So Obama knew all along about deep state’s bid to Get Trump…

American Thinker

By Monica Showalter

Has President Obama finally been caught in the act? Was he in on the FBI’s FISA abuse all along?

Townhall editor Katie Pavlich has dug up something pretty interesting from the trove of newly released emails from the ultra-chatty FBI officials Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe, noted earlier here. She writes:

Next, while Page and McCabe are refusing to clarify, it appears the Obama White House may have been directly briefed on the matter.

She cites this news report from Fox News as the indicator:

On Oct. 14, 2016, Page again wrote to McCabe, this time concerning a meeting with the White House.

“Just called,” Page said to McCabe. “Apparently the DAG [Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates] now wants to be there, and WH wants DOJ to host.  So we are setting that up now.  … We will very much need to get Cohen’s view before we meet with her.  Better, have him weigh in with her before the meeting. We need to speak with one voice, if that is in fact the case.” (“Cohen” is likely then-Deputy CIA Director David Cohen.)

McCabe responded within the hour: “Thanks. I will reach out to David.” On Oct. 19, Page wrote to McCabe that the “meeting with WH counsel is finally set up.”

Neither Lisa Page nor McCabe responded to Fox News’ inquiries as to whether the meeting was designed to brief the White House on the FISA application or some other matter.

Seems like the Fox News question was pro forma. Could such a meeting, a month before the election, back when Hillary Clinton was projected to win, have been about anything else? Would these deep-staters, lining up with their plot to frame Donald Trump, really have lined up as a group to tell the White House Counsel all about their FISA abuse during those electric times and then asked the man to keep the information away from the president? Would the White House counsel have taken in such a meeting and then kept the news to himself, despite his job description? Would Obama have been incurious about such an unprecented meeting?

Color me skeptical.

It very much looks like Obama was in on the plot all along, getting his briefings about it and smiling to himself. And as GatewayPundit has speculated, it certainly would have made sense from Obama’s point of view:

What was Obama’s motive? Simple, he knew if he did that for Hillary, he’d own the next President of the United States, and could blackmail her with the truth till the end of time. It literally would have given him a 3rd and 4th term.

Which is pretty creepy, but also perfectly believable.

Obama, as it happens, has a certain style of governance that is above all characterized by meddling and interference. Here are a few examples from Obama’s post-presidency that I wrote about a few days ago – Obama’s little minions trying to interfere in the Jussie Smollett case, interfering for sure in the Roseanne Barr firing, and maybe having some involvement in the elitist college admissions scandal. They interfere like crazy because they are accustomed to interfering, sticking their fingers in every pie if it benefits them politically. Would Obama have benefited politically from some FISA abuse to spy on Trump and his advisors? Darn tootin’ he would.

Which way down on the horizon raises some questions about whether there should be legal consequences for the illegal activity. If we don’t want to see more of it from Democratic leaders, maybe there has to be.

It’s Suspicious That The FBI And DOJ Didn’t Check Into Christopher Steele’s Leaks To The Press

https://i1.wp.com/media.breitbart.com/media/2018/01/Christopher-Steel-AP-640x480.jpg

Image via breitbart.com

 

Would you do everything you could to determine whether you could trust a source who lied to you before relying on him to treat a U.S. citizen guilty of treason?

 

The Federalist

By

Here’s a hypothetical question for journalists: Let’s say you managed to convince the translator in the room during the President Trump-Vladimir Putin meeting to speak to you, and you only, on the condition of anonymity, and you’re in the midst of writing an explosive, exclusive story for your publication. As you’re writing, you look up to see BREAKING NEWS on CNN, and listen as Wolf Blitzer reports the story you’re writing, with the exact fly-on-the-wall detail you received from your “exclusive” source.

So what’s your first move? Would you assume CNN must’ve convinced the Russian translator to talk to them and move on with your story without taking any action, or would you call your source to figure out where that CNN information came from? If your source denied talking to CNN, would you believe him and move on, or would you do whatever you could to determine whether you can trust this source on such an important matter? You’d want to know the answer to that question before proceeding, would you not?

A hypothetical question for editors: Let’s say you’re editing an article on a Pentagon policy change and notice a number of paragraphs that you think you may have read before in another publication. You Google the lines and find that your reporter appears to have lifted entire paragraphs of copy from another article.

So what’s your first move?

Continue reading

A Bombshell House Intelligence report exposing extensive FISA abuse could lead to the removal of senior government officials

 

Sara Carter

A review of a classified document outlining what is described as extensive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse was made available to all House members Thursday and the revelations could lead to the removal of senior officials in the FBI and Department of Justice, several sources with knowledge of the document stated. These sources say the report is “explosive,” stating they would not be surprised if it leads to the end of Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation into President Trump and his associates.

The House Intelligence Committee passed the motion along party lines Thursday to make the classified report alleging extensive ‘FISA Abuse’ related to the controversial dossier available to all House members. The report contains information regarding the dossier that alleges President Trump and members of his team colluded with the Russians in the 2016 presidential election. Some members of the House viewed the document in a secure room Thursday.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., offered the motion on Thursday to make the Republican majority-authored report available to the members.

“The document shows a troubling course of conduct and we need to make the document available, so the public can see it,” said a senior government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the document. “Once the public sees it, we can hold the people involved accountable in a number of ways.”
The government official said that after reading the document “some of these people should no longer be in the government.”

The document also apparently outlines “several problematic” issues with how FISA warrants were “packaged, and used” state several sources with knowledge of the report.

Over the past year, whistleblowers in the law enforcement and intelligence community have revealed to Congress what they believe to be extensive abuse with regard to FISA surveillance, as previously reported. 

The dossier was used in part as evidence for a warrant to surveil members of the Trump campaign, according to a story published this month. Former British spy Christopher Steele, who compiled the dossier in 2016, was hired by embattled research firm Fusion GPS. The firm’s founder is Glenn Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter who has already testified before Congress in relation to the dossier. In October, The Washington Post revealed for the first time that it was the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC that financed Fusion GPS.

Congressional members are hopeful that the classified information will be declassified and released to the public.

“We probably will get this stuff released by the end of the month,” stated a congressional member, who asked not to be named.

But the government official, who viewed the document said “it will be tough for a lot of people to see this and especially the media, which has been attempting to deemphasize the dossier. It’s going to punch a hole in their collusion narrative.”

The House vote to make the report available to all members is a major step in exposing the long-guarded classified documents obtained by the House Intelligence Committee over the past year. It allows members of the House to view the report and could quickly lead to a motion to declassify the report for the public, numerous House members told this reporter.

“It’s a (House Intelligence) committee document that deals with the assessment on the Department of Justice, FBI and the oversight work that is being conducted by the committee,” said a congressional source, which spoke on condition that they not be named.