Only when one side of the Biden/DOJ equation gets slighted do significant actions occur

Biden-nominated U.S. Attorney resigning for leaking information to press

Fox News tells us of the resignation of Rachael Rollins as she was found to have leaked “sensitive Department of Justice information” to the press.

Massachusetts U.S. Attorney Rachael Rollins is planning to resign after a lengthy investigation by the Department of Justice into her alleged misconduct found that she unethically attended a partisan Biden fundraiser last summer and “falsely testified under oath” about leaking “sensitive DOJ” information to the press in an effort to help a Democrat win elected office.

Details of Rollins’ misconduct – highlighted in the report released Wednesday by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s office – showed that Rollins attempted to swing an election by assisting “Ricardo Arroyo with his Democratic primary campaign for Suffolk D.A.”

Rollins, according to the report, went so far as to offer Arroyo advice on how to handle the sexual assault allegations levied against him during his campaign and also provided media outlets with “negative information” about his challenger, Kevin Hayden.

“Rollins’s efforts to advance Arroyo’s candidacy included providing negative information about Hayden to The Boston Globe and suggesting where the Globe could look to find more information,” the report stated. “The evidence demonstrated that at a critical stage of the primary race, Rollins brought her efforts to advance Arroyo’s candidacy to the MA USAO, when she used her position as U.S. Attorney, and information available to her as U.S. Attorney, in an ultimately unsuccessful effort to create the impression publicly, before the primary election, that DOJ was or would be investigating Hayden for public corruption.”

The efforts, the report noted, included Rollins “trying unsuccessfully to convince her First Assistant U.S. Attorney to issue a letter that would have created the impression that DOJ was investigating Hayden and, when that effort failed, disclosing non-public, sensitive DOJ information directly to a Herald reporter before the primary election.”

“Then, after the Herald did not publish the story before the primary election and Arroyo lost to Hayden, Rollins disclosed additional information to the Herald to damage Hayden’s reputation while he was an uncontested candidate in the general election,” the DOJ report stated.

The Justice Department also concluded that Rollins “falsely testified under oath during her OIG interview when she denied that she was the federal law enforcement source that provided nonpublic, sensitive DOJ information to the Herald reporter about a possible Hayden criminal investigation.”

Rollins later admitted to being the source after she “produced relevant text messages, which definitively showed that Rollins had indeed been a source for the reporter and had disclosed to him the internal DOJ recusal memorandum quoted in the story,” the report said.

In addition to providing the press with sensitive information about Arroyo’s challenger, Rollins helped Arroyo last summer with a response to sexual assault allegations he faced on the campaign trail.

(Read further of the specifics of the data leaked and those implicated at Fox News)

Even the top-level Biden appointee slights the Biden DOJ does action occur

Maybe this ultra-lib thought that she was working for the underdog by releasing DOJ secret information to the press, but all she got was onto the bad side of Biden and the DOJ.

…

Police officer from Virginia charged with lying about leaks to Proud Boys leader

The Daily Press natters on the liberal side on the poor judgement that a police officer practiced when he chose to leak information to the Proud Boys leader while the trial continued.

A Washington, D.C. police officer was arrested Friday on charges that he lied about leaking confidential information to Proud Boys extremist group leader Enrique Tarrio and obstructed an investigation after group members destroyed a Black Lives Matter banner in the nation’s capital.

An indictment alleges that Metropolitan Police Department Lt. Shane Lamond, 47, of Stafford, Virginia, warned Tarrio, then national chairman of the far-right group, that law enforcement had an arrest warrant for him related to the banner’s destruction.

Tarrio was arrested in Washington two days before Proud Boys members joined the mob in storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Earlier this month, Tarrio and three other leaders were convicted of seditious conspiracy charges for what prosecutors said was a plot to keep then-President Donald Trump in the White House after he lost the 2020 election.

A federal grand jury in Washington indicted Lamond on one count of obstruction of justice and three counts of making false statements. A magistrate judge ordered Lamond’s release from custody after he pleaded not guilty to the charges during his initial court appearance Friday.

The indictment accuses Lamond of lying to and misleading federal investigators when they questioned him in June 2021 about his contacts with Tarrio. The indictment also says Tarrio provided Lamond with information about the Jan. 6 attack.

(Read much more at the Daily Press)

Of course, as District Attorney Bragg proved with President Trump, you can indict a ham sandwich

You may be able to indict anyone (even a ham sandwich). Additionally, with Washington’s biased juries and liberal/communist judges, you might be able convict a policeman for walking the beat. However, if this policeman really did violate the wall and the prosecution can prove it, then he should get the punishment he deserves. Still, if leaniency has been offered to some criminals, consideration for the situation and history of this policeman should come into play.

…

The damning Durham Report

The Washington Examiner digs into the damning details of the Durham Report as it exposes the shortcomings of the FBI, our FISA courts, our criminal courts, our “intelligence” system, and the liberal intrusion into all of these.

“Worse than Watergate” has become a Washington cliche that is both inescapable and meaningless. Dozens of political scandals since then have been objectively worse, but the scandal still looms large. This is because of the mythos it created involving a press corps and a Washington establishment allegedly concerned with moving heaven and earth to get at the truth, even when the story involved little more than “third-rate burglary,” as Richard Nixon’s secretary famously called it.

Watergate also marked a sea change in how we held presidents accountable. Prior to his downfall, Nixon’s sentiment that “if the president does it, it’s not illegal” was to some extent the informal understanding, even if that sounds outrageous to contemporary ears. A corrupt president could either be impeached by Congress or thrown out of office by voters, but there was no constitutional middle ground to hold them accountable. Since Watergate, the FBI and the Department of Justice more broadly have increasingly found themselves in the awkward and untenable position of being subject to the president’s constitutional authority while simultaneously being tasked with investigating White House corruption.

So 50 years on, the post-Watergate question remains: How is empowering the FBI and unelected deep-state bureaucrats to hold the president accountable working out for us? With last week’s release of special counsel John Durham’s 306-page report into the origins and development of the Russia collusion investigation that engulfed Donald Trump’s presidency, the question has been definitively answered. The corruption it has enabled has been calamitous, and no one in Washington seems to care about the truth anymore.

Thanks to the report, the public finally has a clear and reliable accounting of possibly the most complicated scandal in American history. The big-picture conclusions of the report sound almost understated: “Senior FBI personnel displayed a serious lack of analytical rigor towards the information that they received, especially information received from politically affiliated persons and entities.” But make no mistake, the details in the report that buttress those conclusions are devastating to the credibility of the FBI and those who championed the collusion investigation into Trump.

Take, for example, the story of the so-called Steele dossier and its origins, which is laid out in detail in the report. The Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign hired a disreputable opposition firm known as Fusion GPS, though the hiring was done using a law firm as a cutout so that they could hide their connection to Fusion GPS via attorney-client privilege. Once hired, Fusion GPS retained the services of former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who began compiling evidence of Trump’s links to Russia via his supposedly extensive network of sources. But according to Durham’s report, a single person, Igor Danchenko, claimed he “was responsible for 80% of the ‘intel’ and 50% of the analysis contained in the Steele Dossier.”

Danchenko, a Russian citizen working at the Brookings Institution in Washington, had previously been the subject of counterintelligence by the FBI between 2009 and 2011. According to the Durham Report, “In late 2008, while Danchenko was employed by the Brookings Institution, he engaged two fellow employees about whether one of the employees might be willing or able in the future to provide classified information in exchange for money.” Despite this, the results of the counterintelligence investigation into Danchenko were inconclusive — after the FBI ended the investigation in 2011 having erroneously believed Danchenko had returned to Russia.

In other words, when the FBI repeatedly cited the Steele dossier as evidence to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to get warrants to spy on a future president, it was relying on the word of someone who may or may not be a Russian spy. Remember that the next time a government agency gives the people a lecture on succumbing to disinformation.

But the problems of the dossier are so much worse than that. Danchenko “maintained a relationship with Charles Dolan, a Virginia-based public relations professional.” Dolan had worked with “key Russian government officials,” and it was Dolan who supplied Danchenko with much of the information he gave to Steele. In fact, Dolan was the source of the dossier’s infamous claim that Putin had “kompromat” on Trump in the form of a surreptitiously recorded video of him getting micturated on by Russian prostitutes.

