Saturday, April 29, 2017

FBI

by -
Corruption Case

Defense attorneys say that the FBI’s use of a staff member to then-Rep Aaron Schock (R-Ill), as an informant could make the prosecution’s case against him much more complicated than previously thought.

In new court filings, lawyers argue that the staffer working at Aaron Schock’s office secretly provided investigators with a trove of credit card receipts, emails, and several other documents that violated the former congressman’s constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizures. The former congressman was indicted with 24 counts last year, and his trial is set to begin this summer.

Lawyers called the use of the informant, in the latest court filings, troubling, and said that it puts a question mark on provisions that mandate a separation between various government branches.

“It threatens the core architecture of our system of government. It’s not something that people should gloss over here,” said Steve Ross, the co-leader of the congressional investigations practice at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld.

Details about how investigation officials gathered information against Schock were made public for the first time after the court filing from Schock’s attorneys last week. In the filing, they asked for more information about how authorities engaged the informant who recorded private conversations and took documents from the lawmaker’s office in Peoria, Illinois.

The informant is reported to have taken several documents from the office, including travel receipts, office purchases invoices, and credit card statements of Schock’s personal American Express account. He also gave content from another staffer’s email account, to the FBI.

“Let’s address the overall feel of it, this kind of thing is very unusual — it’s very unusual to use someone on congressional staff to act in an undercover capacity at all, much less to have them pilfering documents,” Solomon L. Wisenberg, the co-chair of the white collar practice at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough.

The audio recordings from the informant, acquired by the defense attorneys through the court discovery process, reportedly contain conversations between Schock’s staff and the attorney representing them, in addition to attempts made to “deliberately elicit attorney-client privileged information.”

The informant, who worked in Schock’s district office, but is not named in the court documents, had been subpoenaed in the government investigation. According to the court filing, he was the first person to be interviewed by the investigators.

However, prosecutors have said that they don’t intend on using some information obtained from the information, in the trial.

by -
FBI

Law enforcement and other US officials have claimed that the FBI obtained a confidential court order, last summer, to observe the communications of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump’s adviser, Carter Page. The court order was obtained as part of the investigation on possible links between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia.

According to the officials, the Justice Department and the FBI obtained a warrant from a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court judge, to monitor Page’s communications. Both departments believed, and convinced the judge that Page was acting as an agent for a foreign power. Reportedly, they had enough probable cause to support their beliefs.

So far, this is the strongest evidence the FBI has to believe that a Trump campaign adviser was in contact with Russians during the 2016 presidential campaign. Such personnel and several other individuals are now part of the investigation into whether Trump’s campaign colluded with Russian officials to swing the election in Trump’s favor.

Page has not been accused of any crimes yet, and it is still not clear whether the Justice Department will look to file charges against him or any others in connection to Russian interference in the 2016 elections. Officials say that the counterintelligence investigation to determine Russia’s role in the US elections began in July and that most such investigations usually don’t involve criminal charges.

Officials declined to mention any names or disclose their identity because they were not authorized to discuss details of any probe involving counterintelligence investigations.

In March 2016, during an interview with the Washington Post, Trump identified Page as a foreign policy adviser to his campaign team. Page has previously worked as an investment banker in Moscow, and campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks has been known to describe his role as mostly “informal.”

Meanwhile, Page has continued to reject any claims that he acted as an agent for Russia. He has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in his work with Trump’s presidential campaign.

“This confirms all of my suspicions about unjustified, politically motivated government surveillance,” Page said in an interview on Tuesday. “I have nothing to hide.” He further compared his case to the surveillance that the Justice Department and the FBI conducted against Martin Luther King Jr.

The Justice Department, FBI, and the White House refused to give any comments.

 

 

by -
Leaking

After serving as the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond for 13 years, Jeffrey Lacker resigned abruptly after confessing that he leaked confidential information to an analyst of a financial firm in 2013. Since his resignation, he has been questioned by several law enforcement agencies, including the FBI.

