Pennsylvanian Supreme Court Justice Horrified by Anti-Semitism In America

An erudite Judge speaks out on Antisemitism. He sees it as a growing threat in America.  Interesting!   Definitely worth reading.

Justice Wecht Breaks Judicial Silence on Anti-Semitism

A sitting American justice from the state of the Pittsburgh massacre speaks out on First Amendment rights, Christchurch, and the dangers of a pivotal moment in our history

By Joel Cohen

Rarely, if ever, has a sitting American judge spoken out publicly on the threat of anti-Semitism in America. However, here, Justice David N. Wecht, a judge serving on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the highest court in the state and the oldest Supreme Court in the nation, has chosen to speak out boldly and firmly about what he perceives to be a national crisis.

The Honorable David N. Wecht was elected by the citizens of Pennsylvania to a 10-year term on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2015.  His father’s parents ran a grocery store not far from where Justice Wecht was sworn in. Before his election to the state’s Supreme Court, he served four years on the Pennsylvania Superior Court (the state’s intermediate appellate court). He attended Yale University and Yale Law School, where he served as notes editor of the Yale Law Journal, and then clerked for Judge George MacKinnon of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Justice Wecht and his wife were married at the Tree of Life synagogue in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood of Pittsburgh, where he grew up. Tree of Life was the site of the Oct. 27, 2018, attack in which 11 Jews were murdered by a white supremacist.

I interviewed Justice Wecht in March of this year.

Read the full interview.

VIDEO: Yes, Judicial Watch is Investigating the Jussie Smollett Scandal

TRANSCRIPT

On January 29, 2019 at approximately 2:30 AM, TV actor Jussie Smollett called the Chicago Police Department to claim that two while males wearing MAGA-like hats and using a racial and homophobic slur had assaulted him, poured bleach on him, and put a noose around his neck. The Chicago Police launched a massive investigation involving more than two dozen investigators.

On Feb. 13, the police raided the home of two brothers of Nigerian descent. There, they recovered a check that Smollett had paid the brothers for $3,500. Using financial records and surveillance tapes, the police discovered that the brothers had purchased bleach, rope for the noose, and MAGA-like hats the weekend before the “attack” on Smollett.

Under questioning, the brothers admitted to police that Smollett had paid them to stage the hate-crime attack.

On Feb. 19, rather than charging Smollett with a crime, Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx announced that she was “recusing” herself from the investigation and prosecution. Before recusing herself, Foxx exchanged numerous texts with Michelle Obama’s former chief of staff, Tina Tchen, a close friend of the Smollett family.

Nonetheless, on March 8, a grand jury indicted Smollett on 16 felony counts of “false report of offense” related to the fake assault. On March 26, all charges against Smollett were suddenly dropped and his court record was sealed. Smollett was then let off with just 16 hours of community service and the forfeiture of a $10,000 bond. Judicial Watch is determined to get to the truth about what happened–because NO ONE is above the law!

VIDEO: How Obama’s Supreme Court Bankrupted the Morality of the Boy Scouts

In The Federalist column “The Boy Scouts’ Bankruptcy Is Not Just Financial. It’s Moral” Alfred Siewers writes:

What’s left of the Boy Scouts of America (now operating as Scouts BSA) is on the brink of declaring bankruptcy, according to recent news reports. With estimated assets of more than $1 billion, Scouting’s problems go beyond the financial, deep into the problems with America’s civil culture today.

[ … ]

The old American Boy Scouts might as well be filing for moral bankruptcy, having lost both its base and elite cultural capital. What used to be an organization designed to help boys become men has now been re-fashioned in line with the new gnosticism of American culture, accepting LGTBQIA ideology, while abandoning its traditional ascetic position about sex and its opposition to atheism.

Read more.

Christmas for boys from Xcluded on Vimeo.

Smollett and the Deep State: We Deserve Justice

Outrageously, Chicago State’s Attorney Kim Foxx dropped all charges against Jussie Smollett. Smollett is the black actor who staged a fake hate crime, claiming he was brutally assaulted by Trump supporters wearing MAGA caps.

Smollett paid the two guys he hired to stage his bogus attack with a $3000 check. Closed circuit TV caught Smollett’s hired attackers buying the MAGA caps and other materials needed to stage the fake hate crime. Smollett intended for his fake attack to be videoed on cc TV. Thank God the camera in the area Smollett selected malfunctioned. Had Smollett been successful, fake news media would have gleefully aired the video 24/7, probably igniting massive race riots and violence on Trump supporters.

After Kim Foxx dropped all charges, Smollett addressed the media, outrageously lying and presenting himself as a victim of police corruption. Smollett said,

“I have been truthful and consistent on every single level since day one. I would not be my mother’s son if I was capable of one drop of what I’ve been accused of.” 

Does this guy think we are idiots? Dude, you lied about being attacked. Idiotically, you paid your fake attackers with a check. There is video of them buying the props. And yet, Smollett has the audacity to sell the lie that he is yet another innocent black man abused by racist police. Sadly, I suspect most of fake news media will help to sell Smollett’s lie which sets up our brave men and women in blue for more assassinations by Black Lives Matter disciples.

Many have forgotten the ambush of uniformed Texas Deputy Darren Goforth who was shot multiple times in the back while pumping gas. Deputy Goforth’s black assassin was inspired by Black Lives Matter. Forty-seven year old Deputy Goforth left behind his wife Kathleen, his 12 year old daughter Ava and his 5 year old son Ryan.

Do you remember NYPD officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu who were ambushed and killed while eating lunch in their police car? The enraged black shooter said his motivation was revenge for cops supposedly murdering blacks. 

Officer Ramos’ 13 year old son Jaden posted the following on Facebook.

“Today I had to say bye to my father. He was their for me everyday of my life, he was the best father I could ask for. It’s horrible that someone gets shot dead just for being a police officer. Everyone says they hate cops but they are the people that they call for help. I will always love you and I will never forget you. RIP Dad.” 

I could go on and on with examples of police ambushed and assassinated because of the evil politically motivated lie that cops routinely abuse and murder blacks. Democrats nurture this heinous lie because it keeps blacks voting for Democrats to protect them from nonexistent massive police and white American racism.

