Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

News

More BOMBSHELL evidence of the intelligence community working against Trump for partisan reasons

At some point, some rational journalist is going to have to start openly wondering if they’ve been wrong about this FBI/DOJ/Mueller stuff all along, won’t they?

Published

on

At some point, some rational journalist is going to have to start openly wondering if they’ve been wrong about this FBI/DOJ/Mueller stuff all along, won’t they?

The overwhelming majority of agents working for the FBI/DOJ are wonderful, hard-working professionals, which begs the question, how did so many anti-Trump, pro-Hillary Clinton agents get in on the Clinton investigation, the Russia investigation, and the Mueller investigation?

The material that has leaked out over the last few months has proven that at least 4-5 of the agents had a definite anti-Trump animus and that animus was bad enough that Mueller canned them from his investigation.

Trending: WATCH: Omar Openly Mocks Conservative Christians From Floor of House of Representatives

Now, we’re learning that there is even more evidence of the intelligence community working against Trump for partisan reasons.

take our poll - story continues below

Who is most likely to win the Democrat nomination?

  • Who is most likely to win the Democrat nomination?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Here’s what the Hill found in recently uncovered memos:

Multiple reviews of whether FBI agents’ political bias affected the Russia-Trump collusion case remain in their infancy, but investigators already have unearthed troubling internal communications long withheld from public view.

We already know from FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok’s now-infamous text messages with his fellow agent and reported lover, Lisa Page, that Strzok — the man driving that Russia collusion investigation — disdained Donald Trump and expressed willingness to use his law enforcement powers to “stop” the Republican from becoming president.

The question that lingers, unanswered: Did those sentiments affect official actions?

Memos the FBI is now producing to the Department of Justice (DOJ) inspector general and multiple Senate and House committees offer what sources involved in the production, review or investigation describe to me as “damning” or “troubling” evidence.

They show Strzok and his counterintelligence team rushing in the fall of 2016 to find “derogatory” information from informants or a “pretext” to accelerate the probe and get a surveillance warrant on figures tied to the future president.

The memos prove that Strzok and his team railroaded Trump associate Carter Page (who has still never been accused of any kind of wrongdoing) and used him as a scapegoat to spy on the Trump campaign. Strzok’s own words in the memos damn him for his immoral tactics and obvious partisan behavior.

The memos also indicate that certain FBI officials were knowingly and maliciously leaking information from their investigations to Democrats in Congress and to the media.

These and other documents are still being disseminated to various oversight bodies in Congress, and more revelations are certain to occur.

Yet, now, irrefutable proof exists that agents sought to create pressure to get “derogatory” information and a “pretext” to interview people close to a future president they didn’t like.

Clear evidence also exists that an investigation into still-unproven collusion between a foreign power and a U.S. presidential candidate was driven less by secret information from Moscow and more by politically tainted media leaks.

And that means the dots between expressions of political bias and official actions just got a little more connected.

In response to all of the bad news, Democrat leader Adam Schiff (D-CA) has been trying to obfuscate what is really happening by attacking Republicans for being on Trump’s side.

Schiff has even begun mocking a few GOP Congressional leaders as ‘The Four Horsemen,” but Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) isn’t worried about anything Schiff has to say. In fact, to hear Gowdy talk about it… nobody in the GOP “gives a damn” about what Schiff thinks.

From RCP:

“Let me tell you this about Adam,” Gowdy began. “Adam’s had a terrible last couple of years. He wanted to be the attorney general under Hillary Clinton and no one in the country worked harder to protect her than Adam Schiff.”

“He wanted to be the head of the CIA. He wanted to run for California and the run for Senate and the People’s Republic of California, but he couldn’t win either of those seats. So, now, now, he wants to be the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Speaking of the apocalypse, Adam Schiff wants to be the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee,” he said.
“If you ever have — I don’t know — a couple of three months with nothing else to do, I want you to go back, Jason, and think of all the things you would not know if you had taken Adam Schiff’s advice. You wouldn’t know the whole — the spontaneous reaction to a video was a hoax in Libya. You would never have read the first Chris Stevens email. You wouldn’t know that Hillary Clinton had this unique email arrangement with herself because Adam Schiff did everything in his power to keep you from finding out,” Gowdy continued.

“You wouldn’t know about the dossier. You wouldn’t know who funded it. You wouldn’t know it was used in a court proceeding. You wouldn’t know about Strzok and Page. In fact, you wouldn’t even be having the show tonight. You wouldn’t be having the show about Strzok and Page if Adam Schiff had had his,” Gowdy finished.

 

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.

News

Trump, Pentagon Agree to Troop Escalation in The Middle East

The reason is plain to see.

Published

on

Donald Trump

The Middle East is again bracing for turbulence this week after a number of yet-unpunished acts of aggression perpetrated by Iran draw attention to the region. Such turmoil is nothing new in this particular corner of the globe, where religious and political tensions run high seemingly nonstop.  The escalation this week comes to us courtesy of Iran, who are being blamed for two attacks on the Saudi Arabian oil infrastructure. The first fracas took place on the high seas where underwater drones acting as torpedoes “sabotaged” several Saudi oil tankers.  Mere hours later, an airborne drone caused a disruptive explosion to a Saudi-owned pipeline. US President Donald Trump has maintained his hope for staying uninvolved throughout the incidents, but it looks like at least some American military members will be headed to the region. “We’re going to be sending a relatively small number of troops,” the president told reporters outside the White House on Friday. “Mostly protective. Some very talented people are going to the Middle East right now. And we’ll see what happens.” No large military units, such as U.S. Army brigade combat teams, are expected to deploy. Instead, senior military leaders want to deploy an additional Patriot anti-aircraft missile battery, a defensive weapon system. They also want to deploy another warship or submarine to the region, more surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft and potentially more Air Force fighter jets. The total number of troops being deployed is said to be around 2,000. The drama between the US and Iran has been growing ever-more severe since President Trump effectively nullified America’s involvement in an Obama-era “nuclear deal” between the two nations.

Continue Reading

News

Fake News Non-Neurologists Diagnose The Donald Live On Air

Never before has a President been subjected to so many uneducated opinions on his mental acuity.

Published

on

Joe Scarborough

The ways in which President Donald Trump has been criticized are unprecedented in American history. Rising to power from outside of the Washington Swamp was Trump’s first sin in the eyes of many DC fat cats.  This CEO-in-Chief has wasn’t elected to play their game, and it shows both in Trump’s economic effectiveness and in the opposition that he’s face. Simply put:  The President is a threat to the Beltway’s cozy career politicians. That fact, when amplified by the existence of “the resistance”, has somehow given the mainstream media carte blanche to speculate wildly about this President. Take the latest from Morning Joe, for instance. Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski agreed Friday that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is “sharp as a tack” while President Trump’s mental capacity has “completely changed.” The co-hosts discussed the ongoing feud between Pelosi, D-Calif., and Trump, which erupted this week after Pelosi accused Trump of engaging in a “cover-up” and the president cut short a meeting on infrastructure with Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. Scarborough said he’s known Pelosi for 25 years and she’s “tougher today than she was” back then and the difference between the two is “not even close.” The footage was pure media hysteria. https://twitter.com/Morning_Joe/status/1131866287032938496 President Trump has long suffered from the uninformed and uneducated opinions on non-doctors in the mainstream media, but with the focus suddenly on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s linguistic acuity, these attacks have been ramped up significantly.  

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend