Going into the weekend, we’ve got some great new reading material to pass along that blasts to Kingdom Come any pretext of legitimacy concerning the “Trump/Russia” investigation.

As Sen. Lindsay Graham forecast a couple of days ago, the Senate Judiciary Committee, which he chairs, has at last obtained a couple of highly significant documents, newly declassified.

The first is a curious typewritten report by Peter Strzok on the accuracy of a NEW YORK TIMES story on the Trump campaign’s involvement with Russia. Written February 14, 2017, his report (as opposed to the story) shows beyond all doubt Strzok’s awareness that there was NO reliable evidence that the Trump campaign had had contact with Russian intelligence, in any form.

How can we be so sure of this? Well, the NYT had reported that “phone records and intercepted calls” showed that Trump campaign officials had contact with members of the Russian intelligence services. But Strozk, in his report, said, “This statement is misleading and inaccurate as written. We have not seen any evidence of any individuals affiliated with the Trump team in contact with [intelligence officers]."

As Zachary Evans writes in NATIONAL REVIEW, Strzok wrote this not once, not twice, but three times in his report.

Investigative reporter John Solomon, appearing with Devin Nunes and guest host Tammy Bruce on Friday’s HANNITY, said that “nine substantive errors” were found in that single NYT story and that it should be retracted. (Ha, don’t hold your breath. Not that it matters; the damage was done at the time.) According to Solomon, what we’re now finally able to see proves that the FBI knew for months “that everything they gave to the FISA court was wrong --- EVERYTHING --- and yet they never retracted it and renewed the FISA application two more times.”

Nunes stressed the importance of INDICTMENTS. (I put that in capital letters to stress the importance of indictments myself.) “I’m not too interested in the Durham report,” he said. “I would like to know everything, for the four-plus years, that went on, including even the Mueller investigation, but really what we want is...indictments. We’ve made 14 criminal referrals; we have another investigation that’s ongoing...Also, we have suspected for a very long time that Steele had maybe only two Russians, but we believe [that]...he didn’t really know them. How was it that Steele found these supposed 'Russians' and was able to use them? We’ve asked the FBI and the CIA about these Russians; I’ve said for a long time we’re interested in two Russians –- and...they have yet to allow us access to these two Russians who we now believe are living in the United States.”

All right, Director Wray, what is going on with that? It should be all right for senate and congressional investigators to have access to the whole cast of characters by now, as part of their oversight function of the FBI. What is the holdup at this point? If it's just that this is going to make the FBI look bad, well, sorry, that's not a good enough reason.

Moving on...the other document now available is the 57-page transcript of an interview with Steele’s primary source for the “dossier.” The document still contains some redactions, but as THE DAILY CALLER reports, Sen. Graham says it “indicates the reliability of the dossier was completely destroyed” after the interviews, which were conducted over three days in January 2017.

In other words, over January and February of 2017, the “dossier” –- and, by extension, the investigation based on it –- was shown without a doubt to be an outrageous farce with no evidence to back it up. But the FBI just kept pushing. So, of course, did the Democrats. Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel in mid-May!

Incidentally, there had been a hold-up in obtaining this document as well, as can be seen in this earlier report from THE DAILY CALLER, dated June 25.

According to THE DAILY CALLER, the FBI had been “refusing” to supply the document, “saying in response to a public records request that the information is classified and risks identifying a confidential FBI source.” Reading their account, you can see how long and hard the tug-of-war has been to get hold of classified documents that tell the tale of this hoax.

But they're out now --- happy reading!

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 1-8 of 8

  • Donna L Newberry

    07/25/2020 11:45 PM

    Is anyone going to do anything about it ? They talk about it & talk about it& then someone will write a book about it! Then they will go on News programs & talk some more & then they will go on late night talk shows & talk some more [email protected] IS ANYONE GOING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT !!!!

  • Kathryn GRAY

    07/25/2020 04:53 PM

    we need the bogus Mueller report, bogas Trump impeacment funds be returned to Our treasury, Social Security

  • SamK

    07/22/2020 01:45 PM

    If it is confirmed it was a hoax. Then why an investigation? If intentional for indictments, knowing this was false. Technically, shouldn't all indictments be an overreach and all overturned since this investigation should have never happened

  • Ron Buice

    07/19/2020 05:46 PM

    If Durham's indictments are unbiased and thorough, MANY Democrats will be sent to prison for long incarcerations and re-educated in the real American ways. Thank the Lord.

  • Barbara Wolf

    07/19/2020 09:10 AM

    I would love to slap that look off Peter Stroke’s face!! Why isn’t he in jail??

  • Janet Underwood

    07/18/2020 02:00 PM

    When people are not held accountable for their wrongdoings, when investigation of travesties such as these is blocked by those who committed crimes playing a "waiting game" in hopes that an election will see this investigation swept under the rug, when all of this happens, we'll just see more and more wrongdoings and crimes committed against the people. Cleaning up Washington DC is not going to be easy on a good day, but with the complicity of the media, I think it's impossible. The corrupt, duplicitous MSM MUST be called out. The FCC needs to better define "news," "opinion," and "propaganda," and then require those organizations that broadcast information to identify themselves honesty and upfront so people fully understand what the organizations' agendas are. By doing this, the MSM's First Amendment rights would be preserved (they still can say whatever they want), while protecting the public's right to seek out those organizations that provide honest, unbiased reporting. I started my career as a reporter, and yes, it can, and should be done. My editor had strong opinions, but those opinions were only expressed on the Op Ed pages, and then only rarely because he respected the power his position gave him and did not want to abuse it. All of the reporters also were allowed to have opinions -- and present them if they were well written and reasoned, on the Op Ed pages. Interjecting our opinions into news stories was NOT allowed and if someone didn't "get it," he or she would not have a job there for long. As my editor said, the work of reporters is to present the honest facts in an unbiased manner and let the readers form their own opinions.

  • P Quillin

    07/18/2020 12:27 PM

    Prosecute all of the deep state that can be identified and matched with illegality, to the fullest extent of the law, and do it NOW!!!


  • Claire Crawford

    07/18/2020 11:58 AM

    Does the president have the power to demand that ALL documents associated with this investigation be made public at once? This appears to be soooo crooked it make me sick.