So here is race-baiter Jussie Smollett all over national media, disgustingly claiming he is a hero for civil rights. Please excuse me while I barf. This evil man sought to generate more hate and violence on Trump voters who courageously wear MAGA caps.

While in Walmart, I saw a wheelchair-bound elderly white gentleman wearing a white MAGA cap with gold stars on it. I said, “I like that hat.” With a grin, he stuck-out his hand and said, “You’re alright partner!” We enthusiastically shook hands. His wife pushing his wheelchair smiled.

All charges were dropped against Smollett because his insidious hoax furthers leftists’ mission to demonize police, Trump and Trump voters. From Hillary Clinton’s serial lawbreaking to Obama, the FBI, the DOJ and others silent coup against an elected president, the deep state feels free to break laws to remove Trump from office

Allowing deep state operatives to feel emboldened to freely break laws to get rid of Trump is extremely dangerous as we move toward the 2020 presidential election. We must not allow deep state operatives to be above the law.

I pray that Sen Lindsey Graham will follow through with his promise to investigate all the arrogant corrupt players in the deep state’s 679 days bogus Trump-colluded-with-Russia investigation.

My fellow Americans it is time that we stop allowing anti-American enemies-within to get away with criminal and treasonous behavior. Jussie Smollett’s feet should be held to the fire. We the People deserve justice.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Hate Crimes of Jussie Smollett

RELATED VIDEO: Chris Rock: Jussie Smollett, You Don’t Get No Respect From Me | Image Awards – TV One.

55 Years of Carte Blanche Lies by the Main Stream Media

Governments are composed of human beings, and all of the frailties that humans possess are absorbed into these governments and become active within these governments. Hatred, anger, jealousy, fear, greed, distrust and the whole host of afflictions that humans must bear, lurk just beneath the surface of civility displayed by government. – John McAfee

For the poison of hatred seated near the heart doubles the burden for the one who suffers the disease; he is burdened with his own sorrow, and groans on seeing another’s happiness. – Aeschylus


As soon as the 2016 election results came in, many on the left exploded in anger, smashing windows, setting fires, calling for Trump to be assassinated, and labeling his supporters bigots and sexists who should be murdered. Protesters burned Trump in effigy, and passed around a stuffed figure of Trump in a noose.

And then came the Russia Collusion Investigation, thanks to Rod Rosenstein’s appointment of Robert Mueller whose thirty-year modus operandi has destroyed countless lives. Link

Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, the nation’s former so-called spy master, James Clapper, told CNN’s Anderson Cooper, “If it weren’t for President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set up a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, including Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation. President Obama is responsible for that. It was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place.”

There you have it, and despite the Russia collusion investigation being over, targeting President Trump for elimination will never be over.  We know all the players and we want them prosecuted for their corruption, but it’s highly unlikely they will ever be held accountable.

A stench has been emanating from the J. Edgar Hoover Building (FBI headquarters) for decades, but in the last 10 years the decay has become evident.  The brazen plot against President Trump by the Obama-era FBI and DOJ was enabled by a complicit media.

Defamation Law

The odor of corruption has long been noxious and truth is not forthcoming from media.  Why?  Because the 1964 Supreme Court decision in NYTs v. Sullivan gave media a “first amendment” right to lie with impunity about any public figure they wished to destroy or promote thus protecting them from most libel suits.

A public official could recover in a libel action only if and when a court found that the libelous statement about the official was made with “actual malice”—that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.  As long as the press has an “absence of malice,” public officials are barred from recovering damages for the publication of false statements about them.

Defamation law, the ability to sue someone for false attacks on your reputation, was governed by state law until 1964.  The landmark U.S. Supreme Court case, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S. Ct. 710, 11 L. Ed. 2d 686 (1964), extended the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech to libel cases brought by public officials. The Supreme Court sought to encourage “public debate” by changing the rules involving libel that had previously been the province of state law and state courts.

In the case of police Commissioner Sullivan, the State of Alabama found for him against NYTs libel and awarded him $500k which was upheld by the Alabama Supreme Court in 1962.  However, the very liberal Warren Court took up the case filed by the NYTs against Sullivan.

The unanimous Warren Supreme Court decision in New York Times Company v. Sullivan was argued on January 6-7, 1964 and decided on March 9, 1964.  It has proven to be one of the very worst decisions ever made by the supreme court.

Calls to Overturn NYTs v. Sullivan

Justice Clarence Thomas recently called for the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the landmark 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan ruling. Thomas wrote that the New York Times ruling and follow-up cases “were policy-driven decisions masquerading as constitutional law.”

President Donald Trump has called for overhauling the country’s libel laws to make it easier to sue.  He first mentioned the NYTs v. Sullivan case in 2016 when he campaigned in Alabama where the case originated.  He had previously asked why the media was allowed to lie and that is when I wrote my original article on this horrendous ruling.

Now L. Lin Wood, attorney for Covington High School student, Nicholas Sandmann has expounded on this horrible decision and how the ruling enables media to ruin reputations. Nick became the latest focus of false and defamatory accusations published and broadcast across the nation and the world.

Attorney Wood made it very clear on a recent Mark Levin program when he stated he was a believer in the first amendment but that it has no strings and no real value when there is no accountability for wrongdoing.  He explained that with the Nicholas Sandmann case, it was false speech by both social and main stream media (MSM) that threatened, attacked and vilified a minor child.

Watch the twelve-minute Mark Levin interview of Lin Wood’s discussion regarding the NYTs v. Sullivan decision and how it has affected all of society negatively.

VIDEO HERE:

55 Years of Media Deterioration

Attorney Wood was right when he mentioned the deterioration in the media, and over 55 years it has grown exponentially worse.  Mr. Wood said he has watched the media since the  Richard Jewell case, and it is horribly unhealthy.  He said, “There’s nothing valuable to our public discourse for people to simply go out and tell rumors, lies, make accusations with no sources and to be able to use the media and the First Amendment to, in effect, advance his or her or some corporation’s own agendas. That’s what happened to Nicholas. There’s a lot of agendas at work.”