“I crossed the line to confirming information that should have remained confidential,” Lacker wrote in a statement he issued through his lawyer, on Tuesday. His lawyer confirmed that the investigation is now complete and no charges are expected to be filed against Lacker.

“It’s a tragedy, it’s sad,” says Richard Fisher, former head of the Dallas Fed bank who served alongside Lacker. “I never dreamed Jeff Lacker would have done what he says he has done.”

Jeffrey Lacker admitted to have leaked information in 2012, when the Fed was taking extraordinary steps to allow the US economy to recover after the financial crisis of 2008. The Fed’s every move was being monitored closely by investors around the globe, who were trying to profit by finding out the specifics of the Fed’s actions.

The Fed made a decision to buy more bonds in September 2012, in order to pump more money into the economy and try to boost growth. This policy is known as quantitative easing three, or QE 3 in short. At that time, Lacker was the only person who voted against QE 3.

Lacker admits that he spoke with an analyst at Medley Global Advisors, an economic advisory firm based in New York. He shared details with the analyst on October 2, two days before the details of the Fed’s September meeting were released to the public.

According to an investigation later conducted by ProPublica, Medley Global send a report its clients, primarily hedge funds, with intricate details about the types of bonds the Fed had decided to buy. The report by Medley was sent a day before the Fed released details to the general public.

“I deeply regret the role I may have played in confirming this confidential information and in its dissemination to Medley’s subscribers,” Lacker wrote in his statement.

The Federal Bank of Richmond is one of the 12 branches of America’s central bank. Vice president Mark Mullinix is now the acting head of the Richmond Fed.

The Federal Reserve also released a statement saying that is fully committed to maintaining the security of confidential information. It reassured that the officials at the central bank “cooperated fully with the independent law enforcement investigation into an unauthorized disclosure in 2012.”

by -
You will never know what happened . . .

The media is repeating a stream of quotes from FBI Director James Comey from his congressional testimony today.

The media’s talking points including Comey saying that “no president” could order a wiretap and that they found no evidence to support President Trump’s twitter claim that President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower during the election.

What the media has ignored was Comey’s admission that he could not discuss any activity within the FISA court that could approve a request to electronically spy on an American.

FISA which is the abbreviation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, was enacted in 1978 and allows for collection of information on foreign agents and foreign powers.

Under the administration of George W. Bush, FISA powers were expanded to allow surveillance of any communication that occurs with entities overseas regardless if the conversation includes an American citizen on U.S. soil.

Additionally, FISA Courts grant approval for specific requests and the court is strictly secret.

If you were to read in between the lines of Comey’s testimony, you would find that he can’t rule out any spying on the Trump campaign as he cannot divulge any activity that occurred within the FISA Courts.

by -
poll

The FBI has been paying Best Buy’s “Geek Squad” to go through customer’s computer’s and are paid $500 each time they find something worthy of a conviction.

Do you think this is a violation of your Constitutional rights?

by -
The pace of government.

Judicial Watch today announced a hearing will be held Tuesday, February 7, 2017, regarding Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking records held by the FBI containing text messages and emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stored on the equipment of Datto Inc., a commercial data management company, as well as FBI records about the device and what materials were recovered on it (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:16-cv-02369)).  The case is before U.S. District Court Judge Randolph D. Moss.

At the previous hearing Tuesday, January 24, 2017, Trump administration lawyers for the FBI informed Judicial Watch and the court that it located 35 FBI records that concern the Datto device and that it may take up to two years to release the records.  In addition, the FBI recovered approximately 10,000 messages from the Datto device.  The messages were turned over to the State Department to be processed and released on its website.

Tomorrow’s hearing should address whether the Trump FBI will be able to slow walk the release of these records.

Judicial Watch’s lawsuit seeks:

  • All records, including but not limited to emails or text messages (SMSs, MMSs, BBMs, iMessages, etc.), discovered, recovered, retrieved from, or found on any Datto device, equipment, or hardware connected to or used to backup or support former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s clintonemail.com email system.
  • All records relating to the FBI’s efforts to discover, recover, retrieve, or find emails or text messages stored on the Datto device, equipment, or hardware …

Clinton reportedly was using an online backup service called Datto Inc. to create copies of her data during a time when she and her aides were improperly handling classified material. Datto’s website company promises data is “invincible, secure, and instantly restorable at any time.

