Apr 162018

BOMBSHELL – Loretta Lynch threatened the NYPD and the NY FBI with charges on the Eric Garner case if they went public with the contents of Weiner’s laptop

Lynch Threatened To Re-open Investigation Of NYPD Over Eric Garner's Death

Independent Journalist TracyBeanz has uncovered a trail of dirt on Loretta Lynch discovered within thr OIG report on Andrew McCabe.

A summary of a thread by @tracybeanz on twitter:
  1. OIG BOMBSHELL!! Hidden within the OIG report on McCabe’s leak to Barrett of the WSJ, is an astronomically damning correlation between Loretta Lynch, the NY Field Office of the FBI, McCabe, and the NYPD. PLEASE SHARE
  2. On September 28, 2016, McCabe is made aware of the information they found regarding Hillary Clinton on Anthony Weiners laptop in an unrelated “sexting” case they are investigating.
  3. McCabe (amongst other atrocities) sits on this information for an entire MONTH before there begins to be unrest within the local office and the force. The agents on staff and the NYPD appear to get very restless about what was on the computer and the fact it is being concealed
  4. On 10/24/16, AG Loretta Lynch swaps out the federal investigative team looking into the officers responsible for the Eric Garner case. Loretta Lynch swaps out the original team investigating the Eric Garner case with a new team
  5. This is telling, because as ABC hints, it appears they are pushing more aggressively for an indictment and conviction of the officers involved. A SI Grand Jury failed to indict in the case. It was passed to Justice.
  6. Now, in the OIG report on McCabe’s leaks to the WSJ, it states that on 10/26/16 McCabe and NY_ADIC of the FBI participate in a “hastily convened conference call- with LL who delivers the same message about leaks with a focus on leaks in the Eric Garner case” Huh? Why?
  7. It is very interesting that LL would be on this call, and it is very interesting they are admonishing the NYFBI for leaks- especially if they were supposed to be about the WSJ article- as later noted in the report, the NY agents wouldn’t have KNOWN the information McCabe leaks
  8. The same day as that phone call, 10/26/16, Rudy Giuliani is on all of the MSM floating some “big surprises” in the coming days.
  9. So to recap – Mccabe and Lynch are admonishing the NY Field office about leaks they didn’t make, while talking about Garner? Two days after this, Comey sends the letter to Congress announcing that they are reopening the Clinton Email investigation.
  10. On 11/1/16, McCabe recuses himself from any investigations having to do with Clinton.
  11. Here is where it gets VERY interesting. Erik Prince- a name you should know – appears in an interview on Breitbart news, where he drops some MAJOR bombshells about what was found on Weiners laptop. He states IN THE INTERVIEW that the JD was using Garner as leverage!!
  12. THIS IS MAJOR. Why? Because now we have both the OIG report confirming they spoke with FBI in NY about the Garner case, AND we have Prince confirming they were threatened with the case.
  13. You may remember the name Preet Bhara…… So, all of this makes it VERY clear that Prince was getting good information from his sources in the NYPD, because in this interview with Breitbart he mentions they are using Garner to threaten the dept.
  14. This call was relegated to “conspiracy” land because it spoke of Epstein Island, and the MSM will not touch that with a 10ft pole. The OIG report confirms that Prine was, in fact, telling the truth.
  15. In essence, it appears that the AG of the USA, used the Justice Department to threaten the FBI and NYPD into SITTING on evidence of DISGUSTING criminality to protect Hillary Clinton, et al. This is a STRIKING ABUSE of power and it truly makes me sick. RAISE AWARENESS.



Apr 102018

The politically motivated FBI could act on raiding a lawyer’s office for documents related to an adult film star but couldn’t act on stopping the shooter that murdered 17 at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida even though he was reported to them multiple times!



Apr 102018

Mueller is now investigating Victor Pinchuk’s $150,000 donation to the Donald J. Trump Foundation. What they don’t mention is that he has given up $25 million to the Clinton Foundation

Mueller Investigating Trump Over $150K Donation From Victor Pinchuk Who Gave Clintons $25 Million

Robert Mueller is now investigating a $150,000 donation that Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk made to President Trump’s charity in 2015.

The history Victor Pinchuk has with the Clinton Foundation is far shadier than a one time small speaking fee (to Trump’s foundation) years ago could possibly be. Pinchuk donated millions to the Clinton Foundation, and shortly after, Hillary’s State Dept. gave him the green light to sell to Iran in contravention of US sanctions.

