Just ask urselves simple question, morons--how does ANYONE "surveil" the Pres. of Jew S A, the topmost leader?--FBI committed gross crimes, idiots

Apollonian

Guest Columnist

Former Director of National Intelligence: FBI Committed Serious Crimes While Investigating Trump​

STATION GOSSIP 06:31

Link: http://www.stationgossip.com/2022/03/former-director-of-national_20.html

Former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell said the FBI absolutely broke the law with its surveillance of Donald Trum...​

The US Dollar is in Great Peril – Biden’s Actions Are Destroying It – The World Is De-Dollarizing – Will Have Major Implications for All AmericansNY Post Calls Out the 51 Former Senior Intelligence Officials including Former CIA Chiefs Who Openly Lied About Hunter Biden’s Laptop Being ‘Russian Disinformation’
Former acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell said the FBI absolutely broke the law with its surveillance of Donald Trump both when he was a candidate and after he became president.
In an interview with Just the News’ John Solomon published on Wednesday, Grenell agreed that leadership at the bureau and the Department of Justice must have known ahead of time that evidence that Trump somehow “colluded” with Russia to affect the outcome of the 2016 election was false.
“Political appointees and the leaders of the FBI and DOJ purposefully manipulated the truth,” he told Solomon.
Grenell also said he has spoken with FBI operatives who knew the investigation into Trump was faulty.
“The people in the middle management, I’ve talked to them. I’ve talked to FBI agents. They knew that this was a phony exercise,” he said.
“But they were caught by their bosses, who knew that this was a phony Russian collusion hoax but allowed this information to go to the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] courts and to the media and to everywhere else, and they saw people manipulating it,” Grenell said.
He added that he believes special prosecutor John Durham will soon bring more charges.
Even though Durham has been investigating the Russia hoax for three years, the special prosecutor has secured only one conviction.
In January, former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was convicted of altering an email from the CIA regarding former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.
The openly anti-Trump Clinesmith pleaded guilty to adding a phrase to a June 2017 email that had provided information about Page’s relationship with the agency.
Clinesmith deliberately added a line saying Page was “not a source” of intel for the CIA even though he was an occasional source for the agency, and that fact was obscured from the FISA court. If the court understood that Page was a CIA asset, it likely wouldn’t have approved of the FBI’s surveillance of Page.
Despite the conviction, Clinesmith was sentenced to just one year of probation, USA Today reported.
“Do you have any doubt there are more crimes to be prosecuted by Durham?” Solomon asked Grenell.
He said he is sure more is coming.
“Yeah, I have no doubt,” Grenell said, adding that it was “for sure” that the FBI broke the law.
Durham has indicted two others, and those cases are ongoing.
Former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann was indicted in February. Clinton’s law team attempted to have the indictment thrown out, but to no avail. Its next tactic was to have parts of the indictment struck, but that also failed, Fox News reported.
Durham also has indicted former Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko on charges of lying to the FBI during the probe.
But Grenell said these lone actors are only the tip of the iceberg and the whole incident shows an out-of-control government betraying America.
“For the political people at DOJ and FBI, that’s where they need to be held to account,” he told Solomon.
“We hear a lot about, you know, manipulative politicians and political appointees manipulating the powers of government,” Grenell said. “But I’ve never seen it more rampant than in Democratic administrations because the media allows them to get away with it.”
Still, many are frustrated that Durham has not yet done more. Trump himself has wondered aloud what the special prosecutor is doing.
“Where’s Durham? Is he a living, breathing human being? Will there ever be a Durham report?” he said in a statement on March 26, 2021.
In another statement on Aug. 9, 2021, the former president said, “Does everybody remember when we caught the Democrats, red-handed, SPYING ON MY CAMPAIGN? Where’s Durham?”
Trump has called the FBI’s illicit surveillance of his campaign and presidency the “biggest political crime in American history, by far!”
 

