Timeline on Clinton Uranium Crimes

September 6, 2005: In Kazakhstan Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra, attended by William Jefferson Clinton, met the Kazakh president. Days later, Giustra acquired stakes in three uranium mines controlled by the Kazakh state-run uranium agency. In return, Nursultan Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan’s president, was supported by Clinton to head the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

https://www.osce.org/cio/74233

This organization monitored international elections in support of democracy. One of its election watchers was one Joseph Mifsud.

https://www.ibtimes.com/kazakhstan-president-nursultan-nazarbayev-reelected-98-majority-vote-1897642

As Nazarbayev was a corrupt dictator, the Bush policy was against his human rights record, something Clinton’s support worked against, though Hillary Clinton as senator later made noises of public criticism against Nazarbayev to cover their shady dealing. Though Kazakhstan did not meet the international election standards, Mifsud certified them as doing so.

Also in 2005, William Campbell, begins working with high Russian nuclear officials working in the U.S., and would later become an FBI informant when the FBI would be headed by Robert Mueller.

2007, just as Hillary Clinton had announced her run for president, Uranium One merged with a South African company in a $3.5 billion transaction. The enlarged Uranium One company gave Giustra a stake of about $45 million, after which he sold it.

April, 2007: Uranium One purchased a uranium mill in Utah and land for uranium exploration of over 38,000 acres in four Western states. Soon after, Uranium One purchased Energy Metals Corporation with uranium holdings in Wyoming. To this was added those in Texas and additional ones in Utah.

https://www.kuer.org/post/how-tiny-utah-town-got-thrown-real-russia-scandal

2009 – 2010: Skolkovo Innovation Center, a technology project akin to Silicon Valley, near Moscow, “unofficially” led by Vadislov Surkov, one of two Russian sources of the Steele Dossier, partnered with U.S. technology, ushered on by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration. Donors to the Clinton Foundation, led on the Russian end by oligarch Viktor Vekselberg, and U.S. donors were involved. This center was nothing more than a way to make stealing technology easier on a larger scale, according to a report in 2012 by the U.S. Army after it was discovered their Hypersonic missile technology was stolen.

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/08/15/russia-stole-us-hypersonic-missile-tech-to-make-nuclear-advances-bolton-a66880

The Clintons and their foundation was involved with Surkov, whose pet project was Skolkovo. Relative to this project, in May of 2010, Clinton Foundation operatives were arranging Bill Clinton to meet with Vekselberg, and Bill Clinton would be receiving a $500,000 speaking fee in June, 2010.The Uranium One deal was being pitched at this time.It is clear the Clintons were using her office as Secretary to profit them.Furthermore, this Surkov was one of the Russian sources of Steele’s Dossier (via Dearlove and Halper).

2009: Rosatom, a Russian company began making overtures to Uranium One in Kazakhstan. Uranium One turned to the American and Canadian embassies there for help. American embassies were under the Secretary of State–Hillary Clinton. The FBI then began their investigation of Tenex, Rostam’s subsidiary, and Tenam, their U.S. company, but they would ultimately keep quiet to the real crimes.The Director of the FBI at that time was Robert Mueller. The investigation was led by then-Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein at Justice. The DOJ’s Fraud Section was then headed by Andrew Weissmann, the second of Mueller in the future collusion investigation against Trump. The Director of National Intelligence (DNI) was James Clapper.

William Campbell was the Confidential Source-1 (CS-1), the FBI contractor, who had reported his concerns in regard to the Russian company who had hired him as a lobbyist. Campbell began working undercover, and his involvement with the company enabled him to penetrate Putin’s inner circle.Evidence indicated Russian officials gave millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation while she was Secretary of State and on the Committee on Foreign Investment of the United States (CFIUS) which reviewed sales of U.S. companies or assets relative to national security.The FBI attempted to get the head of Tenex and Tenam, Mikerin, to flip, but he resisted, and years later, Justice prosecuted him on lesser charges, keeping the worse crimes implicating the Clinton Foundation and the Obama administration, under wraps. The Obama administration officially issued a visa for Mikerin in 2010, but the FBI’s racketeering investigation revealed he had been operating in the U.S. since at least 2009. It was Mikerin who had hired Campbell as a D.C. lobbyist.