Is Mueller saying that the Ukrainians rigged the election? That Trump was bought and paid for by the Ukrainians, the enemy of the Russians???

From The Washington Examiner:

Emails show a Ukrainian businessman and major Clinton Foundation donor was invited to Hillary Clinton’s home during the final year of her diplomatic tenure, despite her spokesman’s insistence in 2014 that the donor never crossed paths with Clinton while she served as secretary of state.

Victor Pinchuk, who has given up to $25 million to the Clinton Foundation, appeared on the guest list that was sent between Dennis Cheng, an executive at the foundation, and Huma Abedin, then Clinton’s deputy chief of staff at the State Department, ahead of a June 2012 dinner. Abedin noted in a subsequent email that the gathering would be hosted in Clinton’s home.

From The New York Times:

Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton have built a sprawling network of powerful friends around the globe, one that could aid Mrs. Clinton’s chances were she to seek the presidency. But those relationships often come with intersecting interests and political complications; few people illustrate that more vividly than the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk.

A steel magnate and major contributor to the former president’s foundation, Mr. Pinchuk was in frequent contact with Mrs. Clinton’s State Department, at meetings arranged by a Clinton political operative turned lobbyist, Douglas E. Schoen.

And now Mr. Pinchuk is at the center of a trade dispute that places him at odds with steelworkers in Pennsylvania and Ohio, precisely the kind of union workers Mrs. Clinton would need to appeal to in a presidential campaign.

Mr. Pinchuk’s relationship to the Clintons became the subject of scrutiny last summer when American steel makers filed a case alleging that Ukraine — and by extension Mr. Pinchuk’s company, Interpipe Ltd. — and eight other countries had illegally dumped a type of steel tube used in natural gas extraction, an industry whose growth has provided one of the few bright spots in the United States manufacturing sector.



Mar 242018
Dirty Deep State Bingo





Liberals Launch Dozens Of GoFundMe Campaigns For McCabe

 Political  Comments Off on Liberals Launch Dozens Of GoFundMe Campaigns For McCabe
Mar 192018

Andrew McCabe has a net worth of $11 million, yet the loony Left are creating GoFundMe Campaigns for him?

Liberals Launch Dozens Of GoFundMe Campaigns For McCabe

How does a civil servant get that rich over 20 years of service? He must have a fabulous investment strategy. Family money? Gifts from Hillary Clinton and Terry McAuliffe?

From ZeroHedge:

Despite being fired for lying under oath and leaking to the press in a manner that “lacked candor,” former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe has received an outpouring of support from the left. In addition to Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) offering him a temporary job so he can receive his full retirement benefits, dozens of people have set up GoFundMe accounts, which have already raised tens of thousands of dollars.

Some have expressed surprise that the same people who have long railed against “the man” are so overwrought that an FBI Official – who was found corrupt in an IG investigation demanded by Democrats that and that was directed by an Obama IG appointee – was fired by an administration they don’t like, that they’ve put the closest thing to “Agent Smith” on a pedestal and are now giving him money.

So far 39 GoFundMe donation campaigns have been set up for the former Deputy Director who’s now left with a reduced pension.


Andrew McCabe Net Worth and Income Details:

Andrew McCabe Net Worth $11 Million USD
Salary from Employment $180,000 USD
Annual Income $9000,000 USD
Luxury Cars – 4 $420,000 USD
Houses – 2 $1.6 Million USD





Mar 182018

Compare these two these statements. Who is lying, McCabe or Comey?

Comey vs. McCabe - One of Them Is Lying

Andrew McCabe is claiming that he did the leaking with James Comey’s approval. Comey should be feeling nervous about now!

James Comey Testimony May 3, 2017:

Comey Testimony - One of Them Is Lying

Andrew McCabe Statement March 18, 2018

McCabe Statement - One of Them Is Lying
James Comey’s weasel word: “anonymous” source. He will argue the reporter knew who was providing the information but asked not to use McCabe’s name.

Comey, McCabe and Strzok. What more could Crooked Hillary need to own the FBI? Those were her little puppets that guaranteed her immunity from crimes and spying on her enemies. Her very own little KGB.

She owned the FBI, the DNC, and the MSM! Yet she still lost!





Lying Under Oath

 Political  Comments Off on Lying Under Oath
Mar 182018

John Brennan lied under oath. James Clapper lied under oath. John Koskinen lied under oath. Lois Lerner plead the fifth. Eric Holder lied under oath. Loretta Lynch lied under oath. Andrew McCabe lied under oath. James Comey lied under oath. Hillary Clinton lied under oath. Bill Clinton lied under oath.

