With New Referral To The Inspector General: The FBI Finds Itself Caught In A Crossfire Hurricane

2560px-Hurricane_Isabel_from_ISSBelow is my column in the Hill Newspaper on newly released information on the use of an informant against Trump officials as well as other details stemming from Operation Crossfire Hurricane.  The disclosures appear to confirm in large part the allegations made by President Donald Trump at the beginning of his Administration.  While denied at the time, it does now appear that campaign officials were surveilled and investigated.  Deputy  Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has now referred the allegation to the Inspector General for further investigation.  That is a belated but correct decision in light of the troubling implications raised by this new evidence.

Here is the column:

It was called “Crossfire Hurricane,” the FBI counterintelligence operation that targeted Trump figures as part of the investigation into possible campaign ties to Russia. It was a poignant choice of a Rolling Stones song, “Jumpin’ Jack Flash, that describes a man “born in a crossfire hurricane” who “howled at the morning driving rain.”

It could be an apt description of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. After a year of media denials of his claims of surveillance targeting his campaign, Trump can legitimately claim some vindication. Indeed, with his rising poll numbers, the president must feel, in the words of the song, like “it’s all right now, in fact, it’s a gas.”

The New York Times this week disclosed that the FBI made a conscious effort to use secret counterintelligence powers to investigate Trump officials and may have had a confidential informant who was used in connection with key Trump figures long before the November 2016 election. (Officials stated anonymously that this was a longstanding source who worked with both the FBI and CIA for years.)

In early 2017, President Trump was widely ridiculed for alleging that the Obama administration placed his campaign under surveillance. The response from experts on CNN and other sites was open mockery. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper came forward to assure the media that he could categorically deny the allegation and stated, “There was no such wiretap activity mounted against the president, the president-elect at the time, or as a candidate, or against his campaign.” The range of media analysis seemed to run from whether Trump was a clinical paranoid or a delusional demagogue.

We now know there was, indeed, surveillance ordered repeatedly on Trump campaign figures before and after the election. Rather than acknowledge the troubling implications of an administration investigating the opposing party’s leading candidate for president, the media shifted to saying that there was ample reason to order the surveillance.

That remains to be seen but much of the coverage brushes over the fact that no charges were brought against the principal target, Carter Page, or that the secret warrants for surveillance were based in part on a dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, a fact known but not fully disclosed by the FBI to the secret FISA court. The documented Russian interference, thus far, has been largely a Russian operation out of St. Petersburg that special counsel Robert Mueller’s team has said was carried out without the knowledge of Trump campaign officials.

Now the plot has thickened even further with the added disclosure of not just national security letters to gather documents related to Trump figures but also at least one confidential informant who met with campaign figures like Page and George Papadopoulos to gather information. In response to the New York Times report, Trump declared that the FBI planted “at least one” spy in his campaign to frame him. Trump counsel Rudy Giuliani ratcheted up the rhetoric and said, if the story is true, that former FBI Director James Comey should be prosecuted.

The record does not currently support such a criminal conspiracy. However, if Trump and his counsel can be accused of overplaying the known facts, the media can be equally accused of ignoring the implications of the known facts. It should be a serious concern that the Obama administration used secret counterintelligence powers to target officials in the campaign of the opposing party. That is a practice we have widely criticized in other countries from Turkey to Russia to Iran.

Worse yet, the New York Times wrote that the decision was made to use the secret FISA court and counterintelligence personnel to conceal the operation for political purposes. According to the report, FBI officials consciously decided not to seek conventional criminal warrants or pursue a criminal investigation because it might be discovered and raised by Trump during the campaign. Thus, as Trump campaigned against the “deep state,” FBI officials hid their investigation deeper inside the state. FISA was not designed as a convenient alternative for the FBI and the Justice Department to avoid political costs or scrutiny.

The added problem with using a counterintelligence operation is that it is easier to launch and conceal than a criminal investigation. While there is a “probable cause” requirement under FISA, it is not the same as the one contained in the Fourth Amendment. Virtually every FISA application ever filed by the Justice Department has been granted, with a couple of exceptions. The FISA investigation was based on loose claims of foreign influence and a little cognizable evidence of actual crimes.

For his part, Page continues to maintain that he accepted standard contracts to work with the Russians, as have hundreds of people in Washington. Clearly, the FBI should investigate any serious criminal conduct linked to Trump figures or the campaign. However, the publicly released FISA material describes interactions with Russians that could have applied easily to myriad other “Beltway bandits” who regularly cash in on foreign contracts, including leading figures of both parties. The still unresolved question is why these particular allegations of foreign contacts merited the extraordinary decision to target an opposing party’s campaign or campaign figures before a major election.

I have been highly critical of Trump’s attacks on the media. However, that does not mean his objections are wholly unfounded, and this seems one such example. There may have been legitimate reasons to investigate Russian influence before the election. Yet, very serious concerns are raised by the targeting of an opposing party in the midst of a heated election. These concerns will be magnified by the use of a confidential source to elicit information from Trump campaign associates, though officials deny that the FBI actually had an informant inside the campaign.

Just as it is too early to support allegations of a conspiracy to frame Trump, it is too early to dismiss allegations of bias against Trump. As shown by many of the emails and later criminal referrals and disciplinary actions at the FBI, an open hostility to Trump existed among some bureau figures. Moreover, the extensive unmasking of Trump figures and false statements from FBI officials cannot be dismissed as irrelevant.

As a nation committed to the rule of law, we need a full and transparent investigation of these allegations. All of the allegations. That includes both the investigation of special counsel Mueller and the investigation of these latest allegations involving the FBI. For many Trump supporters, this new information deepens suspicions of the role of the “deep state.” If we ever hope to come out of these poisonous times as a unified nation, the public must be allowed to see the full record on both sides.

Until then, many Americans across the country will continue to believe that, like “Jumpin’ Jack Flash,” Trump was greeted after his election by being “crowned with a spike” right through his head.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

310 thoughts on “With New Referral To The Inspector General: The FBI Finds Itself Caught In A Crossfire Hurricane”

  1. Jeff Sessions was Chairman of Trump’s Foreign Policy Advisory Group for the campaign. He was my State Attorney General and U.S. Senator that I supported at every turn. I realize that he recused himself early from the investigation but many who know him are both amazed and disappointed that he has remained as quiet as a church mouse with respect to the DOJ’s lack of cooperation in providing documents requested by Congress and DOJ’s obvious overuse of classification.

    I’d like Devin Nunes or Trey Gowdy to ask Sessions under oath if he has been approached by any member of the DOJ, any member of Congress, any member of the Mueller Team, or any of their surrogates and warned not to comment and/or interfere in any aspect of their activities. The obvious implication is that he too would face personal and financial ruin in defending himself should they decide to use the full might of federal resources in investigating any alleged involvement on his part.

    1. Sessions knows he perjured himself in front of his former colleagues in the Senate so he best be pretty quiet about things.

      Also I think he still has a shred of connection to the rule of law and realizes that people who are subjects of investigations don’t get access to the evidence pertinent to those investigations at this point in the timeline. And he also knows that Nunes and his gang of thugs will hightail it over to the OO and give Trump everything they find out.

      He may have been Trump’s staunchest supporter at the beginning, but Trump has treated him like s*** ever since, so no telling what JS will do.

        1. Thanks. I wish that he had enough integrity to go to Mueller, Rosenstein, and Wray and tell them that he knows that Trump is a crook and he supports what they’re doing. But, even if he did this, he can’t be trusted and they know it.

      1. Sessions knows he perjured himself in front of his former colleagues

        He doesn’t know that, because he didn’t perjure himself.

        Also I think he still has a shred of connection to the rule of law and realizes that people who are subjects of investigations don’t get access to the evidence pertinent to those investigations at this point in the timeline.

        Yeah, Mueller just has to have the goods. Just has to.

        1. Jeff “I can’t recall” Sessions. Yeah, he didn’t perjure himself. LOL

          You know why it’s clear that Mueller has the goods? Just look at how much the entire Trump enterprise has lied repeatedly AND at how determined Trump and his minions [Meadows, Nunes, et al] are to get their hands on whatever info they can. Look at Trump’s terrified and desperate tweets, that are full of both projections and confessions all the time.

          Nice, try, ma’am or sir, but you’re just not cuttin’ it.

          1. You know why it’s clear that Mueller has the goods? Just look at how much the entire Trump enterprise has lied repeatedly A

            If fantasy helps you feel better, MSN, fine. Just keep it at the kids’ table.

  2. Another attempt to divert, distract and cry wolf, Trump did it before with the wire tap BS. The FBI told both campaigns that the Russians were screwing with the system and only the Trump team kept up the talks and meetings. Now we know it was not just Russia,but also the Gulf States. And if the FBI was in the bag for HRC, why did they keep quiet about Trump, and come out about HRC’s e-mail story days before the election and say nothing about Trump’s team and his meeting with the Russians?

    1. Because Comey realized that the Inspector General knew they had been sitting on the Anthony Wiener – Clinton emails since early September. Comey hurriedly rushed the story out in late October trying to cover his own ###.

      1. Thanks for the hannity talking points blather.

        this is to “I have a ‘Hannity was here’ tattoo across my lower back” blainie

    2. The FBI told both campaigns that the Russians were screwing with the system

      We have it on the authority of Robert Mueller’s crack crew of Democratic Party donors that the ‘screwing’ consisted of things like buying Facebook ads.

      1. I’m sure you know that it’s against the law to ask party affiliation before you hire them in the government. I’m sure you know the party affiliation of the head of the SC as well as the FBI and DOJ. I’m sure you don’t give a crap about the facts.

        1. I’m sure you know that it’s against the law to ask party affiliation before you hire them in the government.

          The % of the public who appear in the FEC database is in the low single digits, but he manages to recruit 30% of his lawyers from that low-single digit population, including people whose donations to the Democratic Party total thousands of dollars. And somehow he manages to not hire a single verifiable Republican. Just an amazing co-incidence, I’m sure.

    3. It wasn’t the whole FBI who was in the bag, just a few bad actors near the top.

      Comey always thought he was the Boy Scout…doing the right thing. Even running out weeks before the election to declare there were more emails..only to come out 3 days later to say ‘never mind.’

      It took his department 9 months to looki through Hillary’s emails and only 3 days to look through the same # of emails on Weiner’s laptop. He pre-wrote the memo exonerating Hillary before she was even interviewed.

      A fish rots from the head…and the only question is whether Loretta Lynch, Obama and Hillary are indicted for having led this coup de tat.

      1. The list of Democratic Party notables held accountable for much of anything by federal prosecutors in the last 20 years is (AFAIK) is limited to Elliot Spitzer, screwball James Traficant, a couple of elective state executives (Comptroller of New York and Treasurer of Pennsylvania) and five members of the Congressional Black Caucus (among them William “Cold Cash” Jefferson). Federal prosecutors now consider it outre to go after any Democrat more prominent than a mayor or state legislator (unless you blow $80,000 bucks on structured payments to high-end hookers or have bundles of 100 dollar bills in your basement freezer; in that case the entertainment value makes you a target).

        1. “… in that case the entertainment value makes you a target”

          If entertainment value is the criterion for indicting democrats, Eric Schneiderman had better duck for cover.
          I can’t personally think of a case that would have more entertainment value than a violent sex-criminal leader of the #MeToo movement having mistreated his “brown slave.” That trial would be a ratings blockbuster.

      2. Haha. Unfortunately for the gullible dupes, federal grand juries make decisions and take actions based on “evidence,” a concept obviously unknown to the babble-heads spouting Pravda Faux News talking points and sycophants of the day glo bozo. So sorry for your loss.

        this is to “but, but hannity SWORE hillary was a meanie!” eric

  3. For all his flaws, Trump never tried to frustrate the will of the electorate and depose a duly-elected government official. The intelligence agencies and their willing fools in the media did. That’s the one unpardonable crime in a democracy as it strikes at its very heart. We need a grand jury to issue the indictments and petit jury to put this den of vipers under a jail somewhere. I’d start with Clapper and Brennan and work my way up the chain to Hillary, Lynch and ultimately Obama. That’s what gets attention in the salons of the swamp — jail time.

    1. Good comment, mespo. I’m reading a book by a very good western PA reporter, Salena Zito. It’s called The Great Revolt. She, through face to face interviews, explains the 2016 election.

      1. Is she just telling the same anecdote over and over as she did in her newspaper articles?? Reading her got tedious very fast.

        1. Tedious was the sycophant MSM telling us Hillary had the election in the bag, when actually the only thing in the bag was Hillary. Zito stood against the groupthink and got it right.

          1. She told stories about their economic anxiety but refused to tell stories about their racism. That’s why she failed.

            1. The book is about counties where Obama won both times and Trump won in 2016. So, by your ignorant take on a book YOU HAVEN’T READ, these people must have become “RAAAACIST!” between 2012 and 2016. If I were an uniformed, shoot from the hip, liberal like yourself, I would have chosen “misogynist” not racist. You know…Hillary lost because she has a vagina meme. LOL!

    2. The fact Clapper leaked to CNN on a regular basis and then quickly took a job with CNN after leaving government service ought to tell the current FBI and DOJ that they need a no-knock warrant on Clapper’s home and CNN Office.

      I’d love the media (except CNN) to get advance notice of the US Marshalls and DOJ executing a search warrant on CNN to get all of Clapper’s files, notes and belongings pertaining to his selling official intelligence secrets to CNN for a job promise.

      1. Thanks for checking in with today’s Pravda Faux News prattle. You’re dismissed. Thanks for playing.

        this is to “so, what exactly is a ‘gullible dupe’ anyway?” eric

    3. What’s been grossly amusing the last 5 years has been learning that rank-and-file partisan Democrats are absolutely indifferent to gross violations of procedural norms and will make aggressive (if fallacious) representations for it if they’re compelled to discuss it. And, yet, most partisan Democrats think highly of themselves for their advocacy and affiliations.

      1. Or probably more accurately, they hold nothing but utter contempt for those who would sell out America to a dictatorship of the incompetent solely because they are scared of people who don’t look like themselves.

        this is to the nutty sufferer

        1. And the best evidence of why white supremacy is a deeply failed ideology is white racists themselves.

    4. Rosenstein, Mueller, Comey, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Kadzic, Yates, Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Steele, Simpson, Hillary, Huma, Lynch, Brennan, Clapper, Kerry, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper, Power, Farkas, Rice, Obama et al.

    5. That is, the president can do no wrong, commit no crime. The election was like religious absolution – all is forgiven.
      So the crime is not that the president or his campaign may have colluded with the Russians. The crime is not that the president may have been (and still might be) blackmailed by the Russians. The crime is not that Russian oligarchs are into Trump for millions and millions of dollars.
      No, evidently the crime is that we find out about it.