GREAT QUESTION: After Spending Three Years and Millions of Dollars, How Did Mueller and Weissmann Not Figure Out Hillary Created the Russia Hoax?​

By Joe Hoft
Published May 22, 2022 at 4:00pm

Link: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...smann-not-figure-hillary-created-russia-hoax/

mueller-testimony-lost-dementia.jpg

The Conservative Treehouse revisited the question that all of America is asking. If the Mueller Special Counsel spent so much money and time and resources, how did they not determine that Hillary Clinton was behind the Trump – Russia collusion sham?
The Conservative Treehouse asks:
How did Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann spend 2 years investigating Trump-Russia; with a team of 19 lawyers, $40 million in resources, 40 FBI agents, 2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants and 500 witnesses; and not find out that Hillary Clinton created the hoax they were investigating?
Mueller-Special-Counsel-Expenses.jpg
TRENDING: "If Solzhenitsyn Can Deal with Being in Gulag in Siberia, I Can Deal With this Jail in Virginia" - US Political Prisoner and Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes Speaks with Gateway Pundit (AUDIO)
This is an excellent question that no one else is asking. How could this group of experts spend so much time, energy, and resources and not determine that the Russia-Collusion sham was created by Hillary Clinton? There is even evidence from the very beginning that they knew there was no evidence to back up the claims.
The answer is just as easy as the question is obvious. Mueller and Weissmann didn’t determine that Hillary was behind the Trump-Russia collusion delusion because they didn’t want to. Their mission was to overthrow the Trump Administration, not determine the truth. This was a coup, plain and simple.
We knew this years ago.

We knew that Weissmann, who many believe was the corrupt mastermind behind the Mueller sham investigation, was a Hillary fan. But he wasn’t alone. They all hated President Trump. We also know that this showed in their corrupt actions throughout the investigation.

Will Durham get to the bottom of the Mueller sham or will he end it here with millions of dollars wasted and criminals ignored and set free?
 

The Same FBI Agents that Knew Hillary Was Behind Trump-Russia Lie Were Members of Mueller Team Who Neglected to Include this Important Fact​

By Joe Hoft
Published May 24, 2022 at 11:45am

Link: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...russia-lie-members-mueller-team-ignored-fact/

mueller-testimony-lost-dementia.jpg

The FBI agents who knew Hillary was behind the Trump-Russia lie were the same agents on the Mueller team who neglected to include this important information in Mueller’s report.
In one of the debates, Hillary Clinton made a big deal about her lie that candidate Trump was involved with Russia. She lied and we all knew it.

A few days ago TGP asked why the Mueller and Weissmann gang never uncovered that Hillary was behind the Trump – Russia lie?
TRENDING: EXCLUSIVE FOOTAGE: Secret Video Recordings LEAKED from Inside "The Hole" of DC Gitmo -- First Footage Ever Released of Cockroach and Mold Infested Cell of J6 Political Prisoner

The reason Hillary was never mentioned as being behind the Trump – Russia lie is because the Mueller gang didn’t want to report it. We know this because the same agents who knew Hillary was behind this crime were also members of the Mueller gang.
Mueller was asked about this when he was brought in front of Congress. At this moment the Republicans on the committee were ready. Rep. Steve Chabot asked Mueller about this.

The Conservative Treehouse shares:
Robert Mueller was appointed to look into the Trump-Russia collusion accusations. How could the fact that Team Clinton created the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, not be part of the investigative purview? This question is specifically underlined by the fact, the same FBI officials who knew the Alfa-Bank material came from Clinton, were the same FBI officials on Robert Mueller’s team…
…Peter Strzok would know because he had been investigating the Trump-Russia collusion hoax since early 2016. The Crossfire Hurricane investigation was triggered July 31, 2016, and by the time Michael Sussmann was selling the Alfa-Bank hoax the FBI was aware all of the material was coming from political opposition research and Fusion GPS.
When Peter Strzok transferred into the Mueller investigation in May 2017, why didn’t Strzok tell Mr. Mueller and Andrew Weissmann there was “no there there,” and the material came from the Clinton campaign operatives?
When you realize the same FBI investigators flowed through 2016 into the Mueller team in 2017, the questions are obvious. How could the origin of Trump-Russia hoax not be in the purview of the Special Counsel?
They all knew Hillary was behind the Trump – Russia lie. We did too. Everyone knew. We also knew Mueller and his gang and the Democrats and RINOs were all lying and pretending they didn’t know.
 

“Our Legal System Is Corrupt” – Trump Responds After Sussmann ‘FBI-Russia-Hoax-Lie’ Acquittal​

by Zero Hedge
May 31st 2022, 5:50 pm

Link: https://www.infowars.com/posts/our-...after-sussmann-fbi-russia-hoax-lie-acquittal/

Trump vents on Democrat corruption, inflation and more.

