With Devin Nunes set to hand DoJ criminal referrals for Trump coup conspirators, THESE people should worry

By Jon Dougherty

Few in Congress have worked harder and more diligently than House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes to bring those who concocted “Spygate” and conspired in a coup attempt to oust POTUS Donald Trump.

In recent weeks, House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) has been teasing that he was preparing a number of criminal referrals for the Trump Justice Department involving Deep State figures allegedly tied to Spygate.

On Sunday during an interview with Fox Business Network’s “Sunday Morning Futures” host Maria Bartiromo, Nunes said he’s got eight referrals he’s preparing to make to the DoJ, which is now led by AG William Barr, who is Jeff Sessions’ straight shooter replacement said to be intimately interested in cleaning up his department and the FBI.

“We’re prepared this week to notify the attorney general that we’re prepared to send those referrals over and brief him if he wishes to be briefed,” Nunes said.

Watch:

Nunes was expected, by some, to have delivered those referrals last week. But he told Bartiromo that others had been identified as being intimately involved in the coup attempt, which delayed action.

He said Sunday that up to two dozen people have been identified by his team of investigators who could eventually wind up being referred to DoJ for prosecution.<

Nunes has been working on exposing Spygate for more than two years. Given what we know from previous reporting, these former — and current — officials seem most likely to be on a list of referrals he’s preparing to send to Attorney General William Barr:

Former CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper: We know that the intelligence community under Barack Obama was involved in this coup attempt on many levels; POTUS was right to criticize elements of the IC when he first came into office and learned about the operation.

Brennan and Clapper are in this up to their necks. As we reported:

After all, both of these deep state swamp creatures committed open perjury before the Senate concerning the federal government’s unconstitutional spying operations, and both played a role in perpetuating the lie that President Trump “colluded” with Russia to “steal” the 2016 presidential election.

In responding to continued allegations by Leftists that members of Trump’s inner circle “lied” to Congress, thus indicating that Trump himself is “guilty” of Russian collusion, author Matt Taibbi commented on Twitter about the two elephants in the room that nobody’s talking about: Clapper and Brennan.

“… I struggle to understand why no one seems to care that two of the biggest sources of Russiagate stories, James Clapper and John Brennan, have records of lying to Congress,” Taibbi wrote.

Clapper has lied to Congress before and gotten away with it. So has Brennan — over CIA hacking of computers belonging to staffers on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

James Comey: We reported the former FBI director has probably lied to Congress on at least two occasions:

December 2017: Former FBI Director James Comey was not truthful with Congress when he testified earlier this year when he discussed classified emails that bureau investigators found on a laptop in 2016 belonging to former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, said Chris Farrell, the Director of Investigations and Research at Judicial Watch.

During an appearance on Fox Business‘ “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” Farrell noted that at least five of the emails turned over to his organization on Friday by the State Department in response to a FOIA lawsuit contained classified information. At the time they were discovered, Weiner was married to Huma Abedin, a top aide to Hillary Clinton when she served as President Obama’s secretary of state.

Fox News reported that Comey said during a congressional hearing earlier this year that he believed Abedin regularly forwarded emails to Weiner for him to print out so she could give them to Clinton.

Farrell insisted that Comey’s testimony to Congress was erroneous.

You Might Like

“I know that people have been jailed for a fraction, a tiny fraction, of what has now been made public and documented through Judicial Watch’s litigation and so this really cries out for a legitimate investigation being done,” he told Dobbs.

The possession, transmission, and failing to secure these documents are all federal crimes that do not require intent. Why hasn’t someone been prosecuted? Any member of the  or  would’ve been prosecuted in a second for a violation that substantial,” former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik tweeted.

January 2018: During sworn testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee June 8, 2017, after he’d been fired by President Donald J. Trump, former FBI Director James Comey testified that he had only had two interactions with President Obama.

One, he said, was an hour-long conversation with Obama on policing, law enforcement and race. The other was a “brief” encounter to say goodbye on Obama’s way out the door, according to published testimony.

But during an interview with Fox News, then-Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., and Rep. John Radcliffe, R-Texas, appeared with host Martha McCallum to discuss some of what they discovered after reviewing 50,000 text messages exchanged between anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

Among those, Gowdy said, was a message exchange discussing Comey’s plans to “brief the president” about an ongoing investigation close to the November 2016 election.