Why do we even bother putting Democrats under oath?




Feb 202018

An anti-gun Florida school shooter witness, David Hogg (whose Trump-hating dad works for the FBI), rehearses his spoon-fed lines

Anti-Gun School Shooter Witness Rehearses Spoonfed Lines

This is the same kid who repeated the lie that “there were 17 mass shootings so far this year” and Chris Wallace let him get away with it. Sickening. This is what the Deep State has resorted to, using highschool kids as pawns? I guess college students weren’t effective enough. Yes, his father is retired FBI.

Something fishy is going on.

David Hogg was also be interviewed as a ‘Witness’, on another side of the US, only months ago.

Cut to about 0:28

School shooting survivors demand action on gun control

Same kid on CNN. Was this scripted? Pay attention to the body language. Are these two lying or acting?

The Spider In The Center Of The Web

 Political  Comments Off on The Spider In The Center Of The Web
Feb 192018

When the entire web is finally brought into the light, there is NO doubt we will see clearly the spider sitting in the middle of it all…

The Spider In The Center Of The Web

Lerner, Lynch, Holder, Rosenstein, Yates, Page, Comey, McCabe, Ohr, Strzok, Clinton, Rice, and the list goes on and on. Each an individual strand of corruption alone, but together a web that encompasses the entire Administrative Branch under Obama.

Each time a little more of the darkness is discovered we see more and more how the strands intersect and connect, creating a web of corruption like none before seen in the Administrative Branch of the United States.

The LEFT frantically attempts to downplay any strand; trying desperately to divert the public’s attention… Their TRUE fear is that the entire web will see the light of day and there will no longer be any way to hide the spider sitting in the middle.

That will be the day that Washington’s Governing Elite and its scheme for domination and control will end.





VP Of Facebook Ads, Rob Goldman, Says Russian Ads Were AFTER THE ELECTION

 Political  Comments Off on VP Of Facebook Ads, Rob Goldman, Says Russian Ads Were AFTER THE ELECTION
Feb 182018

This is an absolute BOMBSHELL and needs more coverage: VP of Facebook Ads, Rob Goldman says majority of Russian ads were AFTER THE ELECTION and calls out the Mainstream Media for not covering it.

VP Of Facebook Ads, Rob Goldman, Says Russian Ads Were AFTER THE ELECTION

Facebook vice president of advertising Rob Goldman slammed the media, on Twitter, for their misleading coverage of Russia’s meddling in American politics.

“Very excited to see the Mueller indictment today. We shared Russian ads with Congress, Mueller and the American people to help the public understand how the Russians abused our system. Still, there are keys facts about the Russian actions that are still not well understood”

“Most of the coverage of Russian meddling involves their attempt to effect the outcome of the 2016 US election. I have seen all of the Russian ads and I can say very definitively that swaying the election was *NOT* the main goal”

The majority of the Russian ad spend happened AFTER the election. We shared that fact, but very few outlets have covered it because it doesn’t align with the main media narrative of Trump and the election”

Retweeted by President Trump no less:



h/t u/malioswa



Just One More Thing On Obama And The FBI

 Political  Comments Off on Just One More Thing On Obama And The FBI
Feb 112018
Just One More Thing On Obama and the FBI.

After weaponizing the IRS, the EPA and the court system against Americans, it’s amazing that anyone could have doubts that Obama also weaponized the FBI.




The National Enquirer – Obama And Hillary Ordered FBI To Spy On Trump

 Political  Comments Off on The National Enquirer – Obama And Hillary Ordered FBI To Spy On Trump
Feb 092018

The National Enquirer is more accurate than Mainstream Media. Sad.

The National Enquirer - Obama And Hillary Ordered FBI To Spy On Trump

The world we live in… The National Enquirer is real news and the The New York Times is the tabloid?

Obama & Hillary Ordered FBI To Spy On Trump
Illegal wiretaps and secret papers are ‘worse than Watergate!’




FISA Memo: Charge And Response

 Political  Comments Off on FISA Memo: Charge And Response
Feb 062018

The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence issues the “FISA MEMO: CHARGE AND RESPONSE” document to answer the major Mainstream Media and Democrat attacks on it.

FISA Memo Charge And Response

The response to all charges against the memo, further cementing its validity and destroying all of the Left’s arguments.

A clear and powerful rebuttal to the attacks!