June, 2009: The Russian company official, Mikerin, was to be arrested in early summer. As a result, Uranium One’s stock dropped 40 percent. In the meantime, Russia cornered Uranium One into making a deal, and by mid June, Russia’s company acquired 17 percent stake in Uranium One for a bargain basement price. (See above link of NYT.)

2010: The Department of Justice (DOJ) did not present charges against the Russian executive, extending the investigation for several more years, giving the Obama administration the time to implement its strategy of softening its stance with Russia. In the meantime, Campbell, the undercover FBI informant, reported Russia was aiding Iran in building its nuclear capabilities, having heard the Russian executive having said, “the same kind of payment network” was being used to move funds between Russia and Iran as was used to launder kickbacks between Moscow and Americans (Clinton Foundation and who else?). Very disturbing! The Obama administration had a reason for both the “reset” with Russia, and the Iran Deal, working against the United States. This is not only criminal, but treasonous. No wonder, Obama spied on so many U.S. citizens and others. Campbell had reported all this, at first assuming the government was working the investigation, but nothing ever came of it, and he was gagged by Lynch at Justice. Furthermore, the Russians would later tell Campbell they had routed millions to an American lobbying firm in 2010 and 2011 for the Clinton Foundation global initiative while Uranium One was waiting approval when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.

2010 and 2011: The U.S. firm APCO Worldwide received $3 million to lobby the U.S. government for Rosatom, Russia’s state-owned nuclear company, to increase its uranium sales in the U.S.Their lobbying efforts included more than 50 federal and congressional individuals on behalf of Rosatom’s subsidiary, Tenex, among whom were ten at the State Department.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/372861-uranium-one-informant-makes-clinton-allegations-in-testimony

June, 2010: Russia offered a deal with a 51 percent stake which would control Uranium One, but UA first had to get approval of the American government.The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States is the one authorized to give or deny such permission. The committee is often made up of Presidential cabinet members, including the Attorney General, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy, and the Secretary of Statein this case Hillary Clinton, with the potential of receiving millions into the Clinton Foundation from people connected with Uranium One who stood to make a killing with the Russian acquisition.Because this deal would give the Russian company a controlling stake in Uranium One,this concerned some in the House of Representatives, resulting in legislation seeking to deny the request. They sent a letter to Obama, saying this “would give the Russian government control over a sizable portion of America’s uranium production capacity,”adding it would also give a considerable stake in Kazakhstan mines. In the very same month Russia had made the 51 percent offer, Bill Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow for a $500,000 fee. (See NYT link.)–

August, 2010: The deal with Uranium One was submitted to the Committee for review.

October 22, 2010: The Uranium One deal was approved, gift wrapped by the Committee. Clinton, Secretary of State, had assigned another official from State to take her place on the committee,and Attorney General Eric Holder was also on the committee.

From 2012 on, during Obama’s second term: With the backdrop of the Uranium One deal, the Obama administration had been softening ties to Russia since its first term, provided Putin step down for a term so they could deal instead with Dmitri A. Medvedev. Overheard on March 26th, by an open mic, Obama promised Medvedev “more flexibility” in regard to missile defense. Also during this softening, Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine and Obama, not crossing the “red line”, handed Russia the baton for securing Syria’s chemical weapons.

2013: Russia acquired Uranium One. After this,the Podesta Group lobbied for Uranium One when the Clinton Foundation began receiving millions from U1. The Podesta Group, lobbying during Obama’s administration, did not register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act,the same thing for which Manafort (among other things) and Craig would later be charged.

Just before Labor Day, 2014: Mikerin refused to cooperate with the FBI, and he and others with him were finally indicted for extortion and racketeering stemming all the way to 2004,led by Rosenstein.However, the plea deal in the end did not address the core Uranium One investigation, but merely addressed a single count of money laundering with no right to appeal under the rules for less serious conspiracy, for which sentence is from 0 to 5 years. The crime was in reality not money laundering. Furthermore,none of the extortions in 2009 and 2010 were included in the plea deal, the years before the Committee of whom Clinton and Holder were a part, that approved the Uranium deal, avoiding bringing any further attention to those crimes. The trial was not held publicly and was timed with the approaching holiday so as to avoid questions as to why the Obama/Clinton government had delayed so long while this Russian company kept amassing U.S. Uranium and shipping it out of the country. Though it was claimed he was prevented from doing so by law, Mikerin did so through a third party via Canada, at least 25% of it, where he refined and shipped it.Sentencing was also set for a convenient timejust before Xmas, and he received 4 years.Mueller was head of FBI during the first years of the case and Comey at the end, Rosenstein of Justice the prosecutor, Andrew Weissmann the fraud prosecutor who had brought the plea deal, and Holder was head of Justicethe Usual Suspects.Campbell, who had signed a non-disclosure,was further handled by Loretta Lynch after taking Holder’s place.

April, 2015: Loretta Lynch finally approved for Attorney General. During her tenure, Congress sent a request for William Campbell, the Confidential Source-1 (CS-1) in the Uranium One investigation to answer questions. However, he was placed under a gag order by the Obama Justice Department headed by Loretta Lynch, preventing him from speaking about the Uranium One case.

December 15, 2015:Comey, ended the Uranium One probe upon the sentencing of the Russian official. The case had been presented by Rod Rosenstein.The Justice Department released this statement,

“a former Russian official residing in Maryland was sentenced today to 48 months in prison”

He was also fined $2.1 million.The indictment and the sentencing was kept secret from everyone else in government.

October, 2017: Protests arose in regard to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, demanding he resign due to his involvement in the Uranium One (no mention of the numerous other things). The Senate Judiciary Committee opened an investigation into Uranium One.

December, 2017: Former FBI undercover informant William Campbell was interviewed by FBI relative to their investigation as to whether donations to the Clintons Foundation were used to influence U.S. nuclear policy during the Obama administration. He was specifically asked about the Russians having told him they had routed millions of dollars to an American lobbying firm in 2010 and 2011 to help the Clinton Foundation when she was Secretary of State when the Uranium One deal was pending approval.

Throughout the Obama Administration, the DOJ failed to fully investigate serious concerns surrounding former President Clinton, then-Secretary of State Clinton, and the Clinton Foundation’s connection to Russian company Uranium One, which received Department of State approval to purchase U.S. uranium mines in 2010. Throughout Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, a family foundation controlled by the Chairman of Uranium One made $2,350,000 in contributions to the Clinton Foundation which were not publicly disclosed in violation of an agreement Secretary Clinton had with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors.

The confidential informant who had worked with the FBI to uncover bribery and other corruption related to the Uranium One matter was threatened with reprisal by the Justice Department under Attorney General Lynch when he tried to come forward in 2016.

November, 2018: 16 FBI agents raided the home of former FBI contractor Dennis Nathan Cain, a federally protected whistleblower claiming he had documentary evidence the FBI and DOJ failed to investigate possible criminal activity relative to the Clinton Foundation and the Russian takeover of Uranium One.

April 8, 2019: Sen. Grassley released a statement:

“I’ve been pushing for years for more answers about this [the Uranium One] transaction that allowed the Russian government to acquire U.S. uranium assets. I’ve received classified and unclassified briefings about it from multiple agencies. And I’ve identified some FBI intelligence reports that may shed more light on the transaction. … If the Democrats want to be consistent, they’ll have to treat the Clinton, Uranium One, and Russia-related investigations the same [as the Mueller report]. Anything less than that reeks of political gamesmanship and sets a clear double standard.”