      1. The crime is not that Russian oligarchs are into Trump for millions and millions of dollars.
        No, evidently the crime is that we find out about it.

        But, given 22 months to present evidence of that, Mueller and Company go with an indictment of Russian internet trolls they never expected to have to take to trial.

        1. Mueller doesn’t work off your timeline. He’ll present the evidence when he’s ready to present it. And Mueller’s investigation is 12 months old, not 22.

          1. Sorry, Pumpkin. Took some time to pry the memorandum out of Christopher Wray, but it turns out the investigation began in July 2016.

            That aside, the three previous investigations of this character took aim at their main targets, negotiating please or going to trial. The process crimes and stray crimes were generally on the back burner. The Watergate prosecutors secured three sets of indictments: of the original burglars, of co-operating participants, and of participants who went to trial. The last set of indictments were secured in March 1974, 21 months after the investigation began. The Iran-Congra investigation secured it’s main set of indictments in March 1988, 17 months after the investigation began. The Whitewater investigation secured it’s man set in August of 1995, 19 months after the investigation began, and secured an agreement to co-operate with an important defendant and witless in April 1997, 39 months after the investigation began (all for naught; the witness died).

            But hey…

  4. This entire “investigation” can best be described as a “Self-Licking Ice Cream Cone” – a situation where corrupt, deep state partisans themselves manufacture reasons to continue an investigation into alleged wrong doings they know never really occurred. The investigation is feeding on itself.

    What are its roots? The first was the alleged Russian hacking of DNC mail servers but how do we know that agents of the Russian government actually did so? Neither the FBI nor the CIA nor any member of federal or state law enforcement ever conducted forensic analysis of the servers. That’s a fact. The DNC supposedly would not permit it. Someone tell me, what any other public or private sector group can simply say “no” to investigation by the FBI/CIA yet continue to allege that an international crime occurred? Do you think the RNC could have made such a claim without being mercilessly mocked by the intelligence community, the Left, and the media? Instead, the DNC used private contractor, CrowdStrike, to analyze the servers, the founders of which are Clinton donors.The intelligence community then takes CrowdStrike’s conclusions as the Holy Grail without verification? Suggest another instance where the intelligence community is so conveniently trusting.

    Even if the hacks showed all the tell-tale signs of hackers from Russia, show me the evidence that these hackers were Russian and were acting under authority of the Russian government. Yeah, I know. That’s “classified”, right? They can’t produce the evidence because the Intel community did not gather it themselves nor can they independently verify it but YOU are supposed to accept it at face value. Why not? The Left, including the media which is no longer skeptical, parrots that mantra. Every freaking time the Justice Department is asked to produce anything now, it’s either heavily redacted or they refuse to do so because they classified it. Here’s the true classification: “CYA”.

    The second thing is the heavily discredited Steele dossier. Hillary and the DNC paid for it. The FBI even paid Steele themselves before firing him. The wife of Bruce Ohr, a high-ranking member in DOJ, was hired by Steele’s company, Fusion GPS, to help collect dirt for them during the 2016 campaign. Yet, these are the “trusted servants” leading the current investigation? I no longer trust the FBI, the CIA, nor the Justice Department. They have shown their true colors and it ain’t red, white, and blue. It’s whatever the deep state says it is.

    1. You’re not suggesting an insider downloaded the data from the DNC servers and gave it to WikiLeaks, are you? Someone like a Seth Rich or someone disgusted with how the Democrats were operating?

        1. Because it is the most plausible explanation of how the data got to Wikileaks, that’s why.

                1. wildbill99 – they supported everybody. 😉 And some of the FB ads were after the election. $45k in ads is nothing when Hillary spent a billion dollars. I have serious doubts that they hacked the DNC server. They might have phished Podesta though, what an idiot.

        2. They don’t have facts so they smear anyone they can, including dead people who can’t defend themselves.

      1. Every time one of them writes or says deep state [or as they think of it “THE DEEP STATE”], I crack up.

        I think that about a third of Americans are authoritarian and this overlaps a lot with conspiracy theorists. They are proving every day what a threat they are to our democracy. No wonder Trump is their guy because he is an authoritarian conspiracy theorist, too.

    2. This “Deep State” entity which you have identified appears ominous. It seems that through your dogged sleuthing you have uncovered a nefarious cabal of ne’er-do-wells, seemingly hell-bent on eradicating our ‘Merican way of life, our love of Cheetos and mom, or fluoridating our precious bodily fluids, or some other such dastardly deed. Well done, inspector.

      this is to “Inspector Clouseau, at your service” blainie

  5. Firstly, Carter Page was not a member of the Trump campaign at the time of the first FISA warrant on Carter Page.

    Secondly, Stefan Halper met Carter Page at an ecomonic conference in London that Carter Page attended on his return trip from the speech he gave in Moscow sometime in July of 2016 (IIRC). While Carter Page had not yet been fired from the Trump campaign, his Moscow speech had been publicly reported before he met Halper. And Carter Page was fired from the Trump Campaign shortly thereafter.

    Thirdly, Stefan Halper did not meet with George Papadopoulos until September 2nd, 2016. George Papadopoulos had met Joseph Mifsud several times in March and April of 2016 which was six months before he met Halper. Also, Mifsud introduced Papadopoulos to a Russian government official, Ivan Timofeev, who worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in April of 2016 and Papadopoulos exchanged many emails with Timofeev for several months before Papadopoulos met Halper in September of 2016.

    Fourthly, Mifsud told Papadopoulos that the Russians had Clinton emails on April 26th of 2016. Papadopoulos lied to the FBI about the timing of Mifsud’s revelation of Russia’s possession of Clinton emails and pled guilty to that charge in order to avoid the more serious charge of destroying evidence of his email exchanges with Ivan Timofeev–the Russian official at the MFA. BTW, the OSC has a fair number of the emails exchanged between Papadopoulos and Timofeev that Papadopoulos did not destroy. Ordinarily, destruction of evidence is also evidence of knowledge of guilt.

    Fifthly, the FBI allowed a FISA warrant on Paul Manafort to expire shortly before Manafort joined the Trump campaign in March of 2016. The FBI did not seek a second FISA warrant on Paul Manafort until September of 2016 well after Manafort had been fired from the Trump campaign. So there was no FISA warrant on Manafort at any time that Manafort was a member of the Trump campaign. Which is a pity. Because the true story of the Trump Tower meeting would not be unknown to us had the FBI not refused to surveille Manafort while he was a member of the Trump campaign.

    Finally, Trump still stands in desperate need of an actual legal defense. A mere media strategy that keeps on cranking out one crock of cockamamie after another crock of cockamamie is not an actual legal defense. Because he who will not be deterred, Robert Swan Mueller The Third, is not playing ‘Mericansky Foobaw. Therefore, that old ‘Mericansky Foobaw dictum which holds that “the best defense is a good offense” does not apply to Trump’s legal predicament. No matter how much the spectators in the cheap seats roar their approval for The Great Tweetwall of Trump.

    1. “Trump still stands in desperate need of an actual legal defense.”

      I’ll agree with that statement when you show me the indictment. You’ve put the cart before the horse.

    2. In 2010, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 for a speech in Moscow and $550,000 for a 2011 speech in China. Hillary was Secretary of State through 2013. He also sought permission to give a paid speech in North Korea. Does that make either of the Clintons foreign conspirators?