This needs to be shared far and wide.

CHARGE: The Majority failed to comply with House and Committee Rules.
RESPONSE: All House and Committee rules were complied with and followed, as prescribed, from the requirement to notice a business meeting, to make available classified executive session material to the House, and to publically disclose the material. i

CHARGE: The memo is intended to undermine the Special Counsel’s ongoing Russia investigation.
RESPONSE: The memo has nothing to do with the Special Counsel’s investigation, and is intended to expose past abuses of the FISA process, namely Senior DOJ and FBI officials’ use of unverified opposition research. That research was financed by a presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, and resulted in a surveillance warrant on an American citizen. Further, consistent with its bipartisan commitment not to impede any ongoing investigation, the Committee has not sought documents or information post-dating the appointment of the Special Counsel in May 2017.

CHARGE: The memo is intended to undermine DOJ and FBI.
RESPONSE: The memo is intended to hold some senior DOJ and FBI officials accountable for abuses of the FISA process, consistent with the Committee’s constitutional responsibilities. The Committee has not only the right, but the responsibility, to conduct rigorous oversight of potential abuses—including by making information publicly available— on behalf of the American people.

CHARGE: The memo is intended to undermine the men and women of DOJ and FBI.
RESPONSE: The memo is focused on abuses by a small number of senior leaders. The Committee’s fulfillment of its constitutional duty supports the hard working men and women of law enforcement and the intelligence community by enabling effective, efficient and constitutional oversight of their agencies.

CHARGE: The memo unfairly targets government officials like Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
RESPONSE: This is patently false. The memo simply states that Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and former FBI Deputy Director McCabe were among the senior DOJ and FBI officials who signed off on a FISA application that included, as a substantial and essential part, the DNC and Clinton campaign-funded Steele dossier.

CHARGE: The memo undermines recently-reauthorized FISA Section 702.
RESPONSE: The memo has nothing to do with Section 702, which targets foreigners located overseas. As specified in the memo, the FISA order authorizing surveillance on Carter Page was not obtained under Title VII.

CHARGE: DOJ and FBI did nothing wrong by using the Steele dossier in a FISA application.
RESPONSE: DOJ and FBI senior leaders had four separate opportunities, but failed each time, to adequately investigate or disclose to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) the role of the DNC and Clinton campaign as the funders and beneficiaries of the Steele dossier—even though its political origins were known to numerous senior DOJ and FBI officials. Additionally, FBI’s reliance on Steele’s past credibility was misplaced, since he concealed from the FBI unauthorized media contacts with numerous outlets and his anti-Trump bias, which was known by a senior DOJ official.

CHARGE: The memo, and DOJ and FBI’s use of the Steele dossier in a FISA application, are no big deal.
RESPONSE: It is important for the American people to judge the facts presented in the memo, which Members of the Committee and House assessed to be of substantial public interest. But it is simply astonishing that Democrats would argue the memo is insignificant given the extreme lengths they went to prevent its release.

CHARGE: The memo is nothing more than a collection of partisan talking points.
RESPONSE: The memo is the result of a nearly year long investigative effort by the Committee, including document review and witness interviews. As the public can see, it sets forth a series of facts uncovered by Committee investigators in the face of attempts efforts by senior DOJ and FBI officials to stonewall the Committee’s, and contains no partisan rhetoric or personal attacks.

CHARGE: The memo represents an irresponsible release of highly-sensitive classified information.
RESPONSE: The complaints from the left about Congress doing its job, and Democrats’ sudden opposition to transparency, represent a hypocritical and partisan attempt to prevent the public from learning about the memo’s contents. Contrary to unauthorized leaks of classified information so prevalent in Washington today, the memo’s release occurred pursuant to the Committee’s oversight function and a process laid out in House Rules that balances the public and national interests. Some have falsely claimed that the memo contains “an immense amount of classified information.” However, it was specifically crafted to exclude information that might damage national security and has now been declassified following an executive branch review. This authorized, limited release of formerly classified information serves the public interest, and the only “source or method” specifically mentioned is Christopher Steele—who was terminated as an FBI source for unauthorized disclosures to the press.

CHARGE: It is irresponsible to release the memo over DOJ and FBI’s objections.
RESPONSE: It is disappointing that senior officials at DOJ and FBI would continue to attempt to obstruct the Committee’s efforts to share with the American people information related to surveillance abuses at these agencies. The Committee notes that both DOJ and FBI—along with other stakeholders—had an opportunity to provide input into the executive branch review process, which resulted in the President’s decision to declassify the document in full.