Attorney Wood explained that the large corporations who own the media outlets have no objectivity and no fairness to them and are extensions of political parties who wish to influence the public instead of informing the public.  It used to be for media, “Get it first, but get it right.”  They’ve thrown out get it right and even get it first.  He says that if we don’t get accountability, the deterioration will continue.

The Russia Collusion Narrative

Efforts by high-ranking officials in the CIA, FBI, Department of Justice (DOJ), and State Department to portray President Donald Trump as having colluded with Russia were the culmination of years of bias and politicization under the Obama administration. The weaponization of the intelligence community and other government agencies created an environment that allowed for obstruction in the investigation into Hillary Clinton and the relentless pursuit of a manufactured collusion narrative against Trump.  Link

A willing and complicit media spread unsubstantiated leaks as facts in an effort to promote the Russia-collusion narrative. Worse yet was the “epic disconnect between the Robert Mueller described by the MSM and Officialdom as a model of public propriety and the Robert Mueller documented by independent researchers.  Rep. Louie Gohmert wrote a 15,500-word monograph exposing Mueller, and Louisiana State Senator John Milkovich wrote an entire book on Mueller.

The Spygate scandal also raises a bigger question: Was the 2016 election a one-time aberration, or was it symptomatic of decades of institutional political and media corruption?

Conclusion

Special Counsel Robert Mueller was given no restrictions regarding the collusion investigation from his appointee, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.  In fact, Rosenstein testified that he told Mueller he could investigate any crimes he uncovered in the Russia collusion investigation.

“Rod is a survivor,” dirty cop James Comey once said privately of Rosenstein, not meaning it as a compliment. Rosenstein’s survival helped Special Counsel Robert Mueller do his job absent interference. Every day Rosenstein didn’t resign bought the special counsel more time for character assassination against the President and his supporters. He needs to be fired for a host of reasons

.

The day Rosenstein is actually forced out will be a very good day.  Unfortunately, it won’t be soon enough. Attorney General William Barr has asked Rosenstein to remain despite the fact that as Deputy AG he allowed Mueller to carry out his modus operandi of intimidation and destruction without any oversight.

The group at the FBI that doggedly pursued the false collusion story is the same group that let Hillary Clinton slide on deleting official emails, creating an illegal computer server and destroying evidence of her wrongdoing with cover ups by the complicit democratic controlled media.  It’s also the same group who in 2009 allowed her to sell 20 percent of our uranium to Russia with the help of FBI Director Mueller, while the Clinton Foundation raked in $145 million via Rosatom.

The clear double standard of the liberal media and their role as propagandists is in full view.  This is why the 1964 Warren Court NYTs decision must be overturned.

In the next article, we’ll discuss those who were targeted by Mueller, the Democrat Party and the media and have paid extremely high prices for supporting an outsider for President.

This Veteran, Who Supplied Water to Firefighters, Went to Prison for Digging Ponds [Video]

An elderly veteran who ran a business supplying water to fight forest fires was prosecuted by the federal government and sent to prison for digging ponds on his own property, one of his lawyers says.

Joe Robertson, a Navy veteran from Montana, was 78 when he was convicted and sentenced to 18 months in federal prison and ordered to pay $130,000 in restitution through deductions from his Social Security checks.

His crime?

Robertson, whose business supplied water trucks to Montana firefighters, dug a series of small ponds close to his home in 2013 and 2014. The site was a wooded area near a channel, a foot wide and a foot deep, with two to three garden hoses’ worth of flow, according to court documents.

The U.S. government prosecuted Robertson for digging in proximity to “navigable waters” without a permit, a violation of the Clean Water Act administered by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers.

Tony Francois, a senior attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation, a nonprofit, public interest law firm specializing in property rights, described the events leading up to Robertson’s prosecution during a panel discussion Monday at The Heritage Foundation.

Also on the panel was Kevin Pierce, vice president of Hawkes Co., a Minnesota-based family business that harvests peat for golf course greens. Daren Bakst, Heritage’s senior research fellow for agriculture policy, was moderator of the event, called “Horror Stories of EPA and Corps Overreach under the Clean Water Act.”

Pacific Legal Foundation filed a petition on behalf of Robertson, asking the Supreme Court to review his case, which turns on the definition of “navigable waters.”

The Navy veteran argued that he didn’t violate the Clean Water Act because
digging the ponds did not discharge any soil to navigable waters, since the trickle in the channel didn’t constitute navigable waters.

The largest navigable body of water anywhere near the Robertson home is more than 40 miles away, Francois said.

Because Robertson lived in a wooded area that is “increasingly fire prone,” he was “concerned about the safety and vulnerability of his property,” Francois said. He built the ponds “with a view toward being well-prepared should a fire strike.”

The Supreme Court is expected to decide in April whether it will hear Robertson’s appeal.

Robertson, sentenced in 2016, completed his 18 months behind bars in late 2017.

He was still on parole for the next 20 months when he died March 18 at age 80 of natural causes, according to his widow.

Pacific Legal Foundation filed papers this week to substitute Robertson’s widow, Carri Robertson, as the petitioner in the appeal to the Supreme Court.

Another case Francois cited concerns a proposed road in Marquette County, Michigan. The project, known as CR-595, would shorten the travel time between a nickel mine and a refinery 22 miles away.

The only route now available to the mine, called Eagle Mine, is three times as long, Francois said. The nickel mine, currently the only one in the U.S., is expected to bring about $4 billion in economic activity to the county, according to Pacific Legal Foundation.

The Marquette County Road Commission’s CR-595 proposal called for  a direct road from the mine to a refinery.

“The new route would bypass the city of Marquette altogether, eliminate nearly 30 miles of travel per trip, a million and a half miles annually, as well as save 500,000 gallons of fuel per year,” Francois said.

Since the proposed route goes through wetlands, however, the road commission sought a wetlands permit under the Clean Water Act. The state approved the permit, but the EPA rejected it.

“The final version [of the commission’s planned route] proposed to protect 63 acres of wetlands for every acre the road project would disturb,” Francois said. “But the EPA continued to object to CR 595 because in their view the commission still had not provided adequate plans to minimize impacts, and that its 63-1 mitigation ratio was not a comprehensive mitigation plan that would sufficiently compensate for unavoidable impacts.”

The EPA vetoed the commission’s plan and the Supreme Court declined a petition from Pacific Legal Foundation to review that decision.

Pacific Legal Foundation also represented Hawkes Co. in a 2016 case before the high court. In a 8-0 decision, the justices ruled that landowners have a right to challenge wetland determinations made by federal agencies.

Pierce, the Hawkes Co. official, described a difficult and arduous process to prevail over opposition from the Army Corps of Engineers to secure a permit allowing the company to expand on a 200-acre peat mining site. The company began the application process in 2006.

“I really don’t like how it worked. No. 1, there was a lot of fabrication from the Corps people, Pierce said at the Heritage event, adding:

They actually went to the landowner that we had the option to buy the land with. They sent two people up from St. Paul to his house for two and half hours for a meeting to try to convince him to sell the real estate to someone else, while we got $200,000 already invested in a permit application.

And they gave names and numbers of people who would buy it for preservation to sell it out from under us. Well knowing that we had options to buy and contracts with that landowner, which then forced us to have to buy the land seven years before we got our permit and had to follow through on it.

When I confronted them about it, they literally lied to me and said, ‘We didn’t know you had a permit or an option to buy.’ But then later in the conversation, they say, ‘Well, we thought it ran out.’

Congress initially passed the Clean Water Act in 1948, but lawmakers greatly altered and expanded it into the current form with amendments in 1972.

The law “establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters,” according to the EPA’s website.

Under the 1972 amendments, it is illegal to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters without a permit from the EPA. The Corps oversees the permitting process and shares enforcement authority with the EPA.

In 2015, the Obama administration implemented its Clean Water Rule, widely known as the Waters of the United States rule or WOTUS rule, which expanded the regulatory reach of the EPA and the Corps over bodies of water throughout the country.

The Trump administration has taken steps to withdraw the Obama administration’s rule and replace it with a new one that limits the regulatory reach of federal agencies.

Although Heritage’s Bakst said he approves of the Trump administration’s efforts, he has argued that it ultimately falls to Congress to clarify what waterways are subject to EPA regulations.

The Daily Signal sought comment for this report from both the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers.

“We cannot comment on ongoing litigation even as it pertains to actions of the previous administration,” EPA spokesman James Hewitt said in an email. “However, EPA is moving forward with a replacement WOTUS rule to ensure farmers and ranchers have more certainty when it comes to federal jurisdiction over waters.”

A Corps spokesman said in an email that it would not comment on the Robertson case since it is still active and has nothing to add to the Hawkes case beyond what is already “a matter of public record.”

COLUMN BY

Kevin Mooney

Kevin Mooney is an investigative reporter for The Daily Signal. Send an email to Kevin. Twitter: @KevinMooneyDC


Dear Readers:

Just two short years after the end of the Obama administration’s disastrous policies, America is once again thriving due to conservative solutions that have produced a historic surge in economic growth.

The Trump administration has embraced over 60 percent of The Heritage Foundation’s policy recommendations since his inauguration. But with the House now firmly within the grips of the progressive left, the victories may come to a screeching halt.

Why? Because they are determined more than ever to give the government more control over your lives. Restoring your liberty and embracing freedom is the best thing for you and the country.

President Donald Trump needs all of the allies he can find to push through the stone wall he now faces within this divided government. And the best way you can partner with him is by becoming a member of his greatest ally in Washington: The Heritage Foundation.

Will you activate your membership with a tax-deductible gift today?

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

Treasonous Illegal Take Down and the Failed Coup d’ etat

The biggest political scandal in US history has been exposed. The treasonous illegal take down (insurance policy – which has lapsed), and the failed coup d’ etat is exposed for the world to see. We are now living in a post Mueller Investigation. It’s a brand new day! The disruptive cloud of the collusion hoax has been lifted. President Trump is unchained. Watch Trump at this recent rally in Michigan as he unleashes on the fake news, democrats and the deep state. Furthermore, we will begin to see even greater success with international leaders and negotiations with such countries as China and North Korea etc. Any delays or uncertainties that the witch hunt created will no longer be an obstacle to forging ahead with our allies and trading partners as Trump dismantles globalism and the new world order.

Trump Unchained

With this hoax, for all intents and purposes behind us, President Trump has now openly gone on the offense. The enemy has been and continues to be doing an excellent job at destroying themselves. The president has expressed his views on the dedicated one hour show with Sean Hannity (a must watch), as well as to the international media and from his busy Twitter account. The president acknowledged that this was not only a complete fabricated hoax, but in fact a treasonous illegal take down and failed coup d’ etat against a duly elected president. Trump vows to expose this so that justice will be served. The president stated this must never happen again to any president.

When asked by Hannity about declassifying FISA and other intel records and releasing this to the public, the President concurred that this will now take place. Trump indicated to Sean Hannity that he will now look into Hillary Clinton which I have a well documented track record stating this day would come. President Trump has used words such as evil individuals. Sick people doing really bad things. With regards to the media in a tweet, the president said “The Fake News Media is going Crazy! They are suffering a major “breakdown,” have ZERO credibility or respect, & must be thinking about going legit. I have learned to live with Fake News, which has never been more corrupt than it is right now. Someday, I will tell you the secret! Looking forward to the secret revealed Mr. President.

The president talked with Sean about Obama and his responsibility in all this since it was under BHO’s watch and BHO’s DOJ, FBI, CIA where and when all this originated. We’ve known all along about the Bushes, Clinton’s and Obama’s. The Bush’s are now under Trump’s control. Beginning perhaps from the bottom up, we will see Clinton and Obama in due time, facing justice. What did the founding fathers say is the punishment for elected officials guilty of high crimes, sedition and treason? Oh yeah, execution.

Keep in mind that Google hearings are on going. Facebook is under federal investigation and frantically data dumping as an attempt to hide their crimes.  FB, Twitter, Google, Microsoft YouTube etc. will be challenged further. Are they news sites? Are they breaking any laws with regards to censorship? Shadow banning? Data mining? Algorithms designed to silence the opposition? Leave this up to intel and the lawyers but I am sure we will be hearing about monopolies and anti trust laws along the way.

Q has told us there are over 82,000 sealed indictments. We are witnessing sedition and treason. We are witnessing felonies, high crimes and misdemeanors. These acts will now see the light of day and the facts will be known as the day of reckoning is upon is. Comey, Shiff, Schummer, Pelosi, Feinstein, Ryan, Burr along with McCabe, Clapper, Brennan and so many others.

Watch Lindsey Graham and Rand Paul. The probes, hearings, investigations, grand juries, subpoenas, indictments as well as military tribunals, will now commence and quicker than we may think. This will, however go on for several years. But it’s a new day dawning. In fact, President Trump stated on that Hannity interview I mentioned, that we are in a very dark, dark period but we are now shedding light and coming into the truth and into the light. Yes, from dark to light.

Closing Remarks

President Trump mentioned in the Hannity interview that he is working on restoring election integrity of which I have written extensively about in my book “Trump and the Resurrection of America“. Trump talked about the importance of a paper ballot back up to computers which we now all know are rigged. The chapter in my book titled “Free and Fair  Elections” is perhaps among the first to reveal what really went on rigging the polls, election theft and voter fraud.  We have now officially entered steps six, seven and eight on the scale of discovery and action which will prove to be the longest and most dangerous phase as we are well engaged in America’s second revolution. The democrats, fake news and the deep state will fight back with a vengeance. Expect further false narratives and legal attacks and attempts against the president. False flags will continue and perhaps escalate in terms of damage. Be prepared spiritually, personally and economically.

The hoax has ended. Take a win. Calm down and enjoy the ride. And so the Nuremberg style trials that I wrote about back in August of 2017 are now at our doorstep. In fact with the tribunals of both John McCain and George Herbert Walker Bush already behind us, I stand corrected as this has already begun. Get the popcorn and enjoy the show.

Informed – Connected – Grounded

Read through my books and nearly 400 articles here on this website. Sign up for the JMC Report. I have a pretty good track record for over two decades. It’s either us or them. Mark my words. They are all going down. The global financial reset and the rule of law reset are the underlying policies of which our brilliant and brave President is operating. President Trump is restoring power to the people and re-directing the course for humanity. We are on God’s side. May the force remain with us.

RELATED ARTICLE: Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation

Illinois Prosecutors Bar Association: Full Statement on Jussie Smollett Case Dismissal

Illinois Prosecutors Bar Association

Statement on Jussie Smollett Case Dismissal

The Illinois Prosecutors Bar Association serves as the voice for nearly 1,000 front line prosecutors across the State who work tirelessly towards the pursuit of justice. The events of the past few days regarding the Cook County State’s Attorney’s handling of the Jussie Smollett case is not condoned by the IPBA, nor is it representative of the honest ethical work prosecutors provide to the citizens of the State of Illinois on a daily basis.

The manner in which this case was dismissed was abnormal and unfamiliar to those who practice law in criminal courthouses across the State. Prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges alike do not recognize the arrangement Mr. Smollett received. Even more problematic, the State’s Attorney and her representatives have fundamentally misled the public on the law and circumstances surrounding the dismissal.

The public has the right to know the truth, and we set out to do that here.

When an elected State’s Attorney recuses herself from a prosecution, Illinois law provides that the court shall appoint a special prosecutor. See 55 ILCS 5/3-9008(a-15). Typically, the special prosecutor is a neighboring State’s Attorney, the Attorney General, or the State Appellate Prosecutor. Here, the State’s Attorney kept the case within her office and thus never actually recused herself as a matter of law.

Additionally, the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office falsely informed the public that the uncontested sealing of the criminal court case was “mandatory” under Illinois law. This statement is not accurate. To the extent the case was even eligible for an immediate seal, that action was discretionary, not mandatory, and only upon the proper filing of a petition to seal. See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(g)(2). For seals not subject to Section 5.2(g)(2), the process employed in this case by the State’s Attorney effectively denied law enforcement agencies of legally required Notice (See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(d)(4)) and the legal opportunity to object to the sealing of the file (See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(d)(5)). The State’s Attorney not only declined to fight the sealing of this case in court, but then provided false information to the public regarding it.

The appearance of impropriety here is compounded by the fact that this case was not on the regularly scheduled court call, the public had no reasonable notice or opportunity to view these proceedings, and the dismissal was done abruptly at what has been called an “emergency” hearing. To date, the nature of the purported emergency has not been publicly disclosed. The sealing of a court case immediately following a hearing where there was no reasonable notice or opportunity for the public to attend is a matter of grave public concern and undermines the very foundation of our public court system.

Lastly, the State’s Attorney has claimed this arrangement is “available to all defendants” and “not a new or unusual practice.” There has even been an implication it was done in accordance with a statutory diversion program. These statements are plainly misleading and inaccurate. This action was highly unusual, not a statutory diversion program, and not in accordance with well accepted practices of State’s Attorney initiated diversionary programs. The IPBA supports diversion programs, and recognizes the many benefits they provide to the community, the defendant and to the prosecuting agency. Central to any diversion program, however, is that the defendant must accept responsibility. To be clear here, this simply was not a deferred prosecution.

Prosecutors must be held to the highest standard of legal ethics in the pursuit of justice. The actions of the Cook County State’s Attorney have fallen woefully short of this expectation. Through the repeated misleading and deceptive statements to the public on Illinois law and circumstances surrounding the Smollett dismissal, the State’s Attorney has failed in her most fundamental ethical obligations to the public. The IPBA condemns these actions.

This irregular arrangement was an affront to prosecutors across the State, the Chicago Police Department, victims of hate crimes, and the people of the City of Chicago and Cook County. We strongly encourage our members and the public to review the National District Attorneys Associations statement on prosecutorial best practices in high profile cases.

Best Regards,

Lee Roupas
President,
Illinois Prosecutor’s Bar Association

On The Mueller Report: Time to Investigate the ‘Investigators!’ [VIDEO]

“Russian collusion wasn’t just a hoax, it is a criminal abuse – which is why Judicial Watch has fought and will continue to fight for Russiagate documents in federal court. It’s time to investigate the ‘investigators.’” – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, Inside Judicial Watch Special Edition video


Robert Mueller has finally brought his bogus, politically motivated assault on Donald Trump – and everyone around him – to an end…

But only after spending more than two years — and tens of millions of tax dollars — chasing his tale (pun intended) and doing Hillary Clinton’s bidding.

Not so surprisingly, the conclusion at which Mueller arrived is precisely what Judicial Watch has said all along: There was no collusion.

In fact, Judicial Watch filed dozens of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits to prove it…

And had the Deep State not fought every one of them, the phony case against Trump could have been closed before it was even opened.

Now, in the riveting Inside Judicial Watch interview video below, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton puts the entire Mueller witch hunt into perspective…

And he explains why the collusion delusion hasn’t really ended –

Because now, Judicial Watch intends to investigate the “investigators”!

This is one 20-minute video you won’t want to miss.

RELATED VIDEO: Now To Investigate Mueller.

BREAKING VIDEO EXPOSE: Florida Voters Furious Over Votes Cast In Their Names

These are the victims of voter fraud. 

Project Veritas has uncovered a group of Florida voters whose identities may have been unlawfully used to cast ballots in their names in their former state of New York.

Here are the facts:

  • Each individual claims to be a resident of Florida who moved there from New York.
  • Each voter says they did NOT vote in New York in 2018.
  • The elections offices in New York & Florida have confirmed someonevoted in their names in both states.
  • Each resident says they have not lived in New York or voted there in “years.”

These aren’t the culprits of voter fraud.  These are the victims.  

View the latest video HERE.

When our investigators told these individuals that a ballot was cast in their names in Florida and New York, they were outraged.

Here’s what they told our journalists:

Florida Voter #1: Yeah, someone’s voting with my name in New York . . . I haven’t voted in New York, I mean let’s face it, I was what 25, 26 when I moved out here . . .

Florida Voter #2: Well, we’ve been residents in Florida, that’s our old address.

Florida Voter #3: It wasn’t me.  It was voter fraud apparently.

This second video in our series of voter fraud investigations shows that the real victims of voter fraud aren’t politicians and campaigns, but normal and unknowing people.

Who voted in their names?   Is this yet another systemic voter fraud problem?  How many hundreds or thousands of ‘extra votes’ were cast under the same scam?

You might recall our 2016 investigation where our journalists was offered the ballot of top a Clinton ally, Huma Abedin, in New York City.

Can anyone walk into a New York polling place and vote, using the identity of another person?

Stay tuned . . .  more on voter fraud soon.

Court Kicks CAIR Out of San Diego School District

In a landmark case, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has been forced out of the San Diego Unified School District.

lawsuit was brought against the district for partnering with CAIR and allowing the Islamist organization to run a discriminatory, unconstitutional propaganda program in its schools.

The court agreed with this assessment.

The program in question gave Muslim students special privileges and gave CAIR the power to change the district curriculum to make sure Islam was looked upon more favorably.

Students and parents were made to watch biased videos, CAIR officials were allowed to teach students and teachers about Islam and students were trained “how to become allies with Muslims students.”

The program, which began in April 2017, was based on false evidence that, in the wake of President Donald Trump’s electoral victory, Muslim students were subjected to “Islamophobic” bullying. However, state records indicated there was no evidence of such bullying in the district’s schools.

The court ruled that the program was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause by favoring one religious group over another and mixing government with religion.

Under the terms of the ruling, the school district is required to permanently drop the program and prevented from allowing CAIR to be involved in school activities in the future.

Further, school officials must correct the pro-Muslim student bias and disproportionate emphasis on Islamic history in its curriculum, which were both instituted through the program.

The court further gave the following guidelines to the schools:

  • “Educators should treat each religion with equal respect, with the time and attention spent discussing each religion being proportionate to its impact on history.”
  • “Educational material on religious subjects must be neutral and may not be presented in a manner that promotes one religion over another.”
  • “Educators or other staff sponsoring guest speakers at District events must ask them not to use their position or influence on students to forward their own religious, political, economic or social views and shall take active steps to neutralize whatever bias has been presented.”
  • “Guest speakers from religious organizations are not permitted to present to students on religious topics.”

“This is a tremendous victory, because CAIR intended this plan to be a pilot program for a nationwide rollout,” said Daniel J. Piedra, executive director of the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund (FCDF), the organization which brought the suit against the school district.

The FCDF said that other school districts similarly affected by CAIR are Seattle Public Schools, Minneapolis Public Schools, Cajon Valley Unified School District and Gilroy Unified School District.

“This settlement agreement will serve as a warning to politically correct school boards nationwide to think twice about partnering with CAIR,” said Charles LiMandri, chief counsel for FCDF.

LiMandri called the court’s decision a “victory against radical Islamic indoctrination in America’s schools.”

The FBI and the Justice Department have both banned CAIR as an outreach partner because of its Islamist agenda and ties to Hamas and terror funding.

In 2007, the U.S. government labeled CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for financing the Hamas terrorist group.

In November 2014 CAIR was designated as a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.

CAIR was listed by the U.S. government as being among “individuals/entities who are/were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations.” The Palestine Committee was a secret body set up by the Brotherhood to advance the Brotherhood/Hamas agenda in America.

A secret meeting of the committee held in Philadelphia in 1993 was wiretapped by the FBI. Nihad Awad, co-founder and executive director of CAIR participated in that meeting where members agreed that a new “neutral” entity for influencing U.S. policy and opinion was agreed upon.

Awad founded CAIR the following year.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Judge Disallows References to CAIR-Hamas Ties in Suit 

Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)

CAIR Is Suing Texas — You’ll Never Believe Why

16 Likely Democratic Presidential Candidates Endorse CAIR

Tina Tchen Takes Center Stage again, this Time in the Jussie Smollet Hoax on America Case

I have to admit I had never heard of Tina Tchen until this past week when we learned she had been brought in to try to clean up (cover up?) the misdeeds at the largest hate group in the country—the Southern Poverty Law Center.  (See my story here)

So my ears perked up when I heard her name again, this time because of her involvement in helping to get charges dropped against the very privileged Jussie Smollett.

Frankly, it is special deals for special people that conservative voters won’t forget in 2020.

