Connect with us

NYT: Ukraine Whistleblower Is A CIA Agent, Was ‘Assigned’ White House

Published

on

All agents, hired or promoted, by American traitor John Brennan, need to be investigated and thrown into prison. John Brennan is one evil man.

Get ready, folks. This is only the beginning of the deep state corruption.

Via Daily Caller:

The whistleblower who accused President Donald Trump of seeking political favors from Ukraine is reportedly a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operative.

The agent had been seconded to the White House for duty, but has returned to his regular desk duty, according to three sources, The New York Times reported Thursday.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi cited the whistleblower as a reason for her deciding to proceed with a formal inquiry into impeaching the president, when she spoke at a Monday news conference.

The anonymous intelligence officer was the subject of much comment and speculation at the Thursday morning House Intelligence Committee meeting that heard testimony from Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire. The agent was apparently concerned about the details in a phone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, but had no direct knowledge of the call and relied on hearsay.

His complaint was released to the public Thursday.

The whistleblower’s lawyers are being coy about their client’s employment status, and will not acknowledge his status as a CIA agent, suggesting revealing any information about him could potentially put his safety in jeopardy.

The CIA has also offered no comment on its connection with the whistleblower, and Maguire’s office merely reiterated its commitment to ensuring the individual’s personal security when contacted by the Times.

Former CIA Analyst Rips Whistleblower Complaint To Shreds

Via The Daily Wire:

As the Democratic Party feigns outrage over the recently declassified “whistleblower” complaint in which an unnamed intelligence official asserts numerous allegations against President Trump based entirely on third-party hearsay, a Twitter thread from former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz ripping the complaint to shreds has since gone viral.

In the lengthy thread, Fleitz first points out that the whistleblower’s intent is clearly political based on the language in the given text and that he/she should never have had knowledge of the July phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky.

“As a former CIA analyst and former NSC official who edited transcripts of POTUS phone calls with foreign leaders, here are my thoughts on the whistleblower complaint which was just released,” begins Fleitz. “This is not an intelligence matter. It is a policy matter and a complaint about differences over policy. Presidential phone calls are not an intelligence concern. The fact that IC officers transcribe these calls does not give the IC IG jurisdiction over these calls. It appears that rules restricting access and knowledge of these sensitive calls was breached. This official was not on this call, not on the approved dissem list and should not have been briefed on the call.”

Fleitz goes on to say that the “whistleblower” clearly had help in authoring the report and wondered if he spoke to House Intelligence Committee members beforehand.

“The way this complaint was written suggested the author had a lot of help. I know from my work on the House Intel Committee staff that many whistleblowers go directly to the intel oversight committees. Did this whistleblower first meet with House Intel committee members?” ponders Fleitz. “It is therefore important that Congress find out where this complaint came from. What did House and Senate intel committee dem members and staff know about it and when? Did they help orchestrate this complaint?”

“My view is that this whistleblower complaint is too convenient and too perfect to come from a typical whistleblower,” he continues. “Were other IC officers involved? Where outside groups opposed to the president involved?”

“This complaint will further damage IC relations with the White House for many years to come because IC officers appear to be politicizing presidential phone calls with foreign officials and their access to the president and his activities in the White House,” says Fleitz. “Worst of all, this IC officer — and probably others — have blatantly crossed the line into policy. This violates a core responsibility of IC officers is to inform, but not make policy. This is such a grievous violation of trust between the IC and the White House that it would not surprise me if IC officers are barred from all access to POTUS phone calls with foreign officials.”

Fleitz’s assertions that the “whistleblower” complaint clearly had a political motivation matches a report from the underlying inspector general.

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

 

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


Judge Orders Hillary Be Deposed For Judicial Watch-Benghazi Lawsuit

Published

on

...

* By

We are lucky to have Judicial Watch. This is the only organization that is fighting for justice. This woman shouldn’t be walking free for the crimes she’s committed. No American citizen would be able to get away with these crimes. The left truly believe they are above the law.

It would be nice to see a Clinton in Prison.

Via Breitbart:

A federal judge on Monday ordered former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to deliver a sworn deposition in response to a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch over her role in the Obama administration’s response to the 2012 terror attack on the U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya.

U.S. District Court Royce Lamberth wrote in court filings that Clinton’s written answers to questions regarding the matter in a separate case were “incomplete” and “unhelpful” and demanded more information.

“As extensive as the existing record is, it does not sufficiently explain Secretary Clinton’s state of mind when she decided it would be an acceptable practice to set up and use a private server to conduct State Department business,” wrote Lamberth. “Simply put, her responses left many more questions than answers.”

The judge added: “Even years after the FBI investigation, the slow trickle of new emails has yet to be explained.”