Update (1600ET): Following the Sussmann acquittal, Former President Donald Trump was quick to respond, raging that the legal system isn’t working properly…

“Our Legal System is CORRUPT,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social, adding that “our Judges (and Justices!) are highly partisan, compromised, or just plain scared” before lamenting that Michael Sussmann, the lawyer, was found not guilty.
Screen-Shot-2022-05-31-at-5.45.19-PM-1024x482.png

Jason Miller, a former Trump campaign aide, also reacted to the verdict, writing on Gettr that Sussmann admitted to giving opposition research to the FBI and not telling the bureau that the research was conducted for Clinton.

“How did Sussmann get off??? RIGGED SYSTEM!!!” Miller wrote.
The jury unanimously found Sussmann not guilty.

“I don’t think it should have been prosecuted,” one juror told reporters.
“There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.”
“It was the government’s job to prove it and they succeeded in some ways and not in others,” she continued. “We broke it down and it did not pan out in the government’s favor.”

The woman, who did not give her name, declined to say how she thought the government succeeded.
— Jeff Mordock (@JeffMordock) May 31, 2022

We are unsure what that has to do with the legal principles involved in judging Sussmann’s guilt?

As Constitutional lawyer Jonathan Turley responded to this juror’s comments:

“Telling a lie to the FBI was the entire basis for the prosecution. It was the jury’s job to determine the fact of such a lie and its materiality.
…Of course, this statement can be a simple criticism of the underlying charge without admitting to bias in weighing the elements. Yet, it would have prompted a challenge in the courtroom if expressed during jury selection.”
But then again…

peers.jpeg

* * *

As we detailed earlier, Michael Sussmann, a lawyer representing Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, has been found not guilty of a single count of lying to the FBI when he said he was not working on behalf of any client when he alleged a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank.

Sussmann sits back down. His face is impassive. Judge thanks jury and dismisses them. /12
— Charlie Savage (@charlie_savage) May 31, 2022

Sussmann was charged under 18 U.S.C. 1001 with lying to the FBI during a meeting with then-FBI general counsel James Baker when he came forward with what he claimed was evidence of possible covert communications between the Trump organization and Alfa, a Russian bank. Sussmann allegedly concealed that he was representing the Clinton campaign, which he billed for his efforts.

The verdict comes after a two week trial led to more than a day of deliberations… by this jury:

TURLEY: “I mean, he is facing a jury that has three Clinton donors, an AOC donor, and a woman whose daughter is on the same sports team with Sussmann’s daughter. With the exception of randomly selecting people out of the DNC headquarters, you could not come up with a worse jury” pic.twitter.com/RHqen6AMAc
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 26, 2022

Baker, who now works for Twitter, said that he likely would not have have met with Michael Sussmann if he knew Sussmann was acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign.

I don’t think I would have,” Baker said on the stand in federal court in Washington, as noted by the Epoch Times.

Knowing Trump’s opponent was behind the allegations “would have raised very serious questions, certainly, about the credibility of the source” and the “veracity of the information,” Baker said. It would also have heightened “a substantial concern in my mind about whether we were going to be played.”

The testimony bolsters a key piece of special counsel John Durham’s case against Sussmann—that knowing the sources propelling Sussmann to meet with Baker would have altered how the FBI analyzed the information, which the bureau ultimately found did not substantiate the claims of a secret backchannel between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank.

Absent Sussmann’s false statement, the FBI might have taken additional or more incremental steps before opening and/or closing an investigation,” prosecutors said in Sussmann’s indictment, which charged him with lying to the FBI.

As Techno Fog notes:

The acquittal is no surprise. This is a DC jury, after all. In the Roger Stone case, for example, we documented how a juror lied to get on the panel. (That judge didn’t care.) Making matters worse, the Sussmann judge wrongly allowed for a woman to remain on the jury, despite the fact that her daughter and Sussmann’s are on the same high school crew team. One can’t help but think that juror had her own daughter’s interests in mind – the cohesion of the crew team – when she reached a decision.

On the facts, there was more than sufficient evidence to prove Sussmann’s guilt. Sussmann lied to then-FBI general counsel James Baker in order to get a meeting to pass the Alfa Bank hoax materials to the FBI. Sussmann lied again during the meeting – stating he was not there on behalf of a client – in order to get the FBI to open an investigation into the Trump Organization’s purported ties with Alfa Bank. Later, during testimony to Congress, Sussmann admitted he met with Baker on behalf of a client. Billing records proved he had been working on the Alfa Bank project on behalf of the Clinton Campaign.

https-_bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com_public_images_f358f79e-e7cf-4f61-84cb-0b05d0b57d5f_406x710.png

I won’t say the verdict doesn’t matter. Of course it matters. It would have proven that a DC jury can convict one of their own. It would have resulted in accountability for lying to the FBI. Not the gravest of crimes, but it is still a crime.