Datto announced it had turned over a “hardware device” to the FBI, along with all Clinton emails the company had in its possession, possibly including Clinton’s deleted private emails:

“With the consent of our client and their end user, and consistent with our policies regarding data privacy, yesterday, Tuesday, October 6, Datto delivered a hardware device to the FBI containing all backed up data related to Platte Rivers Networks’ client known to be in its possession,” said the company.

The court hearing is scheduled for Tuesday morning.

by -
hillary

Just two weeks ago, Hillary went from being one of the most powerful people in the world to losing the presidency and it keeps getting worse for the former Secretary of State.

The Clinton Foundation is not raising money like it once had, and it could get a lot worse.

In 2014, the year before Hillary announced her run for the White House, the Clinton Foundation raised $172 million and she earned $3.6 million making speeches.

In 2015, she announced her run and the Clinton Foundation lost 37% in donations by only raising $108 million and getting paid $357,500 for speeches.

Currently we are in 2016 and the Clinton Foundation came under fire from the Trump Campaign and there is a criminal investigation going on in the FBI right now about Hillary’s ties to the foundation and the State Department.

The Clinton Foundation was the subject of many WikiLeaks emails that had a tremendous negative affect on Hillary’s public perception. WikiLeaks didn’t help Bill or Chelsea too much either. It can’t be good for the Clinton brand.

We are just learning the numbers for 2015, and it will be a while until we really know how bad the Clinton Foundation dropped this year.

With so much airtime and column inches dedicated to the criminal activity of the Clinton Foundation and Hillary’s subsequent loss, it wouldn’t be much of a surprise if the Clinton Foundation changed its strategy and downsizes.

The prevailing thought inside the Democratic Party is that Obama is going to pardon Hillary on his way out of office.

Obama might be able to keep Hillary out of prison, but if that happens, the Clinton Foundation will lose a lot of the credibly, power and any prestige it still has left.

The only hope for the future of the Clinton Foundation is to begin to push Chelsea into the spotlight and towards positions of power.

Hillary and the Clinton’s have their future up in the air right now. They never planned for this. They thought they would be filling the new Hillary administration with Clinton Foundation donors right now. They are just trying to figure out what to do next and their only option to save their empire may be Chelsea.

Do you think the Clinton Foundation will continue to function five years from now? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -
chaos

The moment we have been waiting for, the election on Tuesday, could just be the start of the chaos that will follow.

The FBI building was vandalized with the word “corrupt” spray painted on the side. Two men were arrested Saturday for the crime, but they hit Trump International Hotel as well.

Painting “corrupt” on the side of an FBI building would be unthinkable a year ago, but now a lot of people on both sides feel the agency has been corrupted.

What does it say about rule of law in America when many citizens question the FBI’s intentions?

The popular feeling about the FBI and the growing hate for police from the left and minority groups, law and order is being threatened.

Law and order is just one part of the chaos, the economy looks like it will take a hit too.

The “Father of Reaganomics” made a startling claim about what will happen to the stock market after the election.

“The markets are hideously inflated… If you don’t sell before the election, certainly do it afterwards. Government is going to be totally paralyzed regardless of who wins. There could be a 25% draw down on the markets.”

Twenty five percent is huge. That would mean that the stock market would drop from close to 18,000 to 13,500. A drop like that could be devastating to an already struggling economy.

It won’t help that the country is so divided over this election; more people will be absolutely against an elected president than any other time in recent history.

On top of all of our problems, the world has some major problems too.

It has been reported that Russia is going to attack ISIS in Syria within 24 hours and Al-Qaeda wants to attack here. There are threats against New York, Texas and Virginia.

ISIS wants to kill Americans on Election Day.

The Department of Homeland Security is weighing options to take over the elections on Tuesday.

CIA is talking about attacking Russia online if they tamper with our elections.

If we can make it through the election and pick a president, then that could be when the real fun starts.