First thing this morning I hit the computer to see if anyone was pointing out Tina Tchen’s rising star among the Democrat elite and sure enough the intrepid Michelle Malkin posted a great piece overnight!

Crony State: Obamas’ Chicago Fixer Tina Tchen

Here is a some of what Malkin said today at Townhall (emphasis is mine),

How did hate crime huckster Jussie Smollett get away with it? All crooked roads in Chicago lead back to the Obamas.

On Tuesday, as part of a sealed deal, the Illinois state attorney’s office dismissed 16 felony charges brought by a grand jury against the Trump-hating actor, who blamed phantom white MAGA supporters for a brutal racist “assault” that left him with a teensy-weensy scratch under his eye. The day before the “attack,” Smollett’s two bodybuilding friends were caught on surveillance tape buying costumery (red hat, ski masks, bandanas, sunglasses and gloves) that just happened to match Smollett’s descriptions of what his still-fugitive assailants were wearing.

But I guess there’s no use crying over spilled bleach.

Continue here to read more about the case and a litany of Jussie’s connections to the Obama machine.  Then this,

Given Jurnee Smollett-Bell’s [Jussie’s sister] hand-holding friendship with Tchen, Tchen’s intimacy with the Obamas, and Michelle Obama’s chumminess with Jussie Smollett (she hosted him at a musical event at the White House in 2016 and danced with him on stage at a College Signing Day Event in 2018), it is not unreasonable to wonder how much direct knowledge the Obamas themselves may have had about Tchen’s role as Smollett’s fixer.

[….]

Tchen has made quite the career out of exploiting her Obama connections, including cushy spots on VICE’s Diversity and Inclusion Board, Uber’s #MeToo advisory board, and the Grammys’ task force for inclusion and diversity. But those plum jobs and her role in Smollett’s Folly all pale in comparison to her newest gig: playing watchdog over the crumbling Southern Poverty Law Center.

After decades of manufacturing “hate” against peaceful, law-abiding conservatives, sharia opponents, Christian activists and immigration enforcement hawks, the junk mail order house that grifter Morris Dees built is in chaos amid long-brewing strife over internal gender and racial discrimination — not to mention a slew of outside defamation lawsuits. Fresh off assisting one celebrity hate crime huckster, Tchen will now be doing damage control for the granddaddy of all racial hoax rackets.

Go here to read the whole thing, it will be well worth your while!

What should you do?  Keep an eye on Tchen (make her’s a household name!) because first and foremost she will be working to hide every bit of dirty linen at the Southern Poverty Law Center. My recommendation is to find a story every day about the SPLC’s hypocrisy and internal chaos and post the story to your social media networks!

Oh and be sure Michelle Malkin’s piece today is disseminated widely! 

RELATED ARTICLES:

In Smollett Case, Justice Sacrificed on the Altar of Politics and Race

Why We Don’t Trust Our Institutions?

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

Mueller Report Offers Path To Prosecute Hillary Clinton

Two years barking up the wrong tree may now provide the direction to the correct tree in which to find the quarry.

On May 17, 2017, Bob Mueller was appointed Special Counsel to the investigation on Russian interference. Last Friday, nearly two years after his appointment and following the assignment of 19 lawyers, 40 FBI agents, 2,800 subpoenas, nearly 500 search warrants, and interviews with approximately 500 witnesses, Mueller’s report was presented to Attorney General William Barr.

The resounding conclusion, predictably enough was that “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

Wrong tree.

After approximately $25 million of expenditures, two years of incessant torture of a duly elected President of the United States, the harassment and arrest of individuals involved in President Donald J. Trump’s campaign and sphere for reasons not involving collusion, the investigation found what the American people already knew: The President of the United States won the 2016 election because he was fairly elected by the people of the United States over one of the worst presidential candidates in American history!

Oh, yes, and the Russians were trying to interfere with our election process.

Well, there’s front-page news! The Russians were trying to disrupt the American political process! From Soviet times until now. And their interference has almost always been aimed more at sowing discord and division in America while undermining American institutions. On this score, they were wildly successful in 2016 and going forward largely thanks to the irresponsible American media.

But hidden within the pages of AG Barr’s summary are key words that could signal the new direction of the Russian meddling investigation, and perhaps one that would be much more fruitful: “Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks.”

Right tree.

Admittedly, this too is information of which most informed observers were aware, but here, for the first time, is an official admission by a dedicated investigator that Hillary Clinton’s emails, and/or those of her associates, were hacked by nefarious, foreign actors — specifically the Russians.

How far does this intrusion into Clinton’s emails go? We don’t know. That is precisely the question that should lead any subsequent investigators to Clinton’s email habits and an evaluation of her email security practices, not just relating to campaign emails, but those regarding nationally sensitive information such as her activities as Secretary of State.

There is other fertile ground for investigations, i.e. how did the FBI go so far down the wrong rabbit hole, who should be held responsible, were laws broken or the FISA courts lied to and is the law enforcement organization still compromised after the departure one way or another of most of its top leaders? These are implications of the the Mueller report. President Trump spoke of this when he said he hopes the other side is investigated.

Those investigations could and should follow and be part of the direct admission of the Clinton email hacking by Russia and its impact on the election. Doing so, it it were to be pursued, creates the most visible threat to Clinton, and the most likely direction in which any future inquiry regarding Russian meddling will inevitably go.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Left’s Russian Collusion Hoax

Rep. Rashida Tlaib Pushes Democrats to Investigate Trump for ‘Impeachable Offenses’

EDITORS  NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission.

Duke University Ordered to Repay the Federal Government $112 Million for Grant Fraud

It looks like all involved are Americans (LOL! I am, after all, fair and balanced here at Frauds and Crooks!).

But, I’m bringing you this news for several reasons and first and foremost I want you to know that a whistleblower filed a lawsuit that provided information about how research data was being fudged (for years!) and has been awarded $33 million as a reward under the False Claims Act.

Good for him!

So keep an eye on possible opportunities for you to turn in someone or some institution that is defrauding Uncle Sam!  

The story that is all over the news this morning, involves the National Institutes of Health and the EPA, so the first thing I thought about was how much data involving global warming is being manipulated at the big universities that suck off the US Treasury.