In large part, the prosecution of Sussmann was hamstrung by the FBI’s investigation into the Alfa Bank allegations. That goes to materiality. How can the lies be material if the FBI’s investigation was so sloppy? (Answer: they were material because the lies helped open the investigation in the first place.)

On the issue of materiality, look to the testimony of FBI Special Agent Curtis Heide, whose repeated requests to interview the source of the Alfa Bank information were denied by headquarters. FBI Headquarters didn’t want this thing thoroughly vetted – even though they demanded the investigation be opened. As we stated during the trial:

Relatively early on in the investigation – on September 26, 2016 – Agent Heide sent a message to Pientka, requesting an interview of the source of the Alfa Bank white papers. By that time, Heide knew the white paper was bunk. He received no response from Pientka. He repeated this request on October 3, 2016. Agent Heide’s requests were rebuffed by his liaison at FBI headquarters:
That’s not the say the public hasn’t benefited from the trial. The information disclosed during the trial was important to understand the broader Clinton/Fusion GPS/Perkins Coie effort to poison the public, the press, and the FBI with their Trump/Russia lies.

Read the rest from Techno Fog here.

Meanwhile,
here’s more on why many thought Sussmann would be found guilty:

Why Sussmann is guilty as charged.

The popular leftist narrative goes “who cares what Sussmann told Baker? Everyone knew he was working for the Clinton campaign.” It’s flawed because it’s asking the wrong question.

The right question is “would Baker have passed on Sussmann’s data to investigators had Sussmann informed him he was there representing the Clinton campaign?” The answer is no. In fact Baker said he wouldn’t have even taken the meeting.

Baker testifies that knowing whether or not Sussmann had client was important to him to assess its reliability of information. He says he would not have taken the meeting if Sussmann said he was working on behalf of Clinton camp
— Andrew Goudsward (@AGoudsward) May 19, 2022

“Baker insisted he had a clear memory that, at the 2016 meeting, Sussmann claimed he was not bringing the allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client.

“I’m 100 percent confident that he said that in the meeting,” he said.

The key point overlooked by most: Sussmann didn’t lie just to give himself cover. He lied so BAKER would have cover to hand the data over to Cyber Division. In fact the lie was necessary BECAUSE “everyone knew” Sussmann was working for the Clinton campaign. Including Sussmann.

* * *

Sussmann was found not guilty. Many of us viewed the evidence was overwhelming. Yet, the jury either believed he did not lie or that the lie was not material. https://t.co/A20o2GPhQi— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 31, 2022
And let the arguments begin:

We literally found out that Hillary Clinton OKed dissemination of disinformation meant to undermine trust in our presidential elections — which was spread widely by leftist media outlets (CNN being one of the worst offenders.) But sure, do your thing! https://t.co/MG3MZx8TaZ
— David Harsanyi (@davidharsanyi) May 31, 2022
 

The FBI Exposed​

a day ago308Views

Link: https://en-volve.com/2022/09/06/the-fbi-exposed/

GettyImages-1242530782-758x412.jpg



It saddens many of us that the FBI, unfortunately, has become more akin to the KGB than the independent and efficient arm of the Department of Justice it was intended to be. To the surprise and horror of the American people, among it’s many failures, the FBI has repeatedly failed to protect Americans (remember 9/11) and the U.S. Constitution.

The FBI has framed good patriotic citizens, misled the FISA court, doctored evidence, planted materials, leaked confidential documents and accounts to their friends in the left-wing media, shown bias and favoritism, failed to prosecute their political allies, engaged in censorship, election interference and rigging, spied on people, suppressed information, used a fake dossier, and utilized its’ undercover agents to coax people into acts of insurrection or kidnapping. And now it has attempted yet another coup of President Trump with its illegal and illegitimate raid on his home. All of this for one, and only one, reason: to insure he can’t run for office again and finish what he started in his first term.

