Month: April 2018

Peter Schweizer, author of Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends, told SiriusXM hosts Rebecca Mansour and Joel Pollak during Thursday’s Breitbart News Tonight that the legal woes potentially awaiting Andrew McCabe began when the former deputy FBI director lied by characterizing the Bureau’s investigations of Hillary Clinton as executed in good faith.

Schweizer said Andrew McCabe leaked disinformation to the news media in the weeks leading up to 2016’s presidential election to portray the FBI’s leadership as managing a good faith investigation into Clinton’s felonious handling of classified information by conducting government communications via a private email system.

He said, “There were a series of articles in late October of 2016, so we’re talking about a week or two at most before the election. What essentially happened was people in the FBI leaked to the Wall Street Journal that there were a lot of people at the FBI — not only on the email investigation, but the Clinton Foundation investigation — that felt like they were being stonewalled. McCabe, according to the IG report, essentially leaked that, ‘No, there was an investigation going on. There was no stonewalling.’” He added that he did this “to create the impression that there were no roadblocks in the way of proceeding when, in fact, there were.”

LISTEN:

Schweizer continued, “So it’s a major problem for Andrew McCabe — because when the IG came to him to talk about the leaks, he essentially misled them — or in the vernacular, lied to them about it. What’s interesting about this … is not only is Andrew McCabe saying he wasn’t being deceptive; he’s saying that he was told by Comey that this was okay, that he authorized some leaks in the past, which Comey now denies. So you’ve got this really strange dynamic where Andrew McCabe is saying, ‘Well, I leaked, but I did so with the authority and the blessing of the then-FBI Director Jim Comey,’ and Jim Comey is saying, ‘No, he did not do it under my authority.’ So it’s going to be very interesting to see how this all shakes out. I think the finger pointing is only beginning.”

Schweizer noted how the genesis of today’s competing public relations campaigns between James Comey and Andrew McCabe lies in his Clinton Cash investigation. He reflected, “If you go back and look at an October 30, 2016, story, one of the stories mentioned in the IG report is a front-page piece in the Wall Street Journal that talks about the role that the book Clinton Cash played in launching the investigation, that apparently sealed offices of the FBI read the book. I think they, no doubt, had other information that they had tipped up, and the article alludes to that. Then there’s sort of an interesting series of paragraphs where some of the paragraphs say that the field offices of the FBI are frustrated because they are being hamstrung by headquarters and by the Obama Justice Department, but then you also have these paragraphs that essentially say, ‘No, Andrew McCabe is on the case, and he’s proceeding.’ Well, we now know based on the IG’s report that those paragraphs about Andrew McCabe being on the case, and it was proceeding, and everything’s good, was leaked by none other than Andrew McCabe.”

Schweizer recalled how McCabe’s wife was running for office in Virginia’s state Senate as a Democrat in 2016 while he broadly oversaw the FBI’s ostensible investigation of Clinton’s email system. He stated, “To put this into context, just a week or so before, these same Wall Street Journal reporters had broken the story about Andrew McCabe’s wife running for the state’s Senate, and more than half of her campaign money came from a PAC set up by Terry McAuliffe, who is a long-time bagman and fundraiser for the Clintons, who at the time was also governor of Virginia. There were a lot of angles here. … I have several friends who are former senior FBI officials, and they made clear to me that the notion that you could have a spouse of a senior FBI official running for a partisan political position and that would be tolerated at the FBI is totally new. That would not have been tolerated in the past. That was a very frustrating position for a lot of people at the FBI. They did not like the high profile in which McCabe was proceeding. He said he was not going to be involved in his wife’s campaign, and, of course, there were pictures of him actually campaigning for his wife, and McCabe’s solution to try to deal with this was to control it by leaking to the media, and then when he was confronted about it, of course, he lied about it, and that’s where his legal problems begin.”

Mansour described McCabe’s news media strategy as “typical beltway permanent political class behavior.” She then asked Schweizer, “It seems as if the Clintons are the Teflon crooks. How do they always weasel out of this? How do they get away with it?”