And, in the wake of the Admissions scandal, it is one more example of how the average American is being suckered by elite universities.

From The Chronicle of Higher Education,

Duke to Pay $112.5 Million to Settle Scientific-Misconduct Lawsuit

Duke University will pay $112.5 million to settle a lawsuit over its alleged submission of falsified data to obtain $200 million in federal research grants.

The lawsuit, filed by a former lab analyst, Joseph Thomas, alleged that from 2006 to 2013 a research technician, Erin Potts-Kant, fabricated data that Duke used to get research funding from the National Institutes of Health and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Thomas also alleged in the lawsuit, filed under the False Claims Act, that Duke covered up the fraud. The university said on Monday in a written statement that its officials discovered the possible fraud only in 2013, after Potts-Kant was fired for embezzlement. The university did not initially understand “the extent of her research misconduct.”

More here.

The US Justice Department press statement from yesterday is here.  This is one tiny bit of it involving the suit initially brought by Thomas,

The allegations were originally brought in a lawsuit filed by Joseph Thomas, a former Duke employee, under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act, which permit private individuals to sue on behalf of the government and share in any recovery.  The Act permits the government to intervene in and take over the whistleblower’s suit, or, as in this case, for the whistleblower to pursue the action on the government’s behalf.  Mr. Thomas will receive $33,750,000 from the settlement.

I told you about qui tam suits here in January.

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

U.S. Attorney General Barr: No Collusion, No Obstruction of Justice

United States Attorney General William P. Barr issued a synopsis (below) of the Mueller investigation to key members of Congress and to the American people.

The AG Barr’s synopsis Muller investigation found:

The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US. presidential election. As the report states: [T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

AG Barr also addressed the obstruction of justice issue stating:

The Special Counsel’s decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel’s office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel’s obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement in response to the Muller special counsel report summary made public by Attorney General Barr today:

The long, national nightmare is over and President Trump has been vindicated. The corruptly-created and constitutionally abusive Mueller investigation failed to find any evidence to support the big lie that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government.

We’re pleased that AG Barr rejected Mueller’s attempt to smear President Trump with obstruction of justice innuendo by concluding that no such charges could be credibly sustained. Frankly, Mueller never had a valid basis upon which to investigate President Trump for obstruction of justice.

Let’s be clear, neither Mueller, the Obama FBI, DOJ, CIA, State Department, nor the Deep State ever had a good-faith basis to pursue President Trump on Russia collusion. Russia collusion wasn’t just a hoax, it is a criminal abuse, which is why Judicial Watch has fought and will continue to fight for Russiagate documents in federal court.

The targeting of President Trump served to protect Hillary Clinton and her enablers/co-conspirators in Obama administration from prosecution. Attorney General Barr can begin restoring the credibility of the Justice Department by finally initiating a thorough investigation of the Clinton emails and related pay-to-play scandals and the abuses behind the targeting of President Trump.

BOTTOM LINE: No collusion, no obstruction of justice.

RELATED ARTICLE: Attorney General Sees No Case for Obstruction as Mueller Finds No Collusion With Russia

FULL TEXT

Washington, DC.
March 24, 2019

The Honorable Lindsey Graham
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary
United States Senate
290 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC. 20510

The Honorable Jerrold Nadler
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary
United States House of Representatives
2132 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC. 20515

The Honorable Dianne Feinstein
Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC. 20510

The Honorable Doug Collins Ranking Member,
Committee on the Judiciary Ranking Member,
United States House of Representatives
1504 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC. 20515

Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member Collins:

As a supplement to the notification provided on Friday, March 22, 2019, I am writing today to advise you of the principal conclusions reached by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller and to inform you about the status of my initial review of the report he has prepared.

The Special Counsel’s Report

On Friday, the Special Counsel submitted to me a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions he has reached, as required by 28 CPR. This report is entitled “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.” Although my review is ongoing, I believe that it is in the public interest to describe the report and to summarize the principal conclusions reached by the Special Counsel and the results of his investigation.

The report explains that the Special Counsel and his staff thoroughly investigated allegations that members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, and others associated with it, conspired with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere in the 2016 US. presidential election, or sought to obstruct the related federal investigations. In the report, the Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.

1

The Special Counsel obtained a number of indictments and convictions of individuals and entities in connection with his investigation, all of which have been publicly disclosed. During the course of his investigation, the Special Counsel also referred several matters to other offices for further action. The report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public. Below, I summarize the principal conclusions set out in the Special Counsel’s report.

Russian Interference in the 2016 US. Presidential Election. The Special Counsel’s report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel’s investigation was whether any Americans including individuals associated with the Trump campaign joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US. presidential election. As the report states: [T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

The Special Counsel’s investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not and that any US. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

The second element involved the Russian governments efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not and that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.


1 In assessing potential conspiracy charges, the Special Counsel also considered whether members of the Trump campaign coordinated with Russian election interference activities. The Special Counsel defined coordination as an agreement tacit or express between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference.

2

Obstruction of Justice. The report’s second part addresses a number of actions by the President most of which have been the subject of public reporting that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a thorough factual investigation into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as difficult issues of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that while this report does not conclude that I the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

The Special Counsel’s decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the Investigation, the Special Counsel’s office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel’s obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.

In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference, and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloging the President’s actions, many of which took place in public View, the report identities no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department’s principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.


2 See A Sitting President’s Amenability t0 Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C. 222 (2000).

3

Status of the Department’s Review

The relevant regulations contemplate that the Special Counsel’s report will be a confidential report to the Attorney General. See Office of Special Counsel, 64 Fed. Reg. 37,038, , 3 37,040-41 (July 9, 1999).

As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel’s report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.

Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel and my initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or could be subject to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure which imposes restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to latter[s] occurring before grand jury. Fed. R. Crim. P. Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6(e) material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain circumstances. See, e. g. 18 U.S.C. 401(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for their intended criminal justice function.

Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the 6(e) material that by law cannot be made public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all 6(e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible. Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.

*          *          *

As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that the Attorney General may determine that public release of notifications to your respective Committees would be in the public interest. 28 CPR. I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.

Sincerely,

William P. Barr
Attorney General

4