CHARGE: DOJ and FBI had good reason to suspect Carter Page of being a Russian agent.
RESPONSE: While many unverified claims have been made by both Christopher Steele and Committee Democrats, the focus of the memo is not Carter Page. The focus of the memo is the Steele dossier—funded by the DNC and Clinton campaign, and described as “salacious and unverified” by former FBI Director Comey—that formed a substantial and essential part of a secret court application for a warrant on an American citizen.

CHARGE: According to FBI, there are “material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.”
RESPONSE: No one, including the FBI officials who reviewed the memo, has identified any factual errors, and the Committee encourages DOJ and FBI to make publicly available, to the greatest extent possible, documents in those agencies’ possession that would shed additional light on the abuses uncovered by the Committee. Also, the memo does not purport to be exhaustive: it is focused on DOJ and FBI’s use of the DNC- and Clinton campaign-funded Steele dossier to obtain a warrant on an American citizen.

CHARGE: Most members have not reviewed the documents underlying the memo.
RESPONSE: As part of stonewalling the Committee’s investigation, senior officials at DOJ and FBI initially placed burdensome and unreasonable restrictions on the Committee’s access to documents responsive to its subpoenas. Chairman Nunes designated Chairman Gowdy, an experienced prosecutor and investigator, to lead the Committee’s review. All Republican members participated in weekly briefings on the results of the Committee’s investigative efforts, and the Committee does not believe there are—or should be—current restrictions on the Committee’s access to this important information.

CHARGE: The memo’s release violated an agreement with DOJ.
RESPONSE: DOJ and FBI placed no limits on disseminating the information made available to the Committee which—contrary to false claims—is not highly classified or limited to the so-called “Gang of 8.”

CHARGE: The Committee drafted the memo in coordination with the White House.
RESPONSE: This is patently false. No one outside the Committee played any role in drafting or compiling the memo. The Committee had no communications with the White House about the contents of the memo until after the Committee voted to make it publicly available, and it was transmitted to the President’s representatives in accordance with House rules.

CHARGE: The memo was materially altered after the Committee’s vote to make it public.
RESPONSE: The Committee’s vote to release the memo was procedurally sound, and in accordance with House and Committee Rules. The version transmitted to the White House included minor edits, made before the Committee voted to make the memo public, to the version previously made available to all members of the House. The minor edits included technical and grammatical changes, along with the deletion of one piece of information in response to FBI’s last-minute suggestion—which was in accordance with national security protocols, but had no bearing on the memo’s substance. The memo also includes a more precise characterization of the FISA application’s use of a Yahoo News article, in response to feedback from Committee Democrats. Complaints about these edits from Committee Democrats—none of whom voted to release any version of the memo—represent the latest example of the minority’s consistent efforts to obstruct the Committee’s efforts to collect and share information about FISA abuses. The minority opposed all efforts to obtain the underlying documents, including issuing subpoenas for them in August 2017.

CHARGE: The Committee blocked release of the Democrats’ memo.
RESPONSE: The Committee elected to follow the same process and timing for the Majority and Minority memos by first making each available for all members of the House to review. The Majority voted unanimously to make the Minority’s memo available to all House members, even though all Democrats voted against making the Majority’s memo similarly available. The Committee is planning a business meeting next week to address the Minority’s memo, and is soliciting feedback from Members of both parties who have reviewed it.


The original memo is available here and here. Key points are here, a charge and response is here, and a summary of FISA Title I is here.



OFFICIAL: FISA Memo Released




Feb 032018

Comey’s “That’s it” response is extremely telling. He was expecting the House Intelligence Committee Report to contain something even more explosive.

House Intelligence Committee Report

What he doesn’t know is the strategy that is in play right now. Devin Nunes, Chuck Grassley, Bob Goodlatte, and Inspector General Michael Horowitz have coordinated efforts to get all of this information into the public.

Remember when Comey called Trump “Crazy” for suggesting he was being spied on? And now we learn the House Intelligence Committee Report shows that Comey signed off on the FISA application.

And we also know he leaked classified memos through his Columbia Law Professor “friend” Dan Richman to prompt a Special Counsel by his own words. WEASEL… Never Forget!

The real question: Was this really the first time the FBI and DOJ were weaponized to influence a US election?

We know the IRS was targeting the Tea Party during the previous election. There were studies conducted that show that the Tea Party would have swung the 2012 election to Mitt Romney had they not been targeted.