Schweizer explained the favorable treatment Clinton received from the FBI to protect her presidential ambitions. He remarked, “When Hillary Clinton was questioned, she was not put under oath. It was not done in a sort of public way. It was done very privately. She was snuck in, [and] she was snuck out of that interview. A lot of the questions about the conduct of her lawyers, the fact that her lawyers were the ones who were going through and deleting the emails, choosing which ones to delete, the fact that they invoked attorney-client privilege when it seemed that it was not appropriate as it related to this kind of conduct. What you see emerging with Comey and FBI leadership is giving the Clintons pass after pass after pass after pass, and that, I think, is a huge problem, particularly in the context of the kinds of activities the Clintons were engaged in. They have enjoyed the protections of people in the past. I think in this case, I would argue that the FBI essentially bent over backwards to essentially cover for the Clintons, and now, it’s all coming out. I think it’s going to lead to a lot of questions. It already has on Capitol Hill with this criminal referral. People are saying we need to take another look at this because it seems as if the fix were in as it related to the previous investigation of these matters.”

Clinton’s interview with the FBI was not recorded. The FBI did not pursue Cheryl Mills — Clinton’s former chief of staff at the State Department — for perjury after making false statements about Clinton’s unauthorized email system through which she evaded governmental capture of her electronic communications.

Mansour asked Schweizer if President Donald Trump will move on promises to combat political corruption, most commonly expressed during “Lock her up!” chants related to the former first lady’s alleged monetization of political influence.

Schweizer replied, “Where it stands with the Clintons right now is, there is an ongoing investigation relating to the Clinton Foundation. It’s been going on for awhile. I know that they have additional materials related to the emails. That material is there. It’s now up to the FBI. More specifically, it’s up to the Trump Department of Justice to take the next step because where were we back in 2016? We were in a situation where the FBI field offices were ready to process. They wanted subpoena powers. They wanted a greater ability to investigate the Clinton Foundation. … They were not given that by the Obama Justice Department. The Trump Justice Department could grant those wishes tomorrow. Perhaps they already have, but that is the next step so that we can look and see precisely what happened and bring this thing to a conclusion one way or another.”

Schweizer warned of the dangers in allowing political corruption to go unpunished. He said, “This is about something far more important than Bill and Hillary Clinton. They are probably not likely to run for office ever again, but the point is the precedent it sets. Are we really going to say now that senior government officials can set up a private server and then destroy emails when Congress has subpoenaed them? Are we really going to say that senior government officials can set up pay-to-play foundations, and they’re not going to face any legal repercussions? This is not about going after the Clintons. This is about dealing with very serious issues that they have established a precedent for, and we cannot allow that precedent to be common in this country because it’s very detrimental to our future.”

Schweizer described the Clintons as trailblazing innovative pioneers in the realm of political corruption. He stated, “The Clintons are the bridge here. The Clintons globalized corruption with the Clinton Foundation. They took foreign government money while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, our chief diplomat, and it’s now happening both with Republicans and Democrats. It’s a new radical change.”

Breitbart News Tonight broadcasts live Monday through Friday on SiriusXM’s Patriot channel 125 from 9:00 p.m. to midnight Eastern (6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Pacific).

Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter @rkraychik.

A plurality of voters, a full 42 percent, believe that the book written by disgraced former FBI Director James Comey is a “politically motivated attack on the president,” according to a poll released by Rasmussen Reports.

Despite glowing press coverage 24/7 over the last week, an anemic 40 percent believe Comey’s book is an “accurate portrayal of his dealings with Trump.” Nineteen percent remain undecided.

This terrible number comes on the heels of a poll from earlier this week that showed a plurality of 46 percent want Comey prosecuted for leaking classified information.

In other words, a plurality of voters see Comey as a dishonest, partisan hack — which is the exact opposite of the image he and his media are desperately trying to craft. This is a massive failure, not only on Comey’s part, but on the media’s part. Since Trump fired him, both Comey and the media have been trying to shape him into a victim, into the last honest man in DC, into a selfless hero.

We the people are obviously too smart to buy that. We are also not all that interested in buying his book.

