Connect with us

Comey And Mueller Majorly Blindsided – New Evidence Destroys Claims

Published

on

On Sean Hannity’s radio show, Seamus Bruner from the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), a researcher and author of the book “Compromised: How Money and Politics Drive FBI Corruption,” joined Peter Schweizer, GAI president and Breitbart News senior editor-at-large to explain how former FBI Directors James Comey and Robert Mueller leveraged their government positions to enrich themselves.

Bruner said this is a familiar story about the so-called revolving door where being a public servant turns into self-service. He then added that they followed the money all the way to the top, and we found that these choir boys or boy scouts — as the media likes to depict them — James Comey and Robert Mueller, they’re really no better than anyone else in the swamp. They use their public service, their contacts, and position as they cash in through the revolving door.

Here is more via Breitbart:

“Bruner described Lockheed Martin’s — the country’s largest national defense and security contractor — hiring of James Comey in 2005 to the dual position of general counsel and senior vice president as unusual. Comey was 44 at the time and without requisite corporate experience.

Bruner added, “[James Comey] wasn’t just consulting Lockheed Martin, he was their general counsel and a senior vice president at the corporation, which begs the question, why would you choose a young James Comey? He’s got no corporate experience of that kind.”

Bruner drew on a 2012 Huffington Post article describing Next Generation identification — a proposed biometric database and facial recognition system commissioned by the FBI via Lockheed Martin — as a “billion-dollar boondoggle.” He noted that Comey “signed off” on the project as a Lockheed Martin executive and chief legal counsel in 2012, and the project’s authorization by then FBI Director Robert Mueller.

Bruner spoke of Comey’s and Mueller’s complementary roles in expanding “the surveillance state.”

“James Comey and Robert Mueller have this long history together going back to the nineties at the DOJ,” recalled Bruner:

They’ve been very concerned with matters relating to surveillance, especially FISA and the Patriot Act. We see repeatedly throughout the early 2000s and all the way up through today [that] Robert Mueller and James Comey wanted to “tear down the wall,” so to speak, between intelligence agencies, and had issues with what they call “the going dark problem,” where they didn’t have enough information. So they really rapidly expanded [what I describe as] “the surveillance state” which is now, of course, being used against journalists, citizens, and even now a presidential candidate.

Schweizer explained how government officials leverage their roles towards self-enrichment: “What this highlights is this problem, happens at Health and Human Services, it happens at DoD, where you have government officials, who basically, while they’re in government, create demand for their own services when they leave.”

Schweizer continued:

So in the case of Jim Comey, he goes to Lockheed Martin from the Department of Justice. At the Department of Justice, he helped establish some of these very programs that Lockheed Martin was getting contracts to implement and carry out. So he sets up these programs, who is Lockheed Martin going to look for to give a paycheck to who understands this program better than anybody else? The government official who helped put it together, and that is sort of a tried and true story in Washington, DC, and the point is, you played that clip at the beginning of James Comey talking about how sensitive he is to the appearances of doing something wrong or wrongdoing, the fact of the matter is, this is a very familiar story, unfortunately, in the swamp.

Schweizer concluded, “What Seamus shows is this pattern where, when Mueller is in the private sector and Comey is in government, there seem to be contracts and resources that flow in that direction, as well. It’s kind of a tag team arrangement that these two have. It speaks to the financial underbelly that exists even at the Department of Justice. … There are lots of ways in which these officials self-enrich themselves.”

So this is how we constantly see people going into office making $150k a year and somehow retire 10 years later worth over $10 million dollars. It was about time someone explained this corruption which has been happening under our very eyes.

People of modest means come into positions in government and all of a sudden they are multi-millionaires. And all on the backs of the American taxpayer who seems to never be thanked for what they do. Instead, all we hear from most politicians is that we don’t pay enough. Even that if we don’t pay more taxes we are unpatriotic, just like that creepy Joe Biden said during the 2008 election cycle when asked about taxes.

They rob cheat and steal while us hard working honest American people go to work every day. And when it’s time to support us, most choose Illegal Aliens over us. Makes you wonder how long this charade will go on.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


VIDEO: Rashida Tlaib: Dems Discussing Arresting Trump Officials

Published

on

...

* By

It’s crystal clear..that the left should never ever be allowed into our government. These are dangerous folks.

Maybe Rashida should be arrested for her connections to Islamic terrorists. The fact that this woman is in our government…is despicable!

Via The Daily Wire:

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) stated on Tuesday that House Democrats were discussing behind closed doors how to arrest the members of President Donald Trump’s administration who did not comply with congressional subpoenas.

