300 to the Clinton campaign in 2007.
- Aaron Zebley, a former partner at WilmerHale who has previously served with Mueller at the FBI and has served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia.
— Worked with Robert Mueller at the WilmerHale firm.
Really? For someone with brain cancer, Sen. John McCain has time to hit President Trump for defunding CIA program training ISIS-linked Syrian rebels.
John McCain tweets:
“Reports admin ending prgm to assist Syrian opposition irresponsible, short-sighted& plays into Russia, Assad’s hands”
McCain is under probe right now for sharing with media the fake Russian dossier and we can already predict the compassion McCain is going to get, meaning he would be excuse from geoing through real investigation from now on because of his disease. In the meantime, don’t expect Never-Trumper McCain to stop provoking Trump into answering his tweets.
( Daily Wire ) Just a day after his hilarious and well-deserved humiliation at the hands of an epic Reddit Q&A, CNN’s own Chris Cillizza — he of the adorable blue-framed eyeglasses — has been made a public fool of again, revealed as unethical again, this time by his very own colleagues at the last-place CNN — which has also been exposed again as a leader of all things fake news.
As we all now know, on Tuesday night, straight through to Wednesday, the American media went on another one of their Fake News Witch Hunts against Donald Trump, this one about a sinister “secret meeting” between the American President and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. Desperate to keep their flailing Russian conspiracy theory afloat, the media took a usual-usual G20 dinner conversation, one that took place literally in front of the whole world, a dinner the media all knew about, and turned it into a series of frenzied fake headlines.
Because he is awesome, Trump used his Twitter feed to expose and mock this fake news…
At CNN Cillizza blasted Trump as a liar with two claims: 1) “No media outlet reported anything about a ‘secret dinner'” and 2) “no one is suggesting that the media was unaware that the dinner was taking place.”
In the meantime, at this very same CNN, on this very same day, Brooke Baldwin is calling the dinner “secret” and openly asking “Why didn’t we know about this?”
But wait, there’s more!
[CNN anchor Kate] Bolduan on Wednesday called it a “secret and second sitdown between the president and Russian president Vladimir Putin. Why wasn’t the meeting revealed?”
- “When he brought it to me, I said this is really, made-up junk,” Trump said, denying the contents of the dossier. “I didn’t think about any of it. I just thought about man, this is such a phony deal.”
- James Comey alerted Trump because ‘the media was about to publicly report the material’
( Daily Caller ) President Donald Trump accused former FBI director James Comey of trying to use an infamous dossier as leverage against him.
In a New York Times interview published Wednesday, Trump recalled Comey first telling him about the dossier, which contained allegations about indecent behavior supposedly performed by Trump while visiting Moscow.
Trump explained that two weeks before his inauguration, Comey pulled him aside after an intelligence briefing at Trump Tower and informed him about the dossier.
Trump believes now that Comey sharing the document with him was meant as an implicit threat.
“In my opinion, he shared it so that I would think he had it out there,” Trump said. When asked if he meant as leverage, Trump replied, “Yeah I think so. In retrospect.”
The FBI was not able to corroborate the vulgar claims made in the dossier, which was compiled by a British spy.
“When he brought it to me, I said this is really, made-up junk,” Trump said, denying the contents of the dossier. “I didn’t think about any of it. I just thought about man, this is such a phony deal.”
Comey explained the reasoning behind alerting Trump to the material during his June 8 testimony in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
“The IC leadership thought it important, for a variety of reasons, to alert the incoming President to the existence of this material, even though it was salacious and unverified,” Comey’s prepared remarks said.
“Among those reasons were: (1) we knew the media was about to publicly report the material and we believed the IC should not keep knowledge of the material and its imminent release from the President-Elect; and (2) to the extent there was some effort to compromise an incoming President, we could blunt any such effort with a defensive briefing,” he explained.
Read more: Trump Sensed Dossier Threat From James Comey
- President Trump is shutting down the CIA’s program to arm and train rebels fighting the Syrian government
- Declassified doc: The rise of ISIS had been predicated by both the CIA and DIA, as far back as 2012.
- Purposely created by the Obama Administration in part to isolate the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad
- U.S. intelligence agencies were fully aware that weapons were being shipped from Benghazi to Syrian ports
- roughly 60% of the rebel fighters in Syria are sympathetic to ISIS’ .
- Syrian rebels gave “at least a quarter of their United States-provided equipment, including six pickup trucks and a portion of their ammunition, to the Qaeda affiliate in Syria, the Nusra Front.”
Via The Hill:
President Trump is shutting down the CIA’s program to arm and train rebels fighting the Syrian government, The Washington Post reported Wednesday, a victory for Russia, which has called for the move for years.
Officials told the Post that shutting down the program, begun by the Obama administration in 2013, is a sign of Trump’s attempts to work with Russia, which has viewed the U.S. attempts to force out Syrian President Bashar Assad during that country’s civil war as an attack on its own interests.
The shuttering of the CIA program does not mark the end of U.S. involvement in Syria — Trump signed off in May on a plan to arm the Syrian Democratic Forces, a Kurdish rebel group, using Department of Defense funds.
The Post reports that Trump decided to shut down the CIA program last month after meeting with CIA Director Mike Pompeo and national security adviser H.R. McMaster.
Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin struck a deal for a partial cease-fire during their meeting at the Group of 20 summit earlier this month, set for a region of Syria where rebels supported by the CIA are stationed.
( USHerald) Thanks in part to the declassification of Defense Intelligence documents, connecting those missing dots seems to have finally reveled what most Middle East observers have suspected all along, that the rise of the terrorist group ISIS and the likelihood of establishing a terror state (a caliphate), had been predicated by both the CIA and DIA, as far back as 2012.
And purposely created by the Obama Administration in part to isolate the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad. The documents also predicted that the support given by the West, Turkey and the Persian Gulf Arab states to the Takfiri militants would eventually lead to the establishment of a Salafist Principality in Eastern Syria.
According to investigative reporter Nafeez Ahmed, the “leaked document reveals that in coordination with the Gulf states and Turkey, the West intentionally sponsored violent Islamist groups to destabilize Assad, despite anticipating that doing so could lead to the emergence of an ‘Islamic State’ in Iraq and Syria.”
Obviously Obama’s dismissal of ISIS being nothing more than a “JV” team and his apparent miscalculations in not keeping a residual force in place in Iraq, seems to be (as the documents indicate), considerably more sinister than first assumed, in that not leaving a contingency force behind was viewed by most Middle Eastern experts to have been a simple yet costly a tactical error.
However the documents are also shedding light on details referencing weapons operations inside Libya before the 2012 terror attack in Benghazi.
And the report leaves no doubt that U.S. intelligence agencies were fully aware that weapons were being shipped from Benghazi to Syrian ports.
Here is a link to the Judicial Watch press release detailing the released documents.
Here are the released documents themselves.
According to the think tank linked to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, roughly 60% of the rebel fighters in Syria are sympathetic to ISIS’ political and religious beliefs and practices. While there may be personal disputes between ISIS and the other rebels, most find little problem with ISIS’ ideology and governing style.
These findings stand in considerable contrast to earlier claims made by the Obama Administration, about which groups constituted the Syrian rebels. President Obama had, at one point, pushed to train a so-called moderate rebel force in Syria and spent $500 million to do so. After the failures of the program became evident, Obama switched his position and labeled the belief in the moderate rebels as a viable force to take on ISIS and Assad as a “fantasy.”
The program was ultimately suspended in October of this year when it was discovered that not only were the rebels not fighting jihadists, they gave “at least a quarter of their United States-provided equipment, including six pickup trucks and a portion of their ammunition, to the Qaeda affiliate in Syria, the Nusra Front.”
- The results of Obamacare imploding are far worse than Obamacare being repealed. But the Democrats sold it as a panacea. Okay. They own it.
- The original design of Obamacare was to fail. But it was supposed to fail with Hillary Clinton or another Democrat in the White House. And, at the moment of failure, it was then to be suggested almost as a brilliant spur-of-the-moment idea, “Hey, why don’t we just go single payer.” Or, “Hey, why don’t we just put everybody on Medicare? Hey, problem solved!”
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, I want to expand on something here that I just saw President Trump say right before the end of the previous hour. He said that his plan now is to just let Obamacare fail. He’s not gonna own it. He’s just gonna let it fail. Which he’s been saying for months. He said, you know, the smart thing politically for him to do be let it fail and let the Democrats absorb all the blame. Let Obama and the Democrats take the blame. Just let it fail. But Trump said — as a show of good faith — he was gonna work with people to try to replace it, to repeal and replace it rather than just to let it implode, let it fail.
Now, we know that the Trumpster engages in The Art of the Deal at all times, and so this statement of his, which was stated in… It looked like he was in the Cabinet Room. Pence was sitting next to him. A lot of people were there. All the media camera shutters were clicking and flicking there, so this got a wide audience. “I’m just gonna let it fail. I’m not gonna own it. I am not gonna sit here and own this. If this is the way it’s gonna go, I’m just gonna let it fail.” He could be negotiating; he could be serious.He could mean it that he’s just going to sit by and let the thing fail, and that means old Mitch and the boys can go in there and fail to repeal it and that means Obamacare remains the law of the land. This is where it gets interesting. Obamacare is imploding. It is in the process of consuming itself. If Trump follows through and just says, “I’m gonna let it fail,” and we just sit by and watch premiums go up 45, 50% every year… As we watch insurance companies pull out of the exchanges, as we watch the subsidies end, as we watch the exchanges close, as nobody’s able to buy insurance…
You have the Trump opposition in the, quote, unquote, “elite club” known as the establishment.
What are they gonna do now? See, the objective in the original design of Obamacare was to fail. But it was supposed to fail with Hillary Clinton or another Democrat in the White House. And, at the moment of failure, it was then to be suggested almost as a brilliant spur-of-the-moment idea, “Hey, why don’t we just go single payer.” Or, “Hey, why don’t we just put everybody on Medicare? Hey, problem solved!” Because, at that time, that point in time, premiums would be out of reach, deductibles out of reach, insurance companies closing down and closing up shop, exchanges closing up shop. So it’d be eagerly demanded, even maybe by the public.
But now we’ve got Trump who doesn’t want to go single payer, and this the Democrats and the establishment know. So there are two options here, and it’s interesting to note that if you listen to the media and you listen to the Democrats, repealing Obamacare is the worst thing that could be done, but it isn’t. Staying with Obamacare and letting it implode is the absolute worst outcome here. Repealing it means you repeal it. You get rid of every Obamacare law, and that means you start over. But it also raises a question: At what point do you…? Where do you resume?
What do we fall back to?
From fake news to fake polls!
They are backkk! Russian hoax is marching back to the grave so the left is switching tactic and bringing back fake polls again to go after President Trump. Fake polls are
Rush Limbaugh below:
This misrepresentation… They take and put together a faulty sample that oversamples Democrats. This ABC/Washington Post poll that has Trump’s approval number plummeting? Do you know what the plus Democrat number is? It’s 12%! There was a plus-12% additional Democrats sampled in this poll. Well, hell’s bells! And if you look elsewhere, you find that barely 9% of Trump’s base is having some problems with him. He is having practically no falloff at all, which is frustrating. But here’s the thing about these polls. Look at what polls are doing to Democrats and the left.
They think they’re winning everything because of the polls. Hillary was gonna win in a landslide because of the polls. Trump was barely gonna show up because of the polls. Now there are polls saying that Trump’s popularity is vanishing, and he’s quickly becoming a nonentity. But it is not true! So the media believe their own polls and conduct business accordingly. Their deranged audience, the lunatics on the left, believe the polls. They’re losing everywhere except in the polls, and so they think they’re winning and that everything else is fraudulent.
And it’s a disservice that the pollsters are doing to their own people, and it’s large… I think the polls have a major role in creating some of the discord that exists. Not fully. I mean, there are many elements to this. But if you’re a deranged lunatic leftist and you’re part of the Democrat base — and you’re a victim or you’re offended and you’re constantly angry — and you see poll after poll after poll that shows a majority of American people agree with you, and yet everywhere in real life you’re losing, what would you do?