      George Papadopoulos was a 28-year-old self-proclaimed energy consultant. He was listed as a foreign policy consultant but had zero foreign policy experience and, as far as I can tell, little to no practical energy experience. From 2011 to 2015, he was an unpaid intern at “The Hudson Institute”, a Washington-based think tank established in 1961 by colleagues at the Rand Corporation. Papadopoulos nevertheless describes himself on his LinkedIn page as an “oil, gas, and policy consultant”. In a March 22, 2016 interview with the editorial board of The Washington Post, Trump said: “He [Papadopoulos] is an energy and oil consultant, excellent guy”. I doubt Trump had any idea who Papadopoulos was but knew only what he was told: “he’s an energy guy”.

      Papadopoulos was recruited by Sam Clovis and claims Clovis told him that one of the campaign’s foreign policy priorities was to improve U.S.-Russia relations. That’s no secret. Trump said throughout the campaign that the U.S. and Russia should cooperate to defeat Islamic terrorism. I happen to agree with that statement. It is known that a young and ambitious but quite inexperienced Papadopoulos was attempting to wrangle a top white house position for himself and believed the best way to do so was to set up meetings between Trump and those with contacts ties to Putin to further the goal of mutual cooperation on counter terrorism. Papadopoulos tried on six occasions to set up such meetings but was ignored by high-ranking members of the Trump campaign. I believe he did have email exchanges with Russians but that they went nowhere. If he did, it is not illegal to have discussions with foreign officials.

      The irony of all this is that the DNC and the FBI knowingly paid for unverified and salacious information from Russian sources. The wife of a DOJ member was working for Fusion GPS during the campaign. The information was briefed to the Comey before the GOP convention. FISA warrants to surveil the Trump campaign were obtained using the dossier which came from Russian sources. All of it for the purpose of influencing the outcome of the election. Then, after the improbable election of Donald Trump, it was used instead to undermine his presidency. They are actually doing what the allege the Trump campaign did. It’s akin to Jack the Ripper accusing someone else of murder.

      1. Blather McAvoy said, ” If he [Papadopoulos] did [have email exchanges with Ivan Timofeev of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs], it is not illegal to have discussions with foreign officials.”

        It depends upon what they were yammering about in those email exchanges, Blather McAvoy. Why did Papadopoulos plead guilty to lying to the FBI about when exactly Mifsud told him that the Russians had Clinton emails? Why did Papadopoulos destroy evidence of his email exchanges with Timofeev if, as Blather McAvoy says, it is not illegal to have discussions with foreign officials?

        P. S. Welcome aboard, Blather McAvoy.

        1. Still would not be illegal, @$$ wipe is Late4Dinner. You can discuss anything unless there is conspiracy to commit a crime or a crime is actually committed. Mueller and his team have taken allegations and financially ruined people (see Michael Flynn) who must pay from their own pockets to defend themselves from people that have the personnel and financial resources of the U.S. government at their disposal. No American citizen is safe from ruin at the hands of those people. I would likewise try to eliminate anything that might be perceived as suspicious to keep these hounds off my back.

          1. You are wrong. Conspiracy to defraud the United States by obstructing a legitimate function of government is a crime. Papadopoulos knew that Russia had Clinton emails. Russia stole those emails. Russia leaked those emails. That was an illegal, foreign, in-kind campaign contribution to Trump. Papadopoulos attempted to conceal his knowledge of Russia’s possession of stolen, leaked, Clinton emails by destroying evidence of his email exchanges with Timofeev. That’s obstructing the legitimate function of a government agency. And that’s conspiracy to defraud the United States.

            1. Russia stole those emails. Russia leaked those emails.

              I see Seth Rich is now referred to by the code name ‘Russia’/

              That was an illegal, foreign, in-kind campaign contribution to Trump.

              You are sliding into self-parody.

              1. You’ve always been good on denying whacky conspiracy theories, NII, why embrace the Seth Rich version?

                1. Seth Rich was an employee of the Democratic National Committee and Julian Assange has suggested he was a source for Wikileaks. There are supposedly identified features of the data transfer which mark it as a domestic download, not a hack from offsite. Why is it a ‘whacky consipiracy theory’ to endorse the more plausible explanation of how that data left the premises? (As apposed to Diane’s ass pull about a Russian hack?).

                  1. But this ignores the well-known fact that the DNC was seen hovering over your backyard fence in a black helicopter on two occasions within the last three days.

                    this is to “I can cut and past ‘true’ conspiracy theories all day” nutty sufferer

                  2. More plausible hinges upon how much credence you give to Assange.
                    Unsurpringly perhaps, I don’t have as much faith in his word as apparently you do. To me the more plausible explanation is the police version, a botched robbery.

                    1. “Botched” how, exactly? Did someone show up and interrupt the robbery? I never heard that there was a witness. Or the robber decided he or she really didn’t need the money after all? Or perhaps repented on the spot, but unfortunately AFTER shooting the young man.

                    2. “The parents of Seth Rich — the Democratic National Committee staffer police believe was murdered during a botched robbery in 2016 — have sued Fox News over a retracted story that peddled a conspiracy theory about his murder, claiming the network “intentionally exploited” the tragedy for political purposes.”


            2. As I said. Emails alone are NOT a crime. Conspiracy to commit a crime or the actual crime are illegal. This was a 28-year old guy who didn’t know his butt from a hole n the ground trying to get himself in position for a white house gig. Use your common sense!

              1. On April 26th, 2016, Papadopoulos was given foreknowledge of Russia’s possession of Clinton emails. In May of 2016 Papadopoulos shared his foreknowledge of Russia’s possession of Clinton emails with Alexander Downer. When Wikileaks published the DNC emails on July 22nd, 2016, Papadopoulos knew which emails the Russians had. And so did Downer. When Papadopoulos met with Halper on September 2nd, 2016, he denied knowing anything about Russia’s possession of any Clinton emails. And that’s when Papadopoulos attempted to conceal and destroy evidence of his contacts and communications with Timofeev and the honeypot, Olga Polanskaya nee Vinogradova, who, as it turned out, was not Putin’s niece. Papadopoulos has possessed knowledge of guilt ever since.

                P. S. The simple fact that the FBI did not use the information that they had gathered by September of 2016 to disclose to the public their counterintelligence investigation of Russia’s attempts to cultivate members of the Trump campaign before the election and in the public interest effectively disproves the partisan political witch hunt crock of cockamamie that Trump has been bellyaching about for more than a year already. Now go get started on an actual legal defense for Trump before it’s too late.

                1. Annie/Inga – who did this foreknowledge come from and why did he become the recipient? This is your key premise and without it, everything falls. And how is it that the person that raises $25m for the Clinton Foundation is the one person he drunkenly leaks it to later? And how is it that person did not have the permission of his government to reach out to the US government to pass on the information that he shared? And how is it the FBI started a counter-intelligence action against candidate Trump, then President-elect Trump and then President Trump? On whose authority? And how is it that they have indicted Manafort but not his partner Podesta who was doing the same things? And why is it that the Russians are fighting the charges?

    3. Firstly, you don’t seem to understand that a FISA warrant also works retroactively. It allowed FBI to access all of Page’s and his campaign contacts’ stored communications.

      Secondly, Halper met Page at an intelligence seminar (CIS) in mid July, after having invited him a month prior (IOW, 6 weeks before the official opening of the FBI CI investigation). It’s the timing of the invitation that establishes the informant’s first contact with the mark.

      Thirdly, regardless of when Halper met Papadopolous, if he did so as a paid FBI informant, then their meeting is assumed to be contrived and part of the CI investigation. The same holds re his meetings with Page.