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-investigation-transparency-lets-be-consistent

source: https://8kun.top/qresearch/res/9703509.html#9704029

ObamaGate Started It All


WHO LEAKED GENERAL FLYNN’S NAME TO THE PRESS AND WHY?

>>9361988 lb

#Obamagate tags started it. You told a story over many day. You many not have noticed but i gave you a plan to start.
+4MM before they could end the trend in “Trends”
You kept adding and changing bring it back into “Trends”
> You forced the hand which made the mouth speak.
Remember what we said about the SENSEs?
Remember what we said about MEMETICs? > Our Definition
You need to get your IDEAS out of just the 8kun. They need to be heard. Louder than the [MSM]!!!
Remember this post this was next You were to expose the rest. And continue to force the HAND. Which will make the MOUTH speak.
We need answers to these questions THE [MSM] will see once we EXPOSE themt to light.

>>9353803 (You) pb
< Non-descriptive not repeating #1. Why did the DoJ learn about the FBI's interest in Flynn's conversations with the Russian Amb. from a CONVERSATION WITH OBAMA in the Oval Office? Ask me! >>9328302 pb
< See Image Obamagate 1 >>9328358 pb
< See Images Obamagate 3- (1-3) >“President Obama asked if Comey was saying that the NSC should not pass sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn.”
>(‘Hey Comey, are you saying we should hide Russia issues from Flynn?’) “potentially” #ObamaKnew Jan 5 2017
#obamagate #DemandAnswers

1b. How did the illegal spying on Flynn originate?
Strange that Obama knew of the FBI’s interest in Flynn’s talk w/ the Russian Amb. before the DoJ knew.
#obamagate #DemandAnswers

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS IMPLIES?
>>> That the spying was directed by Obama.
>>9353900 pb
>It appears that the illegal spying was DIRECTED BY OBAMA.
>We don’t have direct evidence, but the indirect evidence is strong.
>Occam’s razor.
>HOW would Obama have known that the FBI planned to wiretap Flynn’s conversation with the Russian Ambassador for the purpose of either (1) trying to catch Flynn in some purported illegal act or (2) trying to get Flynn fired because Flynn’s position (DNI) and his potential or actual knowledge (of the Obama admin’s illegal acts) was a DANGER to the success of their coup plot to overthrow the government and prevent President Trump from governing.
>HOW would Obama have known that, unless he was involving in the planning, origination, or direction of that part of the plot?
>And if Obama knew about or directed the BEGINNING of the plot, it’s safe to say that Obama knew EVERYTHING about the plot from start to finish.
>It’s an inference, but a very strong inference.
>Remember the Page/Strzok texts?
>”POTUS WANTS TO KNOW EVERYTHING WE’RE DOING”
< See image in >>9353946 pb
>>9353946 pb
>This could be a great chant for when we are protesting in the street.

>OBAMA KNEW!
>KNEW ABOUT THE COUP!
>OBAMA KNEW!
>KNEW ABOUT THE COUP!

>repeat until teargassed

#2.
Why was Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn unmasked by Obama’s chief of staff, Joe Biden, Susan Rice, and others?
>>9334336 pb