“Let me tell you, this is pretty — and this is the last caucus conversation we had. Do you know this is really unprecedented? This is the worst time we’ve ever had a situation like this,” Tlaib said during a town hall meeting. “So they’re trying to figure out — no joke — they’re trying to figure out, ‘Well, is it the D.C. police that goes and gets them?’ No, no.”

“What are we hoping? I mean, I’m not in those kinds of conversations, but I’m asking, like, you know, what happens? And they’re like, ‘Well, Rashida, we’re trying to figure it out ourselves because this is uncharted territory,’” she continued. “No, I’m telling you that they’re trying to be like, ‘Well, where are we going to put them? Where are we going to hold them?’ No, I mean those are the kinds of things they’re trying to tread carefully.”

Accordingly, in an escalating effort to force White House officials comply with congressional subpoenas, House Democrats have reportedly been reexamining holding those members of the administration in inherent contempt — a power that the legislature has not used since 1935.

The Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) explains that inherent contempt is the oldest of three strategies that Congress can use to enforce subpoenas. According to the Washington, D.C.-based think tank:

“Since 1935, Congress has relied on the executive and judicial branches when people refuse to comply with congressional subpoenas. This practice makes sense: if Congress cannot get the information it needs on its own authority, then it can rely on the authority of the other branches of government. However, there is another option. Instead of turning to another branch, Congress can legally imprison or fine individuals who refuse to comply.”

Tlaib incorrectly suggested that the process could be enforced by the Washington, D.C. Police Department — the procedure actually only involves the chamber that is concerned. Following a contempt citation, the individual is arrested by the chamber’s sergeant-at-arms, and subsequently brought to the floor for punishment, which may include imprisonment.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

Whistleblower Didn’t Follow Law: Went To Schiff’s House Intel Panel Before IG

Published

on

...

* By

This pretty much explains the Democrat party. When do any of them follow the law? None of them have ever been held accountable for the laws they continue to break.

It is important for the American people to fight back. These politicians believe they are above the law. Time to stop allowing that.

Via Breitbart:

A CIA officer whistleblower failed to follow the law for protecting members of the intelligence community (IC) seeking to report government malfeasance by going to the Democrat head of the House Intelligence Community before the IC inspector general (IG).

On Wednesday, the New York Times (NYT) revealed:

The Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistleblower complaint, according to a spokesman and current and former American officials.

However, the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) of 1998 explicitly requires an official concerned about wrongdoing within the government to go to the IC inspector general before the congressional panels in charge of oversight of the intelligence community.

Under a section titled, “Summary of Procedures for Reporting Urgent Concerns Pursuant to the ICWPA,” the official Director of National Intelligence (DNI) website states:

The employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee –

a. before making such a contact, furnishes to the DNI, through the IC IG, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and
b. obtains and follows from the DNI, through the IC IG, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with necessary and appropriate security procedures.

The CIA whistleblower in question went to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff’s office days before the intelligence community’s inspector general, the internal investigator, and watchdog.

Investigators from the office of the IC IG are expected to operate independently of political leadership in government.

Via Breitbart:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) knew about the “whistleblower” complaint days before it was officially filed, it was reported on Wednesday.

Schiff – who performed a dramatized version of President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky during last week’s hearing – was aware of the broad contents of the “whistleblower” complaint days before the partisan CIA official formally filed the complaint, the New York Times reported.

After the detailing his accusations to the “the agency’s top lawyer,” the “whistleblower” took his complaint to a House Intelligence Committee aide, who relayed the information to Schiff, who is largely leading the charge on the impeachment inquiry.

Per the New York Times:

Before going to Congress, the C.I.A. officer had a colleague convey his accusations to the agency’s top lawyer. Concerned about how that avenue for airing his allegations was unfolding, the officer then approached a House Intelligence Committee aide, alerting him to the accusation against Mr. Trump. In both cases, the original accusation was vague.

The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the officer find a lawyer to advise him and file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff or anyone else, an official said.

As the Times detailed, the “whistleblower” eventually brought the complaint to Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for the intelligence community, as Schiff’s aide suggested. That move “gave the whistle-blower added protections against reprisals and also allowed him to legally report on classified information,” the Times reports:

While House Intelligence Committee members are allowed to receive classified whistle-blower complaints, they are not allowed to make such complaints public, according to a former official. A complaint forwarded to the committee by the inspector general gives it more latitude over what it can publicize.

By the time the whistle-blower filed his complaint, Mr. Schiff and his staff knew at least vaguely what it contained.

The complaint – based entirely on second-hand information – ultimately led to the release of the transcript, detailing the contents of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. The transcripts do not show the president engaging in quid pro quo for dirt on Joe and Hunter Biden, as Schiff suggested during his fabricated reenactment at last week’s hearing.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Latest Articles

[ifform list="4174" submit="Subscribe"]

Send this to a friend