Our trust in law and order, our democracy, media and our elected officials is reaching an all-time low and that could spell disaster.

We are living in a dangerous time. Regardless of who wins, things are going to get worse before they get better.

Do you think everything will be peaceful after the election or do you expect chaos? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -
weiner

When the newly found emails discovered on Anthony Weiner’s device were linked to Hillary Clinton, a unique connection is coming together.

When “Carlos Danger”, also known as Anthony Weiner, was caught sending underwear pictures to women with his son sleeping beside him, his career was finally finished.

He was a strong Senator until he got in trouble sending lewd pictures across Twitter and then again busted for the same thing after a failed run for Mayor.

Anthony Weiner is a three time loser and Huma Abedin, his wife is finally leaving him after their son was picturd asleep in one of the lewd pictures.

Huma just happens to be Hillary Clinton’s top aide.

After the last round of pictures from Weiner’s exploits were made public, Huma filed for divorce and the FBI started investigating the disgraced politician.

There is a very real possibility that Hillary got involved in Huma’s ordeal and pushed her connections in the FBI to pursue the investigation.

There is a real possibility that Hillary and Huma encouraged the investigation into Anthony Weiner. During that investigation, the FBI found evidence that could be used against Hillary and Huma and could bring down the entire election for Hillary.

You have to give Huma and Hillary credit for standing by their men in tough times, but Huma may have stayed with Weiner a little too long.

Getting a divorce in the middle of a major election can be distracting when you are Hillary Clinton’s top aide that even read Hillary’s emails for her.

Huma shared a device with Weiner that was automatically backing up Huma’s emails, but she didn’t disclose that to the FBI when questioned. She was ordered to deliver all devices to the FBI, but clearly she didn’t.

Huma could be the fall person for all of this and Hillary could lose the election. It could all be because Hillary and Huma pushed the FBI to investigate Weiner.

If Huma and Hillary didn’t push for the investigation then they are in big trouble, because the same US Attorney that called for the Weiner Investigation is the same person that is investigating the Clinton Foundation.

Preet Bharara is the US Attorney in the prosecutor’s office that subpoenaed Weiner’s devices and could be looking for more evidence in his Clinton Foundation investigation.

If Preet isn’t for Hillary then she could be in a lot of trouble, especially if she doesn’t win the election.

Do you think Hillary pushed for the investigation into Anthony Weiner? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

by -
fbi

The wife of the deputy director of the FBI who oversaw the Clinton email investigation was given a lot of money from this Clinton ally.

Terry McAuliffe, the Virginia Governor, is in some hot water again for helping the Clintons.

First he made it so felons could vote in the presidential election, potentially giving Hillary thousands of new voters.

Now McAuliffe is in trouble for giving the wife of the deputy director of the FBI $675,000 for her senate campaign.

Dr. Jill McCabe is the wife of the FBI deputy director, and a third of her campaign funds came from McAuliffe’s own personal Super PAC and from the Virginia Democratic Party.

McAuliffe gave $467,500 to McCabe’s campaign and the Virginia Democratic Party, which is heavily influenced by McAuliffe, gave an additional $207,788 in support.

McAuliffe said he gave because he thought McCabe would be a good state senator. Despite losing the election to Republican Dick Black, her husband still had his job to do.

Mr. McCabe became the deputy director of the FBI and was put in charge of Hillary’s email scandal.

McCabe was involved in the investigation that did not recommend criminal charges to the DOJ for Hillary’s “reckless” attention to classified information.

McCabe’s wife isn’t the only one to see a bunch of money come from the Clintons; James Comey’s brother is paid by the Clinton Foundation to audit their books.

There is no smoking gun right now proving that the FBI did something wrong, but there is a lot of money surrounding the top investigators. At the very least it seems to be a blatant case of conflicts of interest. Conflicts of interest happen a lot around the Clintons.

Do you think the money was a pay off? Let us know in the comments below.

TRENDING STORIES

Liberal magazine, Vanity Fair’s writer slammed Chelsea Clinton, daughter of former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, in a recent article plaintive over the...