< Covers Some content below no repost >>9335035 pb
>Did they suspect Flynn of collaborating with an adversary? (NOthat was a red herring, not the real reason)
>–Was it a fishing expedition, hoping to find dirt on Trump so they could obstruct his presidency? (POSSIBLY, but that wasn’t the fundamental reason either?)
>–Were they trying to create a cause of action for the eventual appointment of a special counsel to continually investigate a President (and his NSI, Flynn) who had done nothing wrong? YES!
>Their plan required demolishing the Trump presidency.
>It was bad enough that the people actually elected Trump.
>They had to either (1) impeach Trump during his 1st term (they tried), or (2) prevent Trump from having a 2nd term.
>They had to create a fake narrative that would make Trump look bad.
>Although [they] actually collaborated with individuals in Russia and elsewhere (e.g. Hillary selling the uranium and selling classified military secrets and Clinton Foundation receiving a $200M payment from Browder’s Russian company AFTER Hillary arranged for the uranium sale, and Bill Clinton receiving a ridiculously large honorarium for giving a brief speech in Russia), their tactic was to attribute Russian collaboration to Trump. To deflect it from themselves. So that if Trump tried to defend himself with the truth (did not collaborate with Russia to win 2016 election), [they] could say, “Look, Trump is trying to shift the blame”. So the accusations against Trump were 180 degrees opposite of what really happened and this was totally on purpose, contrived, anticipating how the defense against baseless accusations would go in a fake hoaxed-up indictment proceeding.
>No doubt they had the indictment in mind when unmasking Flynn. They HAD to create a pretext to surveil Flynn and 2nd-hand and 3rd-hand associations also scooped up in the illicit spying, hopefully scooping up all of Donald Trump’s and his family’s comms as well.
>The criminal case against Flynn was also part of the plan. They had to paint Flynn as a bad guy, a traitor, in order to smear Trump.
>The court proceeding also perhaps enabled some of the documentation to remain secret for a longer time than otherwise.
>Rosenstein and Mueller’s special counsel also managed to drag the thing on longer so that if Trump publicly unearthed proof that the allegations against him were false, and the allegations against [them] were true, [they] could deflect by saying Trump said this solely for political reasons because he was under examination by Mueller’s special counsel.

Ask me!
#obamagate #DemandAnswers

#3.
Why was Michael Flynn’s identity leaked—a CRIMINAL ACT—to the press?
>>9328291 pb
< See image Obamagate 3-0 >>9310582 pb (Answer)

3b. Who leaked his name and those conversations to the press?
>Anyone who unmasked after 29-Dec-16 is a suspect.
>>9323072 pb (Follow up Questions)
>WHY was Flynn’s ID leaked to the press?
>(Considering that leakage is a criminal act and the individual who leaked it likely knew they were breaking the law.)
>–WHAT did that individual hope to accomplish?
>–Did they leak to a known press ally with the intent that the leaked ID be published?
>–Was it to create a harsh public perception of the good General?
>–Was it to “launder” the info so it would seem to come from a journalist instead of directly from an Obama WH insider?
>–Was it to create a pretext for FBI interviewing Flynn?
>We KNOW from other declassified docs that the FBI set up Flynn. They wanted to frame him. They wanted to get him to lie and get him fired.
>–So WHY did they want Flynn fired?
>–Exactly HOW was Flynn a threat to their plans to usurp power and dump Donald Trump from the presidency by force? (I.e. a COUP)
>–What exact info / experience / contacts / plans did Flynn have that was detrimental to the Obama WH and/or detrimental to their plan to obstruct Trump’s presidency?

>Let’s do REAL JOURNALISM.

>The MSM is not going to answer these questions. They are too weak and stupid and corrupt. Their only motivation is to keep covering up the truth. We need anons to step up and do REAL JOURNALISM and dig into this puzzle and keep pulling the yarn until the pieces all come together.
#obamagate #DemandAnswers

#4.
Why did James Clapper, John Brennan, Samantha Power, and Susan Rice privately ADMIT UNDER OATH that they had no evidence of collusion, WHILE SAYING THE OPPOSITE PUBLICLY?
Ask me!

>>9356583 pb SEE IMAGE
>>9313342 pb
>We can do better. Real journalism requires facts, not just assertions.
>”When a person is prosecuted, there are separate federal regulations for perjury specifically and lying to the feds generally. Under the United States Code, title 18, section 1001, a person who knowingly or willingly makes a material statement that is false, or fraudulent, to the feds, is guilty of a crime. What comes as a surprise to many is that unlike section 1621, section 1001 does not require that a person be under oath.
>The difficulty that comes in prosecuting these crimes is the requirement that the statements be made knowingly or willingly. This allows those being accused of, or investigated for, perjury, to assert a lack of knowledge at the time of the statement that the statement was false. However, this may not be compelling enough to defeat or avoid a prosecution if contradictory evidence exists. Additionally, individuals who lie out of fear, or provide evasive answers, during a federal investigation, frequently find themselves facing the threat of federal prosecution.”
https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-penalties-for-lying-to-congress.html