For over a generation the FBI has been running downhill and exposing itself as corrupt, incompetent, and at times, even criminal. Look at its executives on top—Louis Freeh (1993-2001), Robert Mueller (2001-2013), James Comey (2013-2017), Andrew McCabe (2017), and Christopher Wray (2017-present). This is a stupefyingly horrible band of leaders who, together, have destroyed the Bureau. A simple change of leadership, while necessary, will not work to fix a badly broken system and thoroughly rotten culture.

The motto of the FBI is “Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity,” which has become a farce. The truth is we no longer trust the FBI.
When I was deputy executive secretary (ambassadorial level) at the United Nations in Geneva from 1988-1992, the wall fell and the geopolitical realities completely shifted. During the end of the Cold War my office was bugged, my house was bugged, my car was bugged, and I had a death threat. It wasn’t Tanganyika. It was the KGB. Consider the reality recently for us Trump supporters—it wasn’t the KGB or another adversary up to no good. It was our own FBI.

It is hardly surprising now to hear many conservative and law-abiding people, as well as some brave political leaders, say the FBI should be broken up. Its abilities could be reassigned, in parts, to other federal agencies or cut from appropriations altogether. It could be radically downsized. It may be the only way to deal with what has become an extrajudicial, politicized, and rogue agency—totally out of control and lacking oversight. It seems every day we get more and more evidence to that effect—and there are whistleblowers galore.

My Personal Experience with the FBI

I have had only one set of dealings with the FBI. On March 27, 2018 I flew on a long international flight into Boston’s Logan International airport. I was to connect to a domestic flight enroute to my in-law’s house, just outside of Cleveland, Ohio for the Easter holidays.
After exiting the plane, I was escorted to a special line for passport control. There, I was formally detained and asked to wait, along with my wife who was traveling with me. They would not say why, and I found it most curious as I was a frequent flier and went back and forth between the United States, U.K., and Europe and elsewhere many times a year. I never had such treatment.

After about 20 minutes left waiting, we were taken by a TSA official and an FBI agent to a separate hall where they thoroughly checked my suitcase and asked about any electronic devices, phones, or computers I had in my possession.

This all seemed very foreboding and I have never experienced anything like this before, unless you include trips to Communist China or in the old world to eastern bloc countries as a diplomat.

What’s going on, I thought?

When they found nothing suspicious and would not answer my questions about why they were detaining me, they separated me from my wife and told her to wait in a lounge, without explanation, while I was to be interviewed. That is all they said. Naturally, this left her in a state of total confusion and near panic.

What had I done? Why me? Why this arrangement and detention?

I was then escorted to another building and into a secure conference room with padded walls where two FBI agents introduced themselves to me. They said I was being detained to answer questions regarding the Department of Justice Special Counsel probe and showed me their identification and badges.

They seemed to know everything about me and had my color photograph and personal details and said in intimidating ways that it was a felony to lie to the FBI. I stated that I realized that, and I would readily, in fact gladly, cooperate with them. They never allowed me to call my attorney.

I did, however, find it objectionable to be treated in that way, as I was entering my home country, where I am a citizen and have served at the highest levels of government. They did not need to use such tactics or intimidation. I am a United States patriot and would do anything and everything to assist the government and I had no information that I believed was relevant.

They asked for my cell phone and any laptop (I didn’t have a computer on me) and produced a document, marked “warrant” in bold print, to seize it and perform forensics on it. I signed permission and asked if at least I could keep my drivers’ license and credit cards. They said yes, and they gave them back to me. They then demanded the code to open the phone and I was told I would be held in contempt, if I did not offer it. One of the agents took the phone into another back room and downloaded items but returned to say they would need to keep it and take it to Washington, D.C. for a full assessment. I asked when I could get it back. They assured me in a few days they would definitely get it to me—one way or another. That did not happen. It took months and it was altered.

The other agent then proceeded just short of about two hours to interrogate me and involved himself in various disarming chit-chat about my career, sterling academic credentials, top-secret codeword government clearances from an earlier era, and my being a fan of the championship Philadelphia Eagles. All well and good, I presumed. What did they really want? Why me? And why in this underhanded fashion? What had I done? I should state at this point, and they knew it, that I had taken both the month-long course on intelligence and the two week one on negotiation, when I was at the Department of State during the Reagan Administration, given by the Foreign Service Institute. I knew their game.

The questions got more detailed about my involvement in the Trump campaign (which was informal and unpaid); whom I communicated with, the whole list; whom I knew and how well—they had a very long list of names, starting with Steve Bannon and running the gamut.