      Fourthly, Papadopolous’ meetings with Mifsud and assorted Russians is the current rationale for the EC opening the official FBI CI investigation. Yet he’s only been charged with, and pleaded to, a process crime. That’s hardly reassuring, especially given what little we know about the sketchy Mr. Mifsud who apparently disappeared last year.

      Fifthly, what’s known about the Trump Tower meeting is that nothing happened, and the fact that Glenn Simpson met before and after with the Russian lawyer, Veselnitskaya, makes this also look like a set up.

      1. TLM said, “Yet he’s only been charged with, and pleaded to, a process crime. That’s hardly reassuring, especially given what little we know about the sketchy Mr. Mifsud who apparently disappeared last year.”

        In April of 2016 Mifsud introduced Papadopoulos to Ivan Timofeev of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There were extensive email exchanges between Timofeev and Papadopoulos for six months before Papadopoulos met Halper on September 2nd, 2016. In his signed plea-deal with Mueller Papadopoulos admitted to destroying some of the evidence of his email exchanges with Timofeev. Destruction of evidence presupposes knowledge of guilt.

        What’s known about the Trump Tower meeting is a second-draft cover-story coughed up by Trump that makes precious little sense, since Veselnitskaya and Ahkmetshin had lobbied Congress for repeal of the Magnitsky Act on several occasions years prior to their attendance at the Trump Tower meeting. They knew that Trump could not deliver a repeal of The Magnitsky Act. They also knew that Trump could rescind Obama’s Executive Order imposing sanctions on Russia for its annexation of The Crimea.

        Meanwhile, the Trump Tower meeting was arranged by The Agalarovs, Aras and Emin, who were Trump’s business partners from the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow. Irakly Kaveladze is Aras Agalarov’s lawyer and reputed money-launderer who attended the meeting representing The Agalarovs. Veselnitskaya hired Fusion GPS to do research for the trial of her client, Mr. Katsyv, in the Prevezon Holdings case in SDNY. But Glenn Simpson is not the one who arranged the Trump Tower meeting. The Agalarov’s arranged that meeting. And Veselnitskaya, Ahkmetshin and the translator, Somochornov (IIRC), were added to the Trump Tower meeting most likely for the express purpose of providing the second-draft cover-story about repealing the Magnitsky Act that the Trump campaign could possibly not have delivered to Russia.

        1. Quite honestly, you could throw in another half dozen nefarious Russian names into the set up of this 20 minute meeting and it wouldn’t make a difference. It was a ruse, set up by someone offering to give the Trump campaign “Russian dirt” on Hillary, the effective outcome of which was getting a couple of Russians in Trump Tower talking to Trump Jr, Manafort and Kushner. The optics afterwards spoke for themselves. The fact that it was a ruse from the beginning and that a prime player, Veselnitskaya, was contemporaneously closely associated with Glenn Simpson is lost on you and half the country.

          1. The fact that the Russians were seeking sanctions relief from Trump is lost on you. The fact that Trump was seeking kompromat on Clinton is lost on you. The fact that the sanctions relief that the Russians were supposedly seeking from Trump (repeal of the Magnitsky Act) was sanctions relief that Trump could not possibly have been given to the Russians is lost on you. The fact that the kompromat on Clinton that the Russians offered to Trump at the Trump Tower meeting is not the kompromat that the Russians actually delivered for Trump is lost on you.

            Instead, the thing that you’re harping on is that Veselnitskaya had a meeting with someone whom Veselnitskaya had hired to do research for the defense of her client, Pyotr Katsyv, in the Prevezon Holdings civil forfeiture trial in SDNY on the day of Veselnitskaya’s court appearance in that case. That is known in the business as “cherry-picking” the available data. Perhaps that is lost on you as well. But I don’t think so.

          2. TLM said, “Firstly, you don’t seem to understand that a FISA warrant also works retroactively. It allowed FBI to access all of Page’s and his campaign contacts’ stored communications.”

            You are necessarily referring to 702 authorizations and only 702 authorizations. FISA warrants without 702 authorizations do not allow for downstream surveillance of stored communications. FISA warrants with 702 authorizations are statutorily limited to counter-terrorism investigations and investigations of weapons of mass destruction proliferation. The FISA warrant on Carter Page was not sought for the purpose of conducting a counter-terrorism investigation. It was sought for the purpose of conducting a counterintelligence investigation. If you can identify any 702 authorizations attached to the FISA warrant on Carter Page, then, and only then, would your claim about downstream surveillance of stored communications be true. I heartily recommend that you should attempt to identify any 702 authorizations attached to the FISA warrant on Carter Page. When you’re finished with that, see if you can identify any abuse of the minimization procedures accompanying the alleged 702 authorization purportedly attached to the FISA warrant on Carter Page. Should you succeed in your mission, my argument will be demolished. Just imagine how much fun that would be for you? OMG. I’m shaking in my Army boots.

      2. TLM said, “Secondly, Halper met Page at an intelligence seminar (CIS) in mid July, after having invited him a month prior (IOW, 6 weeks before the official opening of the FBI CI investigation). It’s the timing of the invitation that establishes the informant’s first contact with the mark.”

        I have been unable to confirm your claim about Halper’s invitation to Page from any current press reports. Unless and until you provide confirmation of your own claim, I will regard it as rank speculation and idle conjecture of the usual Trumpian sort.

    1. Benson, in all honesty, I don’t think anyone here would have expected you to learn anything you didn’t already believe.

    2. You will learn that half the people here think that Trump is Christ on earth, and the other half think he is the Anti-Christ.

  6. Given the accelerating allegations of misconduct by James Clapper and John Brennan, I suspect that it’s reasonable to assume that the newly-appointed Inspector General of the “intelligence community” will become involved in this investigation, probably working with Inspector General Horowitz of the DOJ and prosecutor Huber.


  7. One day, Turley will look back at pieces like this and wonder, “When did I sell my soul?” The level of fact twisting and appeasement is unparalleled. Maybe he’s hoping to be included in the next round of Trump lawyers?

    1. Perhaps the shoe will be on the other foot. When an entire group of people, who for the most part are socially conservative, realize they marched in lock step with those who led them to their own economic and cultural demise.

    2. And one day perhaps you will look back and see that your Socialist/Democrat Party has used you, lied to you and was the PARTY OF SLAVERY!

      1. Furry Elise gets more discombobulated with every comment.
        Party of slavery circa1828-1860. Party of Jim Crow 1865-circa 1960.
        Party of Civil Rights 1964-present.

      2. Elise – I wasn’t speaking as a Democrat, but an American. The history lesson you wish to impart about the Party of Lincoln would require me to have stopped paying attention after 1877 when Republican’s sold us out to get Federal Troops out of the South and end Reconstruction. I would have to be unaware of the flight of Dixiecrats in the sixties when most of those who were against civil and voting rights, moved to the Republican Party. I would have to be oblivious to Willie Horton and the Lee Atwater “Southern Strategy” which Republicans still cling to. The widow Atwater was honored at the last RNC.
        I have no illusions about the Democrats and their past. The lies thay have and still tell are real. The ones told by our President are the clear and present danger. “What in the hell do we have to lose?” Everything!

      1. George Washington University. It’s not hard to figure out the influences on JT. He’s concerned with his social standing in the professoriate, which will inhibit him from endorsing Trump but also inhibit him from making vulgar and stupid representations in his columns.