Rasmussen also reports that only 36 percent of those polled are even “somewhat likely” to read Comey’s book, while 60 percent said they are unlikely to read it.

While Comey’s book is currently a number one seller on Amazon, there is anecdotal evidence it will flame out fast.

Comey’s biggest problem with public perception is that he does not wear well. He is obviously a man who is writing himself into his own story as the hero. Overall, though, he comes off as sanctimonious and insecure, a small, awkward and petty man hiding in a tall man’s body.

His book was supposed to contain the smoking gun proving Trump should be impeached, instead it is full of petty attacks on Trump’s appearance, self-aggrandizing, and holier-than-thou sermonizing from lifelong bureaucrat who leaked classified information and promoted partisan snakes like Andrew McCabe, who is now in serious legal jeopardy.

Moreover, Comey stupidly admitting that he re-opened the Clinton email investigation based on political considerations, based on his belief she would win the presidency and this was his way to remove a cloud over an incoming president’s head, beggars belief. Worse still is the news that Comey informed Trump about the most embarrassing parts of the Russian dossier without informing him that the dossier was created by the Clinton campaign!

It is also becoming more and more clear that the only reason Comey even bothered to brief Trump on this unverified nonsense was to set the president up. Comey knew his briefing (the news of which was immediately leaked to CNN anti-Trump activist Jake Tapper — who was probably standing by in cahoots) would magically turn a phony memo into legitimate news. It was all a set-up to allow the far-left CNN to report on a dossier they had been dying to report on, which in turn allowed the far-left BuzzFeed to release the full contents of  lies funded by Hillary Clinton.

Comey’s biggest problem is that none of his so-called revelations back up his rhetoric. He undoubtedly hates President Trump, probably for firing him, but nothing he details in his book, his interviews, or even in those classified memos that were finally released to the public, justify his hatred or Robert Mueller’s stupid investigation.

The public knows a witch hunt based on a nothingburger when they see one, and in Comey the public sees, not a man of integrity, but a petty bureaucrat with an inflated opinion of himself looking to get rich off of the media’s abiding Trump hatred.

Comey will only be remembered as a footnote, and a ridiculous one at that.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

In newly-released personal memos, ex-FBI Director James Comey wrote that he briefed President Donald Trump on unverified claims about an alleged escapade with prostitutes in Moscow in 2013 because “media like CNN had them and were looking for a news hook.”

In actuality, Comey’s very briefing, which was subsequently leaked to CNN, provided the network with the hook to publish a story on the controversial dossier containing the infamous “Russian prostitute” claims as well as unsubstantiated charges of collusion between Russia and members of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.  CNN’s report resulted in worldwide coverage of the dossier charges.

In its report, CNN noted that the dossier claims were circulating for months among the news media, and that the inclusion of the dossier claims in the briefing with Trump and another with President Obama gave the charges some credibility.

Last night, the redacted and declassified sections of Comey’s 15 pages of memos were released after the documents were sent to Congress by the Justice Department.

Comey recounts a January 6, 2017 briefing with President-Elect Trump at Trump Tower at which he informed Trump about the dossier allegations after other officials left the room and the two of them were alone.

Comey says he told Trump that he was briefing him in part because CNN was looking to run with the story:

I said I wasn’t saying this was true, only that I wanted him to know both that it had been reported and that the reports were in many hands. I said media like CNN had them and were looking for a news hook. I said it was important that we not give them the excuse to write that the FBI has the material or [REDACTED] and that we were keeping it very close-hold. He said he couldn’t believe they hadn’t gone with it. I said it was inflammatory stuff that they would get killed for reporting straight up from the source reports.

In his memoir, published earlier this week, Comey also claims that CNN was a factor in his decision to include the dossier claims in the classified briefing to Trump and another briefing to President Obama.

He wrote:

Still, I could see no way out of it. The FBI was aware of the material. Two United States senators separately contacted me to alert me to its existence and the fact that many in Washington either had it or knew of it. CNN had informed the FBI press office that they were going to run with it as soon as the next day.