They seemed to then focus more attention on Roger Stone (whom I have met a grand total of three times and only briefly and in company); Jerome Corsi, a journalist who had been the acquiring editor of a memoir I had written some years ago; and about Wikileaks, about which I knew nothing.

“Had I ever visited the Ecuadorian embassy in London?” they asked again, and again. They were trying to break me down and catch me up, which is a very old and tested interrogation technique.

No, I replied truthfully. They already knew that and surely had all the CCTV tapes from that very place.

I was unfazed and very dubious about why they thought I knew anything. I couldn’t help but wonder: had they read a copy of my soon-to-be-released book, The Plot to Destroy Trump: How the Deep State Fabricated the Russian Dossier to Subvert the President? The timing of this interrogation along with the nearing publication date just days off, seems to me to suggest, yes, they had read it. Closely, and with a fine-tooth comb.

Then they served me with a subpoena, which I noticed had only been issued that very day by an Obama appointed magistrate, not a judge, in Boston. I was to appear before the Mueller grand jury in Washington, D.C. that Friday. They said I could telephone the lead attorney on that team, Aaron Zelinsky, and make necessary arrangements.

They shook my hand and had agents take me to my wife, who was very alarmed and in disbelief. They then escorted us to the adjoining terminal to catch our delayed domestic flight. I have to believe they delayed it.

I called the special counsel’s office the next morning and they said it would be better to appear later, which we agreed would be April 13 and they would pay for my travel, room and board. I told them I had legal representation and asked that they establish contact. For the record, that excellent counsel, over months and months, ended up costing me about $60,000.

The deep state was sending a signal and had no doubt read my detailed book which implicated them. They wanted to intimidate me and knew well that I had no connection whatsoever to Julian Assange.

What could they want from me, a professor—a policy wonk, and philosophical defender of conservatism and Trump? Well, I had endorsed him in a 2015 Forbes article, saying we needed another TR and the economic nationalism that made America great.

I am not and have never been an operative, have no Russian contacts, and—aside from appearing on air and in print often to defend and congratulate our Donald J. Trump—have done nothing wrong. What message does this send? I will tell you—stay clear of Trump and all things Trump or the globalists and deep state will get you as they say, “seven ways to Sunday.”

I have written in this publication about “My Time in the Tank” being interrogated by the FBI and their panels for days, and then hauled before the Mueller Grand Jury. In the end, that failure found nothing and the Russia hoax was called out for what it was.

Only recently, was the full affidavit behind the warrant declassified and unsealed, with redactions, and released.

What’s the Upshot?

The lead FBI special agent in my case, Curtis Heide, has now been reprimanded and is under investigation for misconduct. It is notable that he was a lead agent in the notorious operation “Crossfire Hurricane.” He bragged about it.
Heide’s direct boss was one, Peter Strzok, need we say any more? Why isn’t he in jail?
The FBI told me, and my lawyers, I was only a witness never a target. The affidavit says otherwise. They lied. Clearly, they wanted to “Papadopoulos” me, to turn a surname into a verb.
The FBI surveils people constantly, without their knowledge, without authority to do so, and even if you are outside the country. The Fourth Amendment is out the window.
In my case, the issue seems to have centered around a single email Roger Stone—through a third party, no less—had forwarded to me. I never answered it or did anything about it at all. It was a ridiculous request and one I would never take up under any circumstances. “Get to Assange” was outside my wheelhouse or capability. But I was for Trump, so they had a predicate.
The document shows the great lengths to which the FBI had gone to try and show Trump had ties to the Russians and their election influence and cyber ops. Yet, he did not.
The FBI said I offered to go to the Cleveland Republican National Committee convention as a Trump advisor. I did, admitted such, and I guess that was a significant crime in their eyes, as well.
Finally, this proves not only a strong political bias on the part of the FBI, against Trump, and against anyone remotely on his team, but it shows just how much the FBI knows about all your details, doings, GPS tracking, emails, telephone and FaceTime calls, videos, financial transactions, the cache in your computer and related devices, travel plans, workplace, networks . . . everything. Scary stuff.
I was not charged with anything because I didn’t do anything wrong.
The FBI needs to be exposed for what it has become and how it has betrayed the nation and its very own motto.

From American GreatnessREAD ORIGINAL [see https://amgreatness.com/2022/09/05/the-fbi-exposed/]
 
Back
Top