      2. Himself, like the rest of us. There’s no need to impugn the motives of people you disagree with.

      3. I follow some excellent lawyers on twitter and some of them are perplexed by what Turley is up do, as well. They think he’s lost so much of his credibility.

        1. Turley is pining for the good old days of the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal and impeachment saga.

    3. You’d think by now you’d be ‘woke’ to the fact Trump and his team were setup and hung out to dry for impeachment.

      Clapper, Comey, Brennan, Yates, Rice, Powers, McCabe, Ohr and a few others are going to have to make the hard decision Mike Flynn made.

      Plead Guilty or empty your bank account hiring DC lawyers who go for $700/hour.

      There ain’t enough GoFundMe donations around to help these clowns stay out of jail. I can see the no-knock warrants already being readied. There’s no way Brennan and Clapper aren’t texting back and forth right now trying to get their stories straight. Jokes on them. There’s likely already a FISA warrant issued that is allowing the FBI/DOJ to surveil their conversations.

      This is OUR country…not there’s. And now..mon ami…you know how Trump was able to win the Presidency.

      Power corrupts. Absolute power absolutely corrupts.

      1. Eric from Iowa – Hello former neighbor, I hail from Minnesota myself and took a bike trip through your state. Your use of “woke” and “mon ami” might carry a bit more weight if you could properly differentiate between there’s and theirs but that’s such a minor point.
        To come up with the idea Trump was “set-up” for Impeachment make me want to know more. It wasn’t the deep state or Democrats that used Russians to funnel millions into his real estate projects. Nobody else makes him lie all the time. His whole family is making secret deals with Russia and China and you believe he didn’t know. He totally freaked out when Cohen’s office/hotel/home got raided and what will be discovered won’t be anything he was “set-up” with. He is obstructing justice in plain view, now demanding to know what the DOJ has on him.
        Keep wishing the true corruption lay within the past administration. Perhaps you’ll sleep better at night. I give you credit for knowing that Impeachment is unavoidable. Many of your friends haven’t come to that realization.

      2. Nice shade of Kool-Aid there, feller. Pro tip: Pravda Faux News babble is spouted here regularly by the other gullible rubes and dupes who likewise fell for the big con. Your mix merely confirms your membership in that sorry club. So sorry for your loss.

        this is to “you know, Iowa is really quite cosmopolitan” eric

        1. Mark M., don’t you just love it when someone Trumpian throws a slow curve ball belt high over the middle of the plate while enigmainblack is at the plate?

          P. S. Does the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi still live in “cosmopolitan” Ames? Eric probably does not.

    4. What fact twisting, exactly? One may agree or disagree with his analysis, but his facts appear to be the same facts as in the public record. Agree or disagree, it is not unreasonable to conclude the FBI may have acted badly.

      1. Turley keeps referring to an investigation of the Trump Campaign. There is no instance where the campaign was targeted but certain individuals that were known to be engaging with Russians, all of whom lied about those interactions. The FBI went to the Trump campaign and warned them that Russia was trying to infiltrate their campaign. They asked them to report what they saw. All the campaign has done from the President, Vice-President, on down is deny any meetings with Russians.
        Turley repeats the suggestion a spy was implanted in the campaign, what jobs or positions did he/she hold? Turley is lending authority to every whimsical thing Trump says or tweets with no proof whatsoever.

        1. Enigma, [sarcasm alert] Giuliani is complaining that the FBI failed to veto any of Trump’s campaign hiring decisions the way they were supposed to do in keeping the production format for The Apprentice. Rudy further claims that Trump was “entitled” to have been “directed” against his own hiring practices. It’s so unfair. Trump is only supposed to do the “firing”–not the hiring.

  8. Its hurricane season & the tropics are heating up.

    1 of the most effective politically motivated infiltration tactics used in a U.S. campaign was against presidential candidate Ross Perot during 1992-1993. Democrat & Republican boiler room operations were working overtime.

    So what might turn into a Cat 5 hurricane? So many tropical disturbances…

    Recap: FBI counterintelligence operation “Crossfire Hurricane,” Robert Mueller’s final investigation conclusion, some new damaging discovery from the Michael Cohen FBI office raid, something from Stormy Daniels.

    Or something from the ongoing IRS CID tax audit on Trump. This 1 isn’t discussed often, but it was effectively used to bring down Al Capone.

  9. Oh the hubris of the elites,their paid performers and their useful idiots never cease entertaining me. They have no idea how much of a minority they are. Most Americans are critical thinkers and can see what’s been going on. I’ve been called a Russian spy because i question my money being used on investigating a person and not a crime. Trump was a pretty ruthless businessman who cheats on his wives. We’ve known this for decades. The elites thought they’d find something because they are so corrupt. These are the third world oligarchs. How did all of them become so wealthy on a public employee’s income? They’re only after the dude because he’s unlikely to cover up their nefarious actives.

    After the fiascos of the last several elections I vote only libertarian. However I’m a blue collar self employed woman and my income has doubled since Trump directly lifted a load of useless regulations that employed DNC voters. I promise there will be hoards of us voting in the primaries and general elections. This muhRussia stuff doesn’t matter if we can lift ourselves out of the darknesses of being over regulated and underpaid.

    It will be a matter of protecting our incomes when it comes to Trump. All of the name calling and statist propaganda in the world won’t change that. Keep it up!

    1. I’m also a woman and voted for President Trump. After 8 years of the lies of Obama: “If you like your doctor; you didn’t build that; Bergdahl served with honor and distinction; Benghazi was due to a You Tube Video; not a smidgeon of evidence that Conservatives were not targeted by the IRS; Americans have not been spied on; James Rosen is not being spied on; do whatever it takes to get reelected; I came to despise Obama and his Chumba Gangsta members that include John Brennan, Clapper, Jarrett, Rhodes, Powers, Rice, LoWretta Lynch, Eric Holder to name a FEW. These people represent the very WORST of American politics. I would like to see them ALL serving hefty sentences for their conspiracy to elect Hillary. But I do believe that Americans realize now that we are just STARTING to uncover the damage done to all of us as a result of their nefarious and corrupt conduct. America has been brought back from the brink of insanity! I won’t let a Democrat Socialist in my home anymore. I think they are much more evil than Putin!

      1. I’m not a woman, but I’m married to one.

        I asked her about a billionaire bragging about women letting them grab them by the short hairs and the fact some of them even like it.

        She said that’s absolutely true. Go to any nightclub in any major city and you can see the divorcees and younger women looking for a Sugar Daddy. They’ve already got their eye on the prize. Why would they mind a little grab handing if it helps them achieve their goal?

        These are her words..not mine. I always suspected some women worked this way..thankfully my wife isn’t one of them.

        To each their own…

    2. “Most” Americans? Haha. Reality check. Turn off Pravda Faux News and your pitiful 40% club of the gullibles shrinks by one.

      this is to “hannity always acts like our team is bigger” mkatty

  10. > that the secret warrants for surveillance were based in part on a dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, a fact known but not fully disclosed by the FBI to the secret FISA court.

    Not true. The dossier client was not a “fact known” to the FBI. But they disclosed what they thought was going on.

    According to the October 21, 2016, FISC application:

    “The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. Person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate #1’s campaign.” The “U.S. Person” was Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS and the candidate was Trump. (The FISC quote and the identification are printed in the House minority report responding to the Nunes memo.)

    1. If the FBI didn’t know who funded the “dossier,” then the FBI is guilty of incompetence and gross negligence equal to or worse than lying about it.