>Trying to teach anons how to think.
>Are there some lazy minds here?
>I’ll cut anons a break. Maybe some anons never saw real journalism.
>You grab a thread and start pulling on it. You ask questions and pull on all of them too. You construct the logical connections and write down what you find and what the proof is.
>Then you are RIGHT and you can WRITE.
>>9323600 pb

Washington Post Accidentally Reveals Who Leaked Flynn Call: Nine Obama Administration Officials

>February 17, 2017
>Obama loyalists working in Washington set the wheels in motion to take Flynn down before Obama was even out of office.
>The Washington Post may have accidentally spilled the beans on this in a recent article.
>“Neither of those assertions is consistent with the fuller account of Flynn’s contacts with Kislyak provided by officials who had access to reports from U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies that routinely monitor the communications of Russian diplomats. Nine current and former officials, who were in senior positions at multiple agencies at the time of the calls, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.”
>“At the time of the calls” means these officials were in office during the Obama Administration.

That means it was nine Obama officials who leaked the calls.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/national-security-adviser-flynn-discussed-sanctions-with-russian-ambassador-despite-denials-officials-say/2017/02/09/f85b29d6-ee11-11e6-b4ff-ac2cf509efe5_story.html
>>9324175 pb

>Until those phone call transcripts get released, not sure how much interest OG will continue to generate.
>DJT’s got everyone running down rabbit holes with the Morning Joe story.
>Got to accept it’s an old story and gets stale easily without fresh meat.
>If there were 9 sources for the Flynn leak as the Post claims, that would be a statement by them.
>Ballsy move that achieved its objective – got Flynn out of WH.
>And each could provide cover for the other – safety in numbers.
>With Rice’s memo as icing on the cake for Hussein – giving him and them an added layer of insulation.
>Bet they thought their names would never be exposed though.

>>9324269 pb
>9 sources for the Flynn leak as the Post claims
They wanted to make SURE the leak got out. Getting Flynn’s name published must have been CRITICALLY IMPORTANT to their plan.
>>9324271 pb
>Because they had nothing to back up their Russia collusion claims and even unmasking him didnt prove a crime committed.
>So they leaked to the press because then that could be used to back up their investigation, as false evidence.
>They still never could charge him with a crime pertaining to Russia, or election meddling etc. And as Priestap’s notes said the goal was to get him to lie or trick him because it was THAT important to remove him

>>9334329 pb << SEE IMAGES IN PB >The FBI documents that put Barack Obama in the ‘Obamagate’ narrative
>Agents fretted sharing Flynn intel with departing Obama White House would become fodder for ‘partisan axes to grind.’
>Just 17 days before President Trump took office in January 2017, then-FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok texted bureau lawyer Lisa Page, his mistress, to express concern about sharing sensitive Russia probe evidence with the departing Obama White House.
>Strzok had just engaged in a conversation with his boss, then-FBI Assistant Director William Priestap, about evidence from the investigation of incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, codenamed Crossfire Razor, or “CR” for short.
>The evidence in question were so-called “tech cuts” from intercepted conversations between Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, according to the texts and interviews with officials familiar with the conversations.
>Strzok related Priestap’s concerns about the potential the evidence would be politically weaponized if outgoing Director of National Intelligence James Clapper shared the intercept cuts with the White House and President Obama, a well-known Flynn critic.
>“He, like us, is concerned with over sharing,” Strzok texted Page on Jan. 3, 2017, relating his conversation with Priestap. “Doesn’t want Clapper giving CR cuts to WH. All political, just shows our hand and potentially makes enemies.”
>Page seemed less concerned, knowing that the FBI was set in three days to release its initial assessment of Russian interference in the U.S. election.
>“Yeah, but keep in mind we were going to put that in the doc on Friday, with potentially larger distribution than just the DNI,” Page texted back.
>Strzok responded, “The question is should we, particularly to the entirety of the lame duck usic [U.S Intelligence Community] with partisan axes to grind.”
>That same day Strzok and Page also discussed in text messages a drama involving one of the Presidential Daily Briefings for Obama.
>“Did you follow the drama of the PDB last week?” Strzok asked.
>”Yup. Don’t know how it ended though,” Page responded.
>“They didn’t include any of it, and Bill [Priestap] didn’t want to dissent,” Strzok added.
>“Wow, Bill should make sure [Deputy Director] Andy [McCabe] knows about that since he was consulted numerous times about whether to include the reporting,” Page suggested.
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/fbi-documents-put-barack-obama-obamagate-narrative