However, Durham noted that in addition to working with the Russian government, Dolan “had previously held multiple positions and roles in the Democratic National Committee (‘DNC’) and the Democratic Party.” So, the two biggest sources of the dossier were a possible Russian spy and a former employee of the DNC, the entity ultimately paying for the creation of the dossier.

To put the final capstone on this dispiriting mix of corruption and credulity, in March of 2017, long after the FBI had tried and failed to prove the accuracy of the dossier and had good reason to believe Danchenko had lied to the bureau, Durham noted that the FBI hired Danchenko as a “confidential human source” and paid him $220,000 over the next 3 1/2 years. Why? The FBI bought his silence. If Danchenko were forced to answer questions publicly about the dossier, it would be humiliating for the FBI. As long as Danchenko was on the FBI payroll, he was not subject to congressional oversight due to policies preserving the secrecy of FBI investigation “sources and methods.”

(Read of CH-1, pulling MI6 into damaging candidate Trump, and more at the Washington Examiner)

Aggrivating – yes. Reason to vote conservative – yes. Damning – no (nobody is going to jail over this, much less having a greater chance of hell from this)

While this might be fodder for conversation and may push up the chances of some Republicans into action, the only good thing that might come out of this might be the restructuring of the FBI by the House.

Still, if any reforms come of this (such as did with the Texas Republicans eliminating the appointed position of “elections administrator” which screwed up two elections in Harris County), then some good will have come of it.

…

Washington FBI field office confirms that undercover officers, confidential informants, and FBI assets were embedded in the crowds at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6th

The Gateway Pundit pulls together a laundry list of proofs of malfeasance by the FBI gathered from the Washington, D.C. field office.

Rep Matt Gaetz confirmed today that the government was running several assets in the crowds during the January 6, 2021 protests in Washington DC.

As the Gateway Pundit as previously reported — Dozens if not hundreds of government operatives infiltrated the protests at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The Gateway Pundit previously identified 20 different confirmed incidents and operations involving federal, state, and local government operatives who infiltrated the massive Trump crowds on January 6, 2021.

Each one of these incidents has been confirmed by the far-left press or the government in court documents.

We currently have no idea how many federal, state and local government operatives were working undercover on January 6 but it looks like it is close to 100 operatives leading the charge on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Recent court documents reveal the Biden Department of Justice admitting to at least 40 undercover operatives with the Proud Boys on January 6.

In September 2022, TGP learned the FBI was running operatives inside The Oath Keepers on January 6th. The DOJ sprung this on the Oath Keepers members before their trial in Washington DC before a Kangaroo Court. The US government finally admitted in this letter they sent out before the trial that they were running Confidential Human Sources (CHS) inside the Oath Keepers organization on January 6.

In November 2022,  the FBI finally admitted they had 8 informants inside the Proud Boys organization on January 6 and likely more.

(continued)

SHOCK: The DoJ now admits that another 40 undercover agents were with the Proud Boys on J6 - from HSI - Homeland Security Investigations. The vast majority of the group was paid by the government as either W2 employees or CHS. pic.twitter.com/tCKZubpJmq

— @amuse (@amuse) April 6, 2023

(See two tweets showing government infiltration and a video illustrating the same at The Gateway Pundit)

As of the morning of 23 May 2023, the biased press still reported on 6 January defendents being sentenced despite this obvious railroading

For the felony of disrupting a joint session of Congress, an Army veteran from Houston got a sentence of 13 months in prison and a demand to pay $2,000 in restitution. Let’s weigh that against Ray Epps’ sentence of nothing.

…

FBI says past searches of foreign intelligence database broke standards “but reforms have been made”

The Associated Press hits a new low in regard to its not questioning governmental overreach as it just quotes the FBI’s newest excuse for letting things go: “reforms have been made.”

FBI officials repeatedly violated their own standards when they searched a vast repository of foreign intelligence for information related to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and racial justice protests in 2020, according to a heavily blacked-out court order released Friday.

FBI officials said the thousands of violations, which also include improper searches of donors to a congressional campaign, predated a series of corrective measures that started in the summer of 2021 and continued last year. But the problems could nonetheless complicate FBI and Justice Department efforts to receive congressional reauthorization of a warrantless surveillance program that law enforcement officials say is needed to counter terrorism, espionage and international cybercrime.

(Read the rightful response from Republicans at the Associated Press)

Who wants to try the “But reforms have been made” at your next red light ticket court?

If you even went a mile or so over the speed limit, would the “reforms have been made” defense work?

Why do they expect it to mend any torn fences here?

…

At this late date, the courts find the FBI improperly used surveillance tools on 6 January 2021 protesters

Canada’s Globe and Mail discusses the court finding (after some defendents have been continuously locked up for over two years) how the FBI overstepped in using surveillance tools against the 6 January 2021 protesters and, supposedly, Black Lives Matter protesters. Considering how I do not know of BLM protesters who have been kept in solitary confinement, it will be interesting to see which side the press aims to help.

FBI officials repeatedly violated their own standards when they searched a vast repository of foreign intelligence for information related to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and racial justice protests in 2020, according to a heavily blacked-out court order released Friday.

FBI officials said the thousands of violations, which also include improper searches of donors to a congressional campaign, predated a series of corrective measures that started in the summer of 2021 and continued last year. But the problems could nonetheless complicate FBI and Justice Department efforts to receive congressional reauthorization of a warrantless surveillance program that law enforcement officials say is needed to counter terrorism, espionage and international cybercrime.

The violations were detailed in a secret court order issued last year by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has legal oversight of the U.S. government’s spy powers. The Office of the Director of the National Intelligence released a redacted version on Friday in what officials said was the interest of transparency. Members of Congress received the order when it was issued last year.

“Today’s disclosures underscore the need for Congress to rein in the FBI’s egregious abuses of this law, including warrantless searches using the names of people who donated to a congressional candidate,” said Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the ACLU’s National Security Project. “These unlawful searches undermine our core constitutional rights and threaten the bedrock of our democracy. It’s clear the FBI can’t be left to police itself.”

At issue are improper queries of foreign intelligence information collected under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which enables the government to gather the communications of targeted foreigners outside the U.S. That program expires at the end of the year unless it is renewed.

The program creates a database of intelligence that U.S. agencies can search. FBI searches must have a foreign intelligence purpose or be aimed at finding evidence of a crime. But congressional critics of the program have long raised alarm about what they say are unjustified searches of the database for information about Americans, along with more general concerns about perceived abuses of surveillance.

(Read more at the Globe and Mail)

So, in the international court, we have at least sunk to the level of the banana republic

If we are not at the level of the banana republic, it is only because they see us either as the drunk sugar daddy republic or the sadistic banana republic holding the gun to their heads. Both, I would argue, are on significantly lower levels than just the banana republic.

…

Obama roasted for answer to what keeps him up at night: “Starving for attention”

The New York Post finally let our former commander in chief lay out a case where he now feels marginalized. However, he should feel lucky, since I could argue that a number of legal cases could be opened against him and those in his regime.

Former President Barack Obama was ridiculed Tuesday for saying a “divided media” keeps him up at night in a recent interview.

Jesse Watters argued on “Jesse Watters Primetime” that Obama was being starved for attention following his comments on “CBS Mornings.”

Obama was asked what keeps him up at night.

“The thing that I’m most worried about is the degree to which we’ve now had a divided conversation, in part because we have a divided media,” he said. “When I was coming up, you had three TV stations. And people were getting a similar sense of what is true and what isn’t, what was real and what was not. Today, what I’m most concerned about is the fact that because of the splintering of the media, we almost occupy different realities. Now, people will say, ‘Well, that didn’t happen, or I don’t believe that.’”

Watters roasted the former president for his answer on “Jesse Watters Primetime,” saying it’s not China, fentanyl, or “dirty nukes,” but a “divided media” that keeps him awake.

(Read more at the New York Post)

Now that a precedent has been set for local District Attorneys charging former presidents of unprovable crimes …

Now that District Attorney Bragg has opened pandora’s box, Obama might want to consider that presidents can be charged for jaywalking. Additionally, former presidents like him (and there are a few) might want to consider that they might get charged for real crimes that can be proven.

Therefore, it might be a good time for Democrat presidents to purchase beachfront property in a country where America does not have an extradition treaty.

…