      It probably wouldn’t matter who funded the “dossier” if its contents could have been verified, since verified facts outweigh all other issues. But in the absence of verifying the contents of the “dossier,” the next most important issue is who paid for it.

      And anyway, Comey was lying when he told Bret Baier that he didn’t know who funded the dossier.

  11. The defendant gets to harry and threatened the prosecutor. He gets to threaten and intimidate the investigators If you or I tried this it would be called obstruction of justice. But he he’s Donald Trump and, as he said, he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and his supporters would still love and support him.

    1. You have to be accused of a crime in order to be a defendent. They have no crime to accuse Trump of and are desperately seeking one even if they have to create it. Anyone would be outraged. When a crime is committed we investigate to determine who is the culprit. This investigation had no crime but has targeted what was an individual citizen who decided to run for elected office by using what was a commonly known suspicion (Russian interference in an election has been around since the beginning of the cold war) and nefarious ways of getting around the lack of a crime. It is a new low for government and Democrats in particular. People defending this behavior should take a good look in the mirror and ask why they would be willing to defend people they have never met and don’t know personally as they subvert the Constitution and rule of law to undermine ANY candidate while giving a pass to a candidate and their staff that lied, cheated and actually broke the law.

      1. Unfortunately, the shrews and shills on Pravda Faux News haven’t told you the truth about how conspiracy investigations are conducted by the feds. Many on this blog are lawyers, some of whom are aware of such procedures. Thanks for your input “counselor.” Reddit is down the hall. Thanks for playing, and drive home safely.

        this is to “hannity is my truth whisperer” pammie

    2. And I do still LOVE AND SUPPORT HIM. My loath of the 8 years of Obama’s Corrupt Administration is bottomless.

        1. The Department of Justice was an arm of the Democratic Party during the Obama regime. There weren’t going to be any guilty pleas or indictments, even of officials who took the 5th in front of Congressional committees.

          As for the current administration, it’s all process crimes and all at the hands of this fraudulent special counsel investigation.

          1. Ah, the big conspiracy theory. Please post more of this entertaining material.

            this is to “they’re all in on it, I tell ya” nutty sufferer

        2. How many guilty pleas and indictments where there in Obama’s administration?

          That one question is rooted in pure ignorance. It is also a common question posed by those that supported the Obama administration, and who had placed all their hope in Clinton. Every totalitarian regime that’s ever existed, exists today, or will rise up in the future, needs a large base of people with exactly your degree of willful ignorance. To claim people are innocent of violating the law merely on the basis that they haven’t confessed, plead guilty or been indicted is absolutely void of curiosity.

          You make Steve Martin in this clip appear to be a critical-thinker. Damn! And you vote?


        3. No prosecution of Lois Lerner. Tells us what we need to know about the standards to which his administration was held.

            1. Lois Lerner was prosecuted? What was the final verdict? (Just so we’ll have all the facts).

            2. Lois Lerner was not prosecuted. That’s a fact, and in fact, one more fact than in your reply. You are not looking too smart.

    3. The FBI previously indicated that it opened a counterintelligence investigation into Trump-Russia collusion in late July, 2016, notwithstanding new information indicating that the investigation began substantially earlier and that the reasons previously given for opening the investigation appear to be untruthful.

      At any rate, the procedure for notifying Congress of such investigations being opened requires quarterly notification — every three months — regarding such investigations being opened, and that notification is almost always kept confidential. This means that Congress should have been confidentially notified no later than the end of October, 2016, that the Trump-Russia investigation had been opened

      Yet it was not until March 20, 2017 — almost 8 months after the FBI claimed that the Trump-Russia investigation had been opened — that then-FBI Director Comey notified Congress that this investigation had been opened, and he did it in a public setting, disregarding confidentiality of the information. See Comey’s 3-20-17 testimony, beginning at 33:25 of the youtube video:


      What’s interesting about this conduct — something that none of the congressional CLOWNS or media CLOWNS ever mention — is that for the entire time that Jeff Sessions was being nominated as Attorney General, undergoing his confirmation hearings, and being sworn into office as Attorney General, James Comey knew about the Trump-Russia investigation, and knew that Sessions would have to recuse himself, since a person cannot participate in an investigation concerning which that person is a witness, subject, or target.

      Comey intentionally kept the Trump-Russia investigation secret until after Sessions had been sworn in, so that Trump wouldn’t appoint someone else as Attorney General — someone who wouldn’t have to recuse himself.

      The main element of fraud, either criminal or civil, is misrepresentation or concealment of a material fact, and that’s exactly what Comey did when he concealed the existence of the Trump-Russia investigation until after Sessions had been sworn in as Attorney General.

      So the entire bases of the Trump-Russia investigation is steeped in fraud right from the outset — when it began, why it began, and concealment that it began — and Mueller knows this, and he knows that he’s furthering a fraud that was perpetrated against the President, against the Attorney General, and against the citizens of the United States. If you think Trump is harrying or intimidating Mueller now, I suspect you haven’t seen anything yet. Mueller is a criminal, knowingly furthering a criminal enterprise.

      You picked a very inappropriate fake screen name. The actual Justice Holmes would have a very different perspective than yours. Or maybe you were going for irony? If so, well done.

      1. Intro to Fiction class submission. You get an “A.” Please post more of this entertaining material.

        this is to “I have hannity podcasts piped into my head while I sleep” willie

      2. Wasted it above but I will try again. Try using facts to your opinions, you will appear smarter.

  12. The Dems should take note that Kilauea’s activity is a metaphor for what’s going on in DC. Hot, molten lava will find a crack and eventually force its way, often explosively, to the surface. Eventually, like with Watergate, all this evidence of corruption will all come to the surface. The 1972 breakin was nothing compared to the use of one administration’s investigative powers against the opposing party’s presidential candidate. This goes to the very foundation of our democracy.

    1. The administration that takes the fall won’t be the past one. I regret to inform you that “evidence” is a completely different animal from the wishful screeching of Pravda Faux News babble-heads. So sorry for your loss.

      this is to “but hannity sounded like such a smarty-pants” suzie

  13. And why did DAG Rosenstein get to decide this request should be handled by the DOJ Inspector General? AG Sessions should make the decision as this request has nothing to do with Russian collusion. And AG Sessions should refer this request to his selected attorney Huber who can work along side IG Horowitz. Without that designation, IG Horowitz cannot interview Brennan, Yates, Comey, McCabe, etc.

    Rosenstein and Sessions strike again. What a disgrace.

    1. Isn’t an IG for an federal agency the functional equivalent of a police dept’s internal affairs division? In other words, it only has jurisdiction over the people who work there? I suppose persons outside the agency can speak to the DOJ IG if they choose to, but they can’t be compelled. If this is the case, the investigation by the IG will be rather limited.

      1. According to what I know, the IG of any department is limited to speaking with active employees, so yes, IG Horowitz is limited.

      2. An excerpt from Jeff Sessions’ March29, 2018 letter to Grassley, Goodlaite, and Gowdy, officially identifying John Huber as the prosecutor from outside Washington, DC, assigned to work with Inspector General Horowitz:

        “… It the Inspector General finds evidence of criminal wrongdoing, he may refer tito a United States Attorney who can then convene a grand jury or take other appropriate actions. To be clear, the Inspector General has the authority to investigate allegations of wrongdoing, collect evidence through subpoena, and develop cases for presentation to the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General for prosecution or other action. …”


        Therefore, via either his own subpoena power or working with prosecutor Huber, the Inspector General is not limited concerning only interveiwing or investigating people still withing the DOJ or FBI.

