Revocation of security clearances highlights concerns they were used for political purposes

The security clearances of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and five other individuals, who had been designated as “researchers”—including Clinton’s longtime lawyer, Cheryl Mills—were withdrawn between August and September.

Clinton’s security clearance was withdrawn at her request, according to a statement by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), citing State Department information.

Ongoing active clearances by Clinton and her associates could eventually be connected to evidence uncovered by the House Intelligence Committee of the use of information “to achieve partisan political purposes.”Continue Reading

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has proven himself a polarizing figure. Depending on who you speak to, Rosenstein, appears to occupy one of three rather varying roles.

According to some, Rosenstein is part of the problem, actively working against President Trump’s Administration. To others, he occupies a slightly more grey area, compromised but with the capability to adjust to a new political climate. Not actively bad, but not to be trusted either.

To add to the confusion, there are those who see Rosenstein as something of a quiet hero, a man who intentionally took control of the Russia Investigation out of the FBI’s hands and has operating with honorable, or at least fully legal intentions.Continue Reading

An analysis of documents suggests that Michael Sussmann, a lawyer for Perkins Coie—which had been retained by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign—was feeding information to FBI General Counsel James Baker and at least one journalist ahead of the FBI’s application for a FISA warrant on the Trump campaign.

The information provided by Sussmann could have been used by the FBI as “corroborating information.” This is particularly troubling given that the main source of the Russia-collusion allegations, former British spy Christopher Steele, had been hired by Perkins Coie—the law firm Sussmann works for.Continue Reading

The House Intelligence Committee voted on Friday, Sept. 28, to release a number of transcripts taken from interviews during their investigation into election interference from Russia. The move by the committee had been previously disclosed in a Sept. 16 interview with Devin Nunes on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo.

A significant number of man-hours and effort went into the preparation of the committee’s report—including the review of 7,292 pages of testimony.

As part of their investigation, the House committee noted that they interviewed 73 individuals, resulting in 55 transcribed interviews. The report also indicated that seven witnesses had invoked their Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination.Continue Reading

In a March 8, 2018, op-ed for the Daily Caller titled, The Ever-Changing ‘Russia Narrative’ Is False Public Manipulation, Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska noted how “the disintegration of evidence-based journalism permits a surprisingly small number of individuals to destroy bilateral or multilateral relations.”

Deripaska then described an unusual meeting that took place on March 16, 2017, between his lawyer and a former intelligence staffer for Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) named Dan Jones:Continue Reading

Foreign intel agencies played crucial role in creation of Russia-collusion narrative

President Donald Trump last week received phone calls from two allies saying, “please, can we talk.” Those “allies” were almost certainly the UK and Australia.

The high-level calls were most likely coordinated and related entirely to President Trump’s recent declassification order.

The message appears to have been simple and direct. As President Trump noted, “key Allies called to ask not to release.”

These calls should be receiving far more attention than they have.Continue Reading