Judicial Watch initiated the lawsuit in 2014 to uncover whether Clinton used her private email server to communicate about the Benghazi attack to skirt the Freedom of Information Act and whether the State Department reviewed records following an FOIA request from Judicial Watch. On September 11th, Ansar al-Sharia terrorists attacked the diplomatic compound, killing U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens and U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith.

FLASHBACK August 2019 Court Grants NEW Discovery on Clinton Emails!

Via Judicial Watch:

We have won a significant victory in our pursuit of the truth about Hillary Clinton’s misuse of official email and the Deep State’s efforts to cover it up.

A federal judge granted us seven additional depositions, three interrogatories and four document requests related to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private, unauthorized email server.

Hillary Clinton and her former top aide and current lawyer Cheryl Mills were given 30 days to oppose being deposed by Judicial Watch (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)).

The court rejected Justice and State Department arguments to protect Mrs. Clinton and the agencies from additional discovery and ordered agency lawyers to respond to our questions about their knowledge of the Clinton email issue. The court granted all of our requested discovery but gave Clinton and Mills 30 days to file any opposition to the requests to question them in person under oath.

The new court-ordered discovery allows us to take testimony and gather evidence of Clinton’s handling of emails, specifically in an “after action memo” drafted by Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s senior advisor at State and White House liaison. The memo was created in December 2014 to memorialize the Clinton team’s processing of the Clinton emails. The discovery also asks when Justice and State Department attorneys learned about Clinton’s private email use; and what senior records-keeping officials at the State Department knew about Clinton’s emails and when they knew it.

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

Continue Reading

VA Dems Introduce Bill To Take Pensions From Sheriffs Who Opposed Gun Control

Published

on

...

* By

Maybe it’s time we start taking pensions from all elected officials. Officials who are supposed to serve us. Not us serving them. These elected officials become millionaires in office. These people continue to take from the American people.

Democrat leadership is useless and dangerous. None of them should ever be allowed to have power. This is what they do with that power. The Founders warned us this would happen.

Dear American people..stop voting these people into office.

Via Breitbart:

During CPAC, Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins told Breitbart News that Virginia Democrats are punishing sheriffs who continue to stand against gun control.

On December 7, 2019, Breitbart News reported Jenkins’ announcement that he was ready to “deputize thousands” to defend Second Amendment rights had the Virginia Democrats passed gun bans and other controls that were being pushed.

He made clear he equated his actions with calling forth the militia to defend freedom. He quoted Richard Henry Lee from 1788, saying, “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and include all men capable of bearing arms.”

Over the past weekend of CPAC, Jenkins told Breitbart News:

In early December I came out against the newly proposed legislation to restrict everything from ‘assault weapons,’ so-called ‘assault weapons,’ to ‘high capacity magazines…and said that if we’re going to take away weapons from law-abiding citizens I intend to swear in thousands of citizens as reserve deputy sheriffs so they can keep those weapons and be able to protect themselves and use them.

Jenkins said that he and other sheriffs who took a similar stand were threatened with having insurance coverage removed “from deputies and staff.” He said that sheriffs throughout the state were offered a $10,000 raise “if we would tuck tail and follow [the Democrats’] lead and stop the push-back.”

But Jenkins refused to cower, and said they responded by saying “they would take away the raises of the deputies if we didn’t stop.”

He said State Sen. Janet Howell (D) “introduced a bill for next session where she could remove the pension of sheriffs…next year for…saying that we won’t follow unconstitutional laws or that I would use my lawful powers as sheriff to swear in thousands of people as deputies.”

Virginia Sheriff Vows to ‘Deputize Thousands’ to Defend Gun Rights

Via Breitbart:

Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins says he will “deputize thousands” to defend gun rights should incoming Democrats use their legislative positions to enact more gun control in Virginia.

On December 4, 2019, Jenkins used a Facebook post to thank the Culpeper County Board of Supervisors for standing with the dozens of other counties that have declared their intention to defend the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

But his joy was mixed with somber warnings:

Every Sheriff and Commonwealth Attorney in Virginia will see the consequences if our General Assembly passes further unnecessary gun restrictions. “Red Flag” laws without due process will create enormous conflict as well.

America has more guns than citizens and murder has long been illegal. At best, the proposed gun restrictions will disarm or handicap our law-abiding in their defense and possibly cause a criminal to choose another tool for evil.

He added:

I remain very optimistic that our General Assembly will not pass the proposed bills. Obviously, if passed, there are many of us willing to challenge these laws through the courts. In addition, if necessary, I plan to properly screen and deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own firearms.”

In January, Sheriff Richard Vaughan vowed to defend the 2nd Amendment, also.

WATCH:

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