  14. Professor Turley, you have again embarrassed yourself, academia and the legal profession by your one-sided defense of the Trump-GOP-Nunes conspiracy to defraud the American people. You should be thoroughly ashamed of your actions.
    The real story is here, not in your right-sided column. Read this and retract your unpatriotic nonsense.

    1. (hollywood) with handle like that the professor couldn’t hope to get anything but a response like yours.

    2. Hollywood, it must be tough watching your hopes and dreams slowly fade away. The evidence keeps piling up that the whole Russian collusion theme was produced and directed by the Obama administration. One infiltrator tells Papadopoulos that Russians have Hillary’s emails, and then another infiltrator reports Papadopulos repeating the claim.

      Would make a good screenplay, don’t you think?

      1. Thanks for the update on the Pravda Faux News prattle. But here in the real world, where “evidence” rules, not so much. So sorry for your loss.

        this is to “I have a ‘Hannity was here’ tattoo across my lower back” mikey

        1. Sorry Marky Mark. I don’t get my news from one source. I get it from multiple,sources from both sides of the fence. You might want to try it if you want to really know what’s going on. It’s a shame that the evidence that was laid out by the NYT and WaPo isn’t considered useful by you.

      2. Hollywood – and the person who made the claims about hearing about the Clinton emails raised $25m for the Clinton Foundation and was not narcing for the AU government. Downer was doing it on behest of the Clintons.

        1. Paul: The idea that someone claiming to have heard something about Russians having Hillary’s emails as a reason for the FBI to be interested in that person is bogus on its face, since Russian possession of Hillary’s emails has been a matter of public information available for anyone to know about since March of 2013 — a full three years before Halper or Papadopoulos or the Australian diplomat that hangs out in bars made an issue out of it.


          Someone claiming to have heard that Russians had Hillary’s emails is NOT a viable excuse to open an investigation of that person 3 years after the information became public knowledge.
          And one didn’t even have to visit the RT (Russia Today) website to know about this, since it was widely covered by more-mainstream media, such as Forbes:


          Most likely, it was by gaining access to Blumenthal’s email account that the window was opened to get into Hillary’s server — although there were probably a dozen other ways they could have just as easily accessed Hillary’s downstairs bathroom server.

          Anyway, absent a good reason to spy on Papadopoulis, it appears that the FBI went with an extremely flimsy pretext.

  15. Sadly nothing will happen to these people and very few in the media will call them to task. This whole “collusion” thing has given our nation a black eye that it will never recover from. After seeing what they’ve done you have to ask yourself how many regular Americans have been railroaded by these agencies.
    Sessions should hand in his resignation ASAP.

  16. News Flash! The DOJ has completed its investigation of itself and the FBI this evening, and within only 3 hours! The finding are in! Obama, Lynch, Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, and Page have admitted that they’ve infiltrated the Trump campaign and conspired to rig the election against him, including concocting a Russian-collusion hoax.

    But before Trump supporters get too excited, they should know that Jeff Sessions has decided this evening as well that no charges should be brought because there was no intent to commit any crime on the part of Obama, Lynch, Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, or Page. Sessions added that “although the use of government employees and resources to infiltrate and surveil the Trump campaign and to conspire against Mr. Trump was not necessarily appropriate under the circumstances, such actions do not rise to the level of intent. Consequently, the Mueller investigation must continue without interference and the scope must be continually expanded to give Mr. Mueller the necessary flexibility he needs to bring charges.”

    1. Mister Adamo, Sir, the FBI said not one word about Crossfire Hurricane before the 2016 election. The most likely reason that the FBI did not say one word about Crossfire Hurricane before the 2016 election is that they did not know anywhere near enough about what was going on with The Russians and the Trump campaign to make it in the public interest to disclose anything at all about Crossfire Hurricane. For instance, the FBI did not know about the Trump Tower meeting before the 2016 election. And that’s a pity. For had the FBI known about the Trump Tower meeting before the 2016 election, it might have been in the public interest to disclose the counterintelligence investigation known as Crossfire Hurricane. Of course, there’s no telling exactly what effect that disclosure might have had on the outcome of the 2016 election. I mention it merely to underscore the point that the public did not know about the Trump Tower meeting before the 2016 election. And neither did the FBI.

      1. OTOH, the FBI did know about Papadopoulos’ foreknowledge of Russia’s possession of Clinton emails. But which emails? The missing Secretary of State emails? That might have been what Papadopoulos thought before Wikileaks published the DNC emails on July 22nd, 2016. After July 22nd, 2016, Papadopoulos had to have known that is wasn’t the missing Secretary of State emails that the Russians had had. And yet, Papadopoulos went on ahead and met with Stefan Halper on September 2nd, 2016, despite Papadopoulos’ confirmed foreknowledge that the Russians had had the DNC emails. At some point after his meeting with Halper, Papadopoulos destroyed the cell-phone he had been using and deleted his Facebook account in an effort to conceal his email exchanges with Ivan Timofeev and Olga Polanskaya.

        So why didn’t the FBI disclose its counterintelligence investigation to the public after Papadopoulos met with Halper on September 2nd, 2016, and before election day on November 8th, 2016? Are we seriously supposed to be believe that the FBI preferred to set Trump up for Impeachment rather than prevent Trump from being elected in the first place?

  17. re: “For many Trump supporters, this new information deepens suspicions of the role of the “deep state.” If we ever hope to come out of these poisonous times as a unified nation, the public must be allowed to see the full record on both sides.”

    Not just Trump supporters – all the independents who wish for FULL transparency.

    1. You’ve identified one of the major flaws in the thought process of Turley and many other ideologues, regardless of whether they’re on the “liberal” end of the idiot spectrum or the “conservative” end of the idiot spectrum.

      One thing that all ideologues have in common is the total disregard for the fact that MOST people don’t subscribe to their idiot ideological way of thinking. Most people are pragmatists, not ideologues (just as there are far more Independents than there are people who identify as either democrats or republicans.— almost twice as many) — and if one can believe the polls, while his support is growing, most people aren’t Trump supporters. But this doesn’t mean that people who don’t identify as Trump supporters have no interest in honest government, especially when it comes to the corrupt and out-of-control “intelligence community.”

      One doesn’t need to be a Trump supporter to be suspicious of the “deep state” and suggesting that one does need to be a Trump supporter is one of the most grotesque deflections employed by idiot ideologues such as Turley — and since he does it so often, I suspect that Turley doesn’t even realize he’s doing it.

      JT may be a bet more fair than most other idiot ideologues, but his thought process is still skewed by viewing things through the distorted prism of ideology and apparent disregard for the fact that most people aren’t ideologues.

      It’s a shame that an otherwise-intelligent person such as JT can’t figure out the basic flaw in his own way of thinking. I suspect his blind spot in this regard is related to his continual/continuous connection to the media, since the media is controlled almost exclusively by ideologues, left or right, who never cease to push the distorted ideological view as if it’s a majority opinion, which it’s definitely not.

  18. This is the inflection point.

    It’s the end of the beginning

    and the beginning of the end.

    What did Obama know and when did he know it?

    1. FBI agent Lisa Page told her fellow agent Peter Strzok that

      President Obama “wants to know everything we’re doing.”

    2. Plus, who was that masked man flying the black helicopter over your backyard yesterday?

      this is to “I can cut and paste conspiracy theories all day, just watch” georgie

      1. Marky Mark Mark – that masked man was one of your clients running drugs up from Mexico. We all know how it works.

Leave a Reply