Additional QUESTIONS
>Is it perjury to lie to a Congressional committee?
>Did these individuals give sworn testimony before Congress? When?
>Are the transcripts public? Where?
>Can we identify where in their sworn statements they denied any evidence of (Trump-Russia) collusion?
>Can we identify the public statements asserting that there WAS (Trump-Russia) collusion?
>If these statements differ as alleged,
>is that perjury?
>Is it a criminal offense?
>What statute?
>What’s the penalty if found guilty?
#obamagate #DemandAnswers

#5.
Why did the Obama administration use opposition research— funded by a political organization and filled with foreign dirt—to spy on members of the Trump campaign?
Ask me!

>>9336469 pb
>Here’s a little bit of research establishing that opposition research funded by a political organization was indeed used:
>The [anti-Trump rag] Washington Post admitted on Oct 25, 2017 that the DNC and Hillary’s presidential campaign helped pay for the opposition research that resulted in the discredited “dodgy dossier” alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. (https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/debra-heine/2017/10/25/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-oppo-research-led-discredited-anti-trump-dossier-n54220)
>According to the Washington Post, the opposition research firm Fusion GPS was retained in April 2016 by Marc Elias (of law firm Perkins Coie), a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Fusion GPS then hired former British spy Christopher Steele to conduct the research (i.e. to assemble false rumors and innuendo into a “dossier” of allegations that Trump and his campaign actively colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 election). (I hate that word “dossier” because the word itself implies a package of credible evidence on a person.)
>The FBI used “dossier” – in conjunction with a Yahoo News report – in their fraudulent application for a FISA warrant. A version of the “dossier” was leaked to Yahoo News, which in turn wrote an article; this article was used in an attempt to create credibility for the “dossier” in a process that we could call “intelligence laundering”, i.e. a circuitous route that tries to conceal the actual source of intel.

>None of the dossier’s allegations of collusion have been verified. Lawyers for Steele admitted in court filings in April 2017 (http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/02/politics/donald-trump-spy-dossier/index.html) that Steele’s work was not verified and was never meant to be made public.

>The Federalist reported that OFA, Obama’s 2016 campaign arm, paid nearly $800,000 to Perkins Coie in 2016 alone, according to FEC records. The first 2016 payments to Perkins Coie, classified only as “Legal Services,” were made April 25-26, 2016, and totaled $98,047. A second batch of payments, also classified as “Legal Services,” were disbursed to the law firm on September 29, 2016, and totaled $700,000. Payments from OFA to Perkins Coie in 2017 totaled $174,725 through August 22, 2017. (https://thefederalist.com/2017/10/29/obamas-campaign-gave-972000-law-firm-funneled-money-fusion-gps/)

>So the next questions we need to get into are
>- “filled with foreign dirt” (i.e. what was in the dossier and can we prove that it was false? Perhaps somebody admitted it was false?)
>and
>- WHY was the dossier used by the Obama admin?
>Any budding journalists want to step up?
>Almost got this thing nailed…
#obamagate #DemandAnswers
extra images