“And I saw an interesting text that Director Comey was going to update the President of the United States about an investigation,” Gowdy said.

“I don’t know if it was the Hillary Clinton investigation because that had been reopened in the fall of 2016 or whether it was the Trump investigation. I just find it interesting that the head of the FBI was gonna update the President of the United States who at that point would have been President Obama,” he said.

In April 2018, former federal prosecutor Joe DiGenova said Comey needs to be charged with lying to Congress and to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to get warrants to spy on Carter Page, a member of the Trump campaign.

“That it was absolutely purposely used illegitimately by senior officials at the FBI and the Department of Justice. Mr. Comey lied repeatedly last night. And regrettably, he lied to the FISA Court,” he added.

“He encouraged others to lie to the FISA Court. And regrettably, I think Mr. Comey has to be charged with crimes for falsely presenting information to a FISA Court and for apparently lying regularly to Congress,” he said.

Andrew McCabe: In an interview with Fox News‘ Laura Ingraham, Rep. Jim Jordan — who is familiar with an internal Justice Department report that recommended McCabe’s firing — said, “[FBI Dep. Director Andrew McCabe] didn’t lie just once; he lied four times.”

“Four times he lied. He lied to James Comey. He lied to the [FBI’s] Office of Professional Responsibility, and he lied twice under oath to the inspector general,” said Jordan who is a member of the House Judiciary Committee.

Earlier, Jordan told The Daily Caller the Office of Professional Responsibility noted that McCabe not only neglected to tell former FBI Director James Comey he authorized media leaks, he “affirmatively denied” that he did so.

In March 2018, constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley suggested Saturday that Comey may have lied in sworn testimony to Congress based on something that just-fired McCabe said in a post-firing statement.

After briefly discussing McCabe’s potential liability for misleading investigators looking into the handling of Hillary Clinton’s email investigation by the FBI and Justice Department — the reason why McCabe was fired — Turley started talking about how Comey may fit in the equation.

“This could easily spin further out of control. There was one line in the case statement last night that I immediately flagged. Because he said that he had authority to do this and he conferred with the director—the director at the time was James Comey,” the Democrat-supporting law professor said.

“Now, the problem there is that James Comey said under oath that he never leaked information and never approved a leak,” he continued.

“So, if the Inspector General believes this was a leak to the media, it raises serious questions about Comey’s previous testimony and could get him into serious trouble.”

Peter Strzok: The former FBI counterintelligence official “lied to the House Judiciary Committee in his June 2018 testimony, telling Congress that he did not text from a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF). But texts between Strzok and his mistress Lisa Page show Strzok repeatedly stating that he was texting Page from inside a SCIF,” Big League Politics reported earlier this month.

Also, as the Washington Examiner noted in July 2018, after the former FBI official’s congressional testimony, “Strzok insisted several times during Thursday’s public hearing that he was telling the truth and cooperating as much as possible with lawmakers. But Gohmert and other Republicans refused to believe him when he said he was free of bias and that he hadn’t prejudged investigations against President Trump or Hillary Clinton, despite the recovery of several anti-Trump texts.”

His one-time paramour, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, contradicted that, telling Congress, per Big League Politics:

Strzok also provided false testimony to Rep. Trey Gowdy regarding his text messages with lover Lisa Page, according to Page’s behind-closed-doors testimony with House Freedom Caucus investigators. Page implored Strzok via text to “Protect the country from that menace.”

Pacific Standard Reports points out the discrepancy between Strzok’s testimony and Page’s interview, in which she sang like a canary, leading President Trump to brand her “Lovely” Lisa Page.

“Sir, my understanding of the word ‘menace’ and the use of ‘menace’ was the broad context of the Government of Russia’s attempts to interfere with our election. To the extent those allegations involved credible information that members of the Trump campaign might be actively colluding, I see that as a broad effort by the Government of Russia. So I don’t think you can tease it apart, sir, but it is inaccurate to — and I did not see that as Mr. — or then candidate Trump,” Strzok testified.

Page said: “The menace is Donald Trump…I have — at the time that we opened the investigation, I don’t have any reason to believe that it is Donald Trump himself who was colluding with the Russians.”

Bruce Ohr: The Justice Department’s former No. 4 official had multiple contacts with former British spy Christopher Steele, author of the notorious “Russia dossier” which got the Spygate ball rolling, as well as Fusion GPS, the firm that commissioned the dossier and for which his wife, Nellie Ohr, worked.