The news hook that CNN in part used to report on the dossier claims was actually the briefing on the matter by Comey, and a similar briefing to President Obama by administration officials.

On January 10, CNN was first to report the leaked information that the controversial contents of the dossier were presented during classified briefings inside classified documents presented one week earlier to Obama and Trump.

The news network cited “multiple U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the briefings” – in other words, officials leaking information about classified briefings – revealing the dossier contents were included in a two-page synopsis that served as an addendum to a larger report on Russia’s alleged attempts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

The documents were given to the politicians during the briefings delivered by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, and NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers, the officials told CNN.

The network reported the documents state that “Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump” and contain “allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.”

CNN reported how the briefings provided credibility to the dossier charges that were circulating among the news media for months but remained largely unreported:

Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.

It would later emerge that the dossier had been paid for by Trump’s primary political opponents, namely Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). It was produced by the controversial Fusion GPS firm.

Just after CNN’s January 10 report on the classified briefings about the dossier, BuzzFeed infamously published the dossier’s full unverified contents.

The New York Times used CNN’s story to report some contents of the dossier the same day as CNN’s January 10 report on the briefings.

After citing the CNN story, the Times reported:

The memos describe sex videos involving prostitutes with Mr. Trump in a 2013 visit to a Moscow hotel. The videos were supposedly prepared as “kompromat,” or compromising material, with the possible goal of blackmailing Mr. Trump in the future.

The memos also suggest that Russian officials proposed various lucrative deals, essentially as disguised bribes in order to win influence over Mr. Trump.

The memos describe several purported meetings during the 2016 presidential campaign between Trump representatives and Russian officials to discuss matters of mutual interest, including the Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee and Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman, John D. Podesta.

Immediately following CNN’s article, National Intelligence Director Clapper added fuel to the media fire about the dossier by releasing a statementthat he spoke to Trump to express “my profound dismay at the leaks that have been appearing in the press” – referring to the leaks to CNN about the classified briefing. He called the leaks “extremely corrosive and damaging to our national security.”

Clapper’s statement generated fresh media coverage of the dossier briefing.

Prior to CNN’s report, which was picked up by news agencies worldwide, the contents of the dossier had been circulating among news media outlets, but the sensational claims were largely considered too risky to publish.

All that changed when the dossier contents were presented to Obama and Trump during the classified briefings. In other words, the briefings themselves and the subsequent leak to CNN about those briefings by “multiple US officials with direct knowledge,” seem to have given the news media the opening to report on the dossier’s existence as well as allude to some of the document’s unproven claims.

In an updated version of CNN’s report, the network revealed that it had reviewed the 35-page dossier and would not report “on details of the memos, as it has not independently corroborated the specific allegations.”

When it published the full dossier, BuzzFeed reported that the contents had circulated “for months” and were known to journalists.

The website reported, “The documents have circulated for months and acquired a kind of legendary status among journalists, lawmakers, and intelligence officials who have seen them. Mother Jones writer David Corn referred to the documents in a late October column.”

In his statement following the leaks to CNN about the dossier briefings to Obama and Trump, Clapper also said the dossier contents had been “widely circulated in recent months among the media, members of Congress and Congressional staff even before the IC became aware of it.”

It seems the news media waited for the leak about the dossier briefings first reported by CNN before publicizing on the dossier’s existence and some of its contents.

Yet Comey continues to claim the opposite was the case – that he conducted the briefings because of the possibility of news media coverage.

In his June 2016 prepared remarks before the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in June, Comey also made that claim when he detailedwhy the Intelligence Community briefed Obama and Trump on the “salacious material” – a clear reference to the dossier.

Comey wrote:

The IC leadership thought it important, for a variety of reasons, to alert the incoming President to the existence of this material, even though it was salacious and unverified. Among those reasons were: (1) we knew the media was about to publicly report the material and we believed the IC should not keep knowledge of the material and its imminent release from the President-Elect; and (2) to the extent there was some effort to compromise an incoming President, we could blunt any such effort with a defensive briefing.

Comey is clearly painting a picture that he needed to brief Trump and Obama on the dossier claims because of supposedly imminent news media reports.

Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.