View post on imgur.com

NOW BE THE NEWS

ObamaGate

#ObamaGate

This article Connects a lot of dots. stopped half way through to post when I saw Lee Smith put head clownfag Brennan and Susan Rice in the killbox

“We were looking for ties between al-Qaida and Iran,”
[C_A Director John] Brennan and [National Security Adviser Susan] Rice pulled the plug
I corrected the I > _ for him

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/russiagate-obama-iran

So if the Obama administration wasn’t alarmed by Flynn’s nonexistent ties to Russia, why was he Obama’s No. 1 target? Why were officials from the previous administration intercepting his phone calls with the Russian ambassador?

The answer is that Obama saw Flynn as a signal threat to his legacy, which was rooted in his July 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Flynn had said long before he signed on with the Trump campaign that it was a catastrophe to realign American interests with those of a terror state. And now that the candidate he’d advised was the new president-elect, Flynn was in a position to help undo the deal. To stop Flynn, the outgoing White House ran the same offense it used to sell the Iran deal—they smeared Flynn through the press as an agent of a foreign power, spied on him, and leaked classified intercepts of his conversations to reliable echo chamber allies.

“What made Flynn revolutionary is that he got people out in the field,” says Shahbandar, who served in Iraq under Flynn in 2007-08 and in Afghanistan in 2010-11. “It wasn’t just enough to have intelligence, you needed to understand where it was coming from and what it meant. For instance, if you thought that insurgents were going to take over a village, the first people who would know what was going would be the villagers. So Flynn made sure we knew the environment, the culture, the people.”

Influential senior officers like Gens. David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal credited Flynn for collecting the intelligence that helped defeat al-Qaida in Iraq in 2007. In 2012, he was named DIA chief. The next year he secured access for a team of DIA analysts to scour through the documents that had been captured during the 2011 operation to kill Osama bin Laden.

“The bin Laden database was unorganized,” says a former senior DIA official. “There had been very little work on it since it was first captured. The C_A had done machine word searches to identify immediate threats, but they didn’t study it for future trends or strategic insight.” Flynn arranged for a team from United States Central Command, based in Tampa, Florida, to come up to Washington. The subject of their investigation was a potentially sensitive one.

“We were looking for ties between al-Qaida and Iran,”

says Michael Pregent, a former Army intelligence officer who was working on the bin Laden documents as a contractor. “We’re arguing with everyone—NSA, whoever else—telling them what we wanted and they kept saying

‘there’s nothing there, we already went through it.’ The C_A

and others were looking for immediate threats. We said ‘we’re DIA, we’re all-source analysts and we want everything to get a full picture.’”

Just as the CENTCOM team was preparing for their trip to Northern Virginia, they were shut down. “Everything was set,” says Pregent. “we had our hotel reservations, a team of translators, and access to all of the drives at the National Media Exploitation Center. Then I get a call in the middle of one of the NCAA basketball tournament games from the guy who was running our team.

He said that [C_A Director John] Brennan and [National Security Adviser Susan] Rice pulled the plug.”

The administration was, it appears, clearing space for Obama to implement his big foreign policy idea—the Iran nuclear deal. Another aide, Ben Rhodes, had said in 2013 that the Iran Deal was the White House’s key second-term initiative. Evidence that Tehran was coordinating with a terror group that had slaughtered thousands in Manhattan and at the Pentagon would make it harder to convince American lawmakers of the wisdom in legitimizing Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

What was the information about al-Qaida’s ties to Iran that Flynn wanted his CENTCOM team to get out? According to published news reports, the bin Laden database included“letters about Iran’s role, influence, and acknowledgment of enabling al-Qaida operatives to pass through Iran as long as al-Qaida did its dirty work against the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan.” One of those letters showed that “Al-Qaeda was working on chemical and biological weapons”’in Iran.”

Who financed 9-11?
Who was Bin Laden’s handler?
Why was the Clowns In America tasked to hunt/kill/capture UBL?
Why not MI?