He’s believed to be in on the FISA warrant fraud.

The Daily Caller:

Ohr served in 2016 and 2017 as a back channel between the FBI and Christopher Steele, the former British spy who authored the anti-Trump dossier alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.

Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, worked as a contractor for Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele.

During his testimony, Ohr said he warned the FBI and Justice Department that the dossier was very likely political in nature because it was connected (commissioned) by the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign and, thus, very biased and likely inaccurate.

But Ohr’s warnings about political bias in the dossier were conspicuously absent some weeks later when, in September, the FBI filed for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant with the secretive FISA court, which gave agents permission to begin spying on the 2016 Trump campaign for alleged “Russian collusion” to steal the election.

In August, presidential lawyer Rudy Giuliani suggested that Ohr may have committed a felony regarding payments his wife, received while working for Fusion GPS.

“What are the odds the DOJ or Mueller have begun an investigation of Bruce Ohr for violating 18 USC sec. 208? That’s a federal felony unless he disclosed all facts to the DOJ and has a written waiver. How many of you know what that is?” Giuliani wrote on Twitter.

Giuliani was referring to whether Bruce Ohr had issued his wife a waiver so she could work for Fusion.

“Ohr’s wife was financially benefitted by Ohr, a DOJ official, advancing the Steele phony dossier. Her firm got some part of the $1.02 million paid by Hillary and DNC. A crime unless he has a written waiver from Obama’s politicized DOJ which is possible,” Giuliani said in a second tweet.

The Daily Caller News Foundation reported that Ohr did not obtain a conflict of interest waiver from the Justice Department for his wife’s work.

James Baker: The FBI’s former top lawyer may have illegally leaked sensitive information pertaining to ongoing investigations; both he and Comey were reportedly under investigation for such leaks. We noted:

House Republicans revealed in a letter Tuesday that former top FBI lawyer James Baker is under criminal investigation for alleged unauthorized leaks to the media.

According to Fox News’ Catherine Herridge, Republican Reps. Jim Jordan (Ohio) and Mark Meadows (North Carolina) cited a transcript of a congressional interview with Baker, a former bureau general counsel, and his attorney last fall.

Herridge said that the investigation was conducted by “seasoned U.S. Attorney John Durham.”

“You may or may not know, [Baker has] been the subject of a leak investigation … a criminal leak investigation that’s still active at the Justice Department,” attorney Daniel Levin told lawmakers during questioning as resisted questions regarding his client’s conversations with reporters.

Herridge noted further:

The transcript of the closed-door interview and the letter do not include details explaining why the investigation is being led out of the Connecticut office. The status of the investigation is not publicly known.

But the disclosure marks the latest confirmation of a leak investigation involving FBI figures who have since left the bureau.

Last year, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe saw his leak case referred to the U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C. McCabe was fired for lying to federal investigators about his role in a media leak regarding the Clinton Foundation on the eve of the 2016 presidential election.

Herridge noted that the Republicans’ letter also included additional concerns that came about as part of their probe when the GOP controlled the House.

“The Committees learned that in some instances, high-ranking DOJ and FBI officials, including the FBI General Counsel James Baker and DOJ Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, took the self-described ‘unusual’ step of inserting themselves into the evidentiary chain of custody,” it said.

Sally Yates: Trump’s acting attorney general when he took office, she was immediately fired after refusing to defend and enforce his first travel ban. She has been implicated in potentially lying to federal investigators.

We reported in June 2018:

…[F]ollowing The New York Times’ publication of a leaked 29-page memo from POTUS Trump’s legal team sent to special counsel Robert Mueller in January outlining all the reasons why he cannot subpoena or indict a sitting president for “obstruction,” new details have emerged that may put Yates in hot water with the law.

According to the contents of the letter, Yates may have intentionally misled federal investigators regarding the investigation into Trump’s first national security advisor, retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

There are others whom Nunes and his team of investigators have no doubt identified, and they could include former ranking members of the Obama administration such as AG Loretta Lynch and Susan Rice. Nunes could also be looking at people we’ve not heard about yet.

Time will tell. Nunes indicated to Bartiromo on Sunday that he was close to pulling the trigger.

Be the first to receive our latest video reports: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel by clicking here and pro-liberty video platform Brighteon by clicking here


35
Leave a Reply

avatar
22 Comment threads
13 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
Notify of
D3F1ANT
Guest
D3F1ANT

Why on EARTH would these folks worry? Are Democrats SUDDENLY going to be held to the same legal standards as the rest of us? Because THAT would be an unlikely change. More likely NOTHING at all will happen to these duplicitous insurrectionists…

The Rational Realist
Guest

We’ll see. Even a cat has only 9 lives. I think they’re currently walking a very fine line. Treason is punishable by death. I’ll stock up on popcorn in the meanwhile. Always the optimist.

rufusvondufus
Guest
rufusvondufus

History will again repeat itself and NOTHING will be done to any of these people, even the guiltiest of the guilty!

Jim M. Ryles
Guest
Jim M. Ryles

Nothing….Nunes, Nothing and just read what he said “We’re prepared this week to notify the attorney general that we’re prepared to send those referrals over….” They are prepared to tell everyone, that by golly they are prepared…..

Ted B
Guest

The only one who needs to worry is Nunes. He might suddenly decide to commit Arkancide and shoot himself in the back of the head two or three times.

Philly
Guest
Philly

“Laws are for the little people” HRC, et al.

marty lopez
Guest

The President hasn’t made the slightest attempt to drain the swamp and restore honest, good governance, or the confidence of the American people of ever seeing the same. So pardon me, if I ask. Who is kidding who? After six years of being fooled by George Bush and now we are faced with still another bait and switch, trick President? Rallies will only go so far. Ann Coulter is definitely right and a blind man can see it. We are most certainly at war. Shouldn’t we at least have a President who acts as, if he knows it? What the… Read more »

Meh
Guest
Meh

It’s sedition folks, not treason. These people should absolutely worry. Those chickens are coming home to roost, eh BO?

marty lopez
Guest

Is Nunes expected to actually have to kick Trump in the azz just to get him to do something?
How about slap his kids? You tell me, What will it take to get this Justice Department, FBI and the rest of this Administration out of neutral and into gear?

I am so sick of Trump’s inaction and bullschit.

Chuck Howard
Guest
Chuck Howard

Liberty roars its ugly head again. We have been living off those who know its price for far too long in this Country. If it means war, let it come; won’t be the first time nor the last. I reckon I won’t be be around much to see it, if at all, but it will one Hell of a show!

Jon Jones
Guest
Jon Jones

The problem is the People have no confidence that the Deep State in the DOJ will do anything because these are libs and Deep Staters. We will believe this is more than just more conservatives pretending they are tough when we see some of these traitors in prison.

snailmailtrucker
Guest
snailmailtrucker

The Tree of Liberty is awfully awfully Thirsty !

Billy Twoknives
Guest

Not one of those criminals is worried for they all know the Deep State takes care of its own.

Craig Cosbey
Guest
Craig Cosbey

You are correct. We people have not much confidence in the DOJ due to lots of them being RINOS. There are thousands within the system. Donald is trying REALLY hard to deal within the Legal and the political spectrum. He’s been pretty Brilliant so far dealing within the constraints with which he has had to deal.. In the end, I pray and believe this man is sent from the Almighty to be a blessed Constitutional Republic, to bring us around to His will It seems to maybe heading in that direction. Thank you Jesus! Continue your prayers for the benefit… Read more »

David Rhodes
Guest

The new definition of insanity is reading articles like this and believing that these democrat criminals will pay for their lawlessness. No one has anything to worry about.

veto
Guest
veto

why isnt Rat Rodentslime mentioned? He was gonna wear a wire! WHAT A PIG!

trackback

[…] We reported April 8: […]

trackback

[…] We reported April 8: […]

trackback

[…] with that said, the one thing that is clear is if the U.S. Attorney decides to take our complaint—I’m not saying he’s going to do exactly what we’ve asked him to do but he’s clearly […]

trackback

[…] with that said, the one thing that is clear is if the U.S. Attorney decides to take our complaint—I’m not saying he’s going to do exactly what we’ve asked him to do but he’s clearly […]

trackback

[…] with that said, the one thing that is clear is if the U.S. Attorney decides to take our complaint—I’m not saying he’s going to do exactly what we’ve asked him to do but he’s clearly […]

trackback

[…] with that said, the one thing that is clear is if the U.S. Attorney decides to take our complaint—I’m not saying he’s going to do exactly what we’ve asked him to do but he’s clearly […]

%d bloggers like this: