RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events From Russia with love

Apparently you missed the part where Judge T.S.Ellis said Meuller's investigation were trying to leverage Manafort to "sing" (to testify against Trump, under pressure of manufactured charges). And he followed up saying under pressure to manke Manafort "more than sing, to compose" (i.e., under pressure of going to prison, to push Manafort to lie, to make up a story to get Trump, just so Manafort could use it to plea himself into being given immunity and avoid jail).

Further, both Robert Meuller and Andrew Weissman have a history of such tactics, suborning perjury, and withholding exculpatory evidence, that sent many people to jail, in cases that later reversed on appeal and released. Regarding Arthur Anderson accounting firm case, it bankrupted a company and destroyed tens of thousands of jobs, and two falsely imprisoned died in jail before the others were released on appeal. These are the people trying to entrap the president.

Hate to break up WB's insane screeds, but why do you keep bothering posting here, MEM? The place--this forum, especially--is as lost a cause as slavery and the confederacy (things I assume WB supports). Leave this place to the racist pederast and go live your best life. Seriously.

Hate to break up WB's insane screeds, but why do you keep bothering posting here, MEM? The place--this forum, especially--is as lost a cause as slavery and the confederacy (things I assume WB supports). Leave this place to the racist pederast and go live your best life. Seriously.

You posted a photoshopped picture of Comey wearing a Clinton shirt and a swastika and call it great commentary. Shame on you.

By Mary Kay Linge
May 19, 2018


A Cambridge professor with deep ties to American and British intelligence has been outed as an agent who snooped on the Trump presidential campaign for the FBI.

Multiple media outlets have named Stefan Halper, 73, as the secret informant who met with Trump campaign advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos starting in the summer of 2016. The American-born academic previously served in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations.

The revelation, stemming from recent reports in which FBI sources admitted sending an agent to snoop on the Trump camp, heightens suspicions that the FBI was seeking to entrap Trump campaign aides. Papodopoulous has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, while Page was the subject of a federal surveillance warrant.

“If the FBI or DOJ was infiltrating a campaign for the benefit of another campaign, that is a really big deal,” President Trump tweeted Saturday, calling for the FBI to release additional documents to Congress.

The Halper revelation also shows the Obama administration’s FBI began prying into the opposing party’s presidential nominee earlier than it previously admitted.

Halper’s sit-downs with Page reportedly started in early July 2016, undermining fired FBI Director James Comey’s previous claim that the bureau’s investigation into the Trump campaign began at the end of that month.

Halper made his first overture when he met with Page at a British symposium. The two remained in regular contact for more than a year, meeting at Halper’s Virginia farm and in Washington, DC, as well as exchanging emails.

The professor met with Trump campaign co-chair Sam Clovis in late August, offering his services as a foreign policy adviser, the Washington Post reported Friday, without naming the academic.

Clovis did not see the conversation as suspicious, his attorney told the paper — but is now “unsettled” that “the professor” never mentioned he’d struck up a relationship with Page.

Days later, Halper contacted Papadopoulos by email. The professor offered the young and inexperienced campaign aide $3,000 and an all-expenses-paid trip to London, ostensibly to write a paper about energy in the eastern Mediterranean region.


“George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?” the professor pressed Papadopoulos when they met, according to reports — a reference to Trump’s campaign-trail riffs about Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

Sources close to Papadopoulos told NBC News that he now believes Halper was working for an intelligence agency.

Highly detailed descriptions of the FBI informant in Friday reports in the New York Times and Washington Post pegged Halper in all but name. Outlets including NBC and Fox News subsequently connected the dots. The revelation confirms a March report in the Daily Caller that outlined Halper’s repeated meetings with Papadopoulos and Page.

It is not clear if the professor was paid [by the FBI] to speak with Trump campaign figures, but public records show that he has received large payments from the federal government in the last two years.

The Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment — a shadowy think tank that reports directly to the secretary of defense — paid Halper $282,000 in 2016 and $129,000 in 2017.

Halper has close personal and professional ties to the CIA reaching back decades. He is the son-in-law of a former deputy director of the agency and worked on the 1980 presidential campaign of George H.W. Bush, who had served as CIA director.

When Bush became Ronald Reagan’s running mate, Halper was implicated in a spying scandal in which CIA officials gave inside information on the Carter administration to the GOP campaign.

Meanwhile, reports emerged Saturday that Donald Trump Jr. met in August 2016 with a representative of Saudi crown princes, who offered pre-election help to his father’s campaign.

An Israeli political strategist who attended the meeting told the New York Times that their plan to carry out a pro-Trump social media campaign did not go forward.

It may be true that President Trump illegally conspired with Russia and was so good at covering it up he’s managed to outwit our best intel and media minds who've searched for irrefutable evidence for two years. (We still await special counsel Robert Mueller’s findings.)

But there’s a growing appearance of alleged wrongdoing equally as insidious, if not more so, because it implies widespread misuse of America’s intelligence and law enforcement apparatus.

Here are eight signs pointing to a counterintelligence operation deployed against Trump for political reasons.

1) CODE NAME

The operation reportedly had at least one code name that was leaked to The New York Times: “Crossfire Hurricane.”

2) WIRETAP FEVER

Secret surveillance was conducted on no fewer than seven Trump associates: chief strategist Stephen Bannon; lawyer Michael Cohen; national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn; adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner; campaign chairman Paul Manafort; and campaign foreign policy advisers Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.

The FBI reportedly applied for a secret warrant in June 2016 to monitor Manafort, Page, Papadopoulos and Flynn. If true, it means the FBI targeted Flynn six months before his much-debated conversation with Russia’s ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

The FBI applied four times to wiretap Page after he became a Trump campaign adviser starting in July 2016. Page’s office is connected to Trump Tower and he reports having spent “many hours in Trump Tower.”

CNN reported that Manafort was wiretapped before and after the election “including during a period when Manafort was known to talk to President Trump.” Manafort reportedly has a residence in Trump Tower.

Electronic surveillance was used to listen in on three Trump transition officials in Trump Tower — Flynn, Bannon and Kushner — as they met in an official capacity with the United Arab Emirates’ crown prince.

The FBI also reportedly wiretapped Flynn’s phone conversation with Kislyak on Dec. 31, 2016, as part of “routine surveillance” of Kislyak.

NBC recently reported that Cohen, Trump’s personal attorney, was wiretapped. NBC later corrected the story, saying Cohen was the subject of a “pen register” used to monitor phone numbers and, possibly, internet communications.

3) NATIONAL SECURITY LETTERS

Another controversial tool reportedly used by the FBI to obtain phone records and other documents in the investigation were national security letters, which bypass judicial approval.

Improper use of such letters has been an ongoing theme at the FBI. Reviews by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General found widespread misuse under Mueller — who was then FBI director — and said officials failed to report instances of abuses as required.

4) UNMASKING

“Unmasking” — identifying protected names of Americans captured by government surveillance — was frequently deployed by at least four top Obama officials who have subsequently spoken out against President Trump: James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence; Samantha Power, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations; Susan Rice, former national security adviser; Sally Yates, former deputy attorney general.

Names of Americans caught communicating with monitored foreign targets must be “masked,” or hidden within government agencies, so the names cannot be misused or shared.

However, it’s been revealed that Power made near-daily unmasking requests in 2016.

Prior to that revelation, Clapper claimed ignorance. When asked if he knew of unmasking requests by any ambassador, including Power, he testified: “I don't know. Maybe it's ringing a vague bell but I'm not — I could not answer with any confidence.”

Rice admitted to asking for unmasked names of U.S. citizens in intelligence reports after initially claiming no knowledge of any such thing.

Clapper also admitted to requesting the unmasking of “Mr. Trump, his associates or any members of Congress.” Clapper and Yates admitted they also personally reviewed unmasked documents and shared unmasked material with other officials.


5) CHANGING THE RULES

On Dec. 15, 2016 — the same day the government listened in on Trump officials at Trump Tower — Rice reportedly unmasked the names of Bannon, Kushner and Flynn. And Clapper made a new rule allowing the National Security Agency to widely disseminate surveillance material within the government without the normal privacy protections.

6) MEDIA STRATEGY

Former CIA Director John Brennan and Clapper, two of the most integral intel officials in this ongoing controversy, have joined national news organizations where they have regular opportunities to shape the news narrative — including on the very issues under investigation.

Clapper reportedly secretly leaked salacious political opposition research against Trump to CNN in fall 2017 and later was hired as a CNN political analyst. In February, Brennan was hired as a paid analyst for MSNBC.

7) LEAKS

There’s been a steady and apparently orchestrated campaign of leaks — some true, some false, but nearly all of them damaging to President Trump’s interests.

A few of the notable leaks include word that Flynn was wiretapped, the anti-Trump “Steele dossier” of political opposition research, then-FBI Director James Comey briefing Trump on it, private Comey conversations with Trump, Comey’s memos recording those conversations and criticizing Trump, the subpoena of Trump’s personal bank records (which proved false) and Flynn planning to testify against Trump (which also proved to be false).

8) FRIENDS, INFORMANTS and SNOOPS

The FBI reportedly used one-time CIA operative Stefan Halper in 2016 as an informant to spy on Trump officials.

Another player is Comey friend Daniel Richman, a Columbia University law professor, who leaked Comey’s memos against Trump to The New York Times after Comey was fired. We later learned that Richman actually worked for the FBI under a status called “Special Government Employee.”

The FBI used former reporter Glenn Simpson, his political opposition research firm Fusion GPS, and ex-British spy Christopher Steele to compile allegations against Trump, largely from Russian sources, which were distributed to the press and used as part of wiretap applications.

These eight features of a counterintelligence operation are only the pieces we know. It can be assumed there’s much we don’t yet know. And it may help explain why there’s so much material that the Department of Justice hasn’t easily handed over to congressional investigators.

__________________________________________

Sharyl Attkisson (@SharylAttkisson) is an Emmy-award winning investigative journalist, author of The New York Times bestsellers “The Smear” and “Stonewalled,” and host of Sinclair’s Sunday TV program, “Full Measure.”

The “deep state” is in a deep state of desperation. With little time left before the Justice Department inspector general’s report becomes public, and with special counsel Robert Mueller having failed to bring down Donald Trump after a year of trying, they know a reckoning is coming.

At this point, there is little doubt that the highest echelons of the FBI and the Justice Department broke their own rules to end the Hillary Clinton “matter,” but we can expect the inspector general to document what was done or, more pointedly, not done. It is hard to see how a yearlong investigation of this won’t come down hard on former FBI Director James Comey and perhaps even former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who definitely wasn’t playing mahjong in a secret “no aides allowed” meeting with former President Clinton on a Phoenix airport tarmac.

With this report on the way and congressional investigators beginning to zero in on the lack of hard, verified evidence for starting the Trump probe, current and former intelligence and Justice Department officials are dumping everything they can think of to save their reputations.

But it is backfiring. They started by telling the story of Alexander Downer, an Australian diplomat, as having remembered a bar conversation with George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. But how did the FBI know they should talk to him?
That’s left out of their narrative.

Downer’s signature appears on a $25 million contribution to the Clinton Foundation. You don’t need much imagination to figure that he was close with Clinton Foundation operatives who relayed information to the State Department, which then called the FBI to complete the loop. This wasn’t intelligence. It was likely opposition research from the start.

In no way would a fourth-hand report from a Maltese professor justify wholesale targeting of four or five members of the Trump campaign. It took Christopher Steele, with his funding concealed through false campaign filings, to be incredibly successful at creating a vast echo chamber around his unverified, fanciful dossier, bouncing it back and forth between the press and the FBI so it appeared that there were multiple sources all coming to the same conclusion.

Time and time again, investigators came up empty. Even several sting operations with an FBI spy we just learned about failed to produce a DeLorean-like video with cash on the table. But rather than close the probe, the deep state just expanded it. All they had were a few isolated contacts with Russians and absolutely nothing related to Trump himself, yet they pressed forward. Egged on by Steele, they simply believed Trump and his team must be dirty. They just needed to dig deep enough.

Perhaps the murkiest event in the timeline is Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s appointment of a special counsel after he personally recommended Comey’s firing in blistering terms. With Attorney General Jeff Sessions shoved out of the way, Rosenstein and Mueller then ignored their own conflicts and took charge anyway. Rosenstein is a fact witness, and Mueller is a friend of Comey, disqualifying them both.
Flush with 16 prosecutors, including a former lawyer for the Clinton Foundation, and an undisclosed budget, the Mueller investigation has been a scorched-earth effort to investigate the entirety of the Trump campaign, Trump business dealings, the entire administration and now, if it was not Russia, maybe it’s some other country.

The president’s earlier legal team was naive in believing that, when Mueller found nothing, he would just end it. Instead, the less investigators found, the more determined and expansive they became. This president and his team now are on a better road to put appropriate limits on all this.

This process must now be stopped, preferably long before a vote in the Senate. Rather than a fair, limited and impartial investigation, the Mueller investigation became a partisan, open-ended inquisition that, by its precedent, is a threat to all those who ever want to participate in a national campaign or an administration again.

Its prosecutions have all been principally to pressure witnesses with unrelated charges and threats to family, or just for a public relations effect, like the indictment of Russian internet trolls. Unfortunately, just like the Doomsday Machine in “Dr. Strangelove” that was supposed to save the world but instead destroys it, the Mueller investigation comes with no “off” switch: You can’t fire Mueller. He needs to be defeated, like Ken Starr, the independent counsel who investigated President Clinton.

Finding the “off” switch will not be easy. Step one here is for the Justice Department inspector general report to knock Comey out of the witness box. Next, the full origins of the investigation and its lack of any real intelligence needs to come out in the open. The attorney general, himself the target of a secret investigation, needs to take back his Justice Department. Sessions needs to act quickly, along with U.S. Attorney John Huber, appointed to conduct an internal review of the FBI, on the Comey and McCabe matters following the inspector general report, and then announce an expanded probe into other abuses of power.

The president’s lawyers need to extend their new aggressiveness from words to action, filing complaints with the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility on the failure of Mueller and Rosenstein to recuse themselves and going into court to question the tactics of the special counsel, from selective prosecutions on unrelated matters, illegally seizing Government Services Administration emails, covering up the phone texts of FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and operating without a scope approved by the attorney general. (The regulations call for the attorney general to recuse himself from the investigation but appear to still leave him responsible for the scope.)

The final stopper may be the president himself, offering two hours of testimony, perhaps even televised live from the White House. The last time America became obsessed with Russian influence in America was the McCarthy hearings in the 1950s. Those ended only when Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.) attacked an associate of the U.S. Army counsel, Joseph Welch, and Welch famously responded: “Sir, have you no decency?” In this case, virtually every associate and family member of the president has been subject to smears conveniently leaked to the press.

Stopping Mueller isn’t about one president or one party. It’s about all presidents and all parties. It’s about cleaning out and reforming the deep state so that our intelligence operations are never used against opposing campaigns without the firmest of evidence. It’s about letting people work for campaigns and administrations without needing legal defense funds. It’s about relying on our elections to decide our differences.
_________________________________________

Mark Penn is a managing partner of the Stagwell Group, a private equity firm specializing in marketing services companies, as well as chairman of the Harris Poll and author of “Microtrends Squared.” He served as pollster and adviser to President Clinton from 1995 to 2000, including during Clinton’s impeachment. You can follow him on Twitter @Mark_Penn.

Just yesterday Trump's Secretary of State grudgingly admitted there wasn't a deep state. My guess is the evidence if we get to see it will show Spanky colluding and obstructing among other things. Imagine if this was a democrat. Do you really think anything your saying now would be in that case.

The Deep State is made up of influential people in both parties, and transcends the power of either party. Its goals are primarily globalist, but even above that is enriching themselves. In Hillary Clinton they found their perfect candidate, the most corrupt and buyable candidate ever offered, making her their perfect vehicle of choice. And conversely, Trump is a threat to them because he is the most dedicated to breaking up their power structure, and is the least pliable to their control. That is why they want to destroy him.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said on Tuesday that the FBI’s use of an informant for the Trump campaign in 2016 was appropriate, joining top Democrats in disputing President Donald Trump’s characterization of the informant as a spy.

“I am even more convinced that the FBI did exactly what my fellow citizens would want them to do when they got the information they got, and that it has nothing to do with Donald Trump,” Gowdy said during an interview on Fox News.

In recent days, Trump has parroted misleading claims about the FBI’s use of the informant as part of its counter-intelligence investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, dubbing the individual a “spy” and referring to the controversy as “Spygate.”...

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., used to be a prosecutor. So he’s not entirely new to the concept of evidence, investigations, charges and conflicts of interest.

What he apparently doesn’t understand is the FBI’s idea of a “conflict-of-interest-free” special counsel’s office, which employed a key investigator who helped clear a political candidate he supported and later targeted one he vehemently opposed.

“There are a lot of issues I’d like to ask you about, Mr. Deputy Attorney General,” Gowdy told Rod Rosenstein at a House hearing Wednesday. “We had the terrorist incident in New York this week. We have 702 reauthorization that is pending in Congress. Gun violence. The opioid epidemic. Criminal justice reform.

“But when I go home to South Carolina this weekend, trust me when I tell you that no one is going to ask me about any of those issues. They’re going to ask me what in the hell is going on with the Department of Justice and the FBI.”

Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller as special counsel to investigate the allegations the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election. Mueller later stacked his staff with almost exclusively Democratic Party donors.

Rosenstein’s appointee even hired someone to help investigate allegations about President Trump as a candidate who talked about having an “insurance policy” in the event Trump won.

After months of bashing Trump in texts and stating that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton “just has to win,” Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page exchanged a cryptic text concerning an “insurance policy” against a Trump win.

On Aug. 15, 2016, Strzok wrote: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in [Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s] office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

New York Times reporter Ali Watkins' past tweets are raising eyebrows after revelations she had a three-year romantic relationship with a Senate Intelligence Committee aide now accused by federal prosecutors of leaking sensitive information to journalists, including herself.

On Thursday, the New York Times reported that federal investigators had seized years' worth of Watkins’ email and phone records as part of a leak probe into James Wolfe, the former security director for the Senate Intelligence Committee indicted for giving false statements to FBI agents. Wolfe appeared for a federal court hearing in Baltimore on Friday, where he relinquished his passport and was prohibited from traveling outside of the District of Columbia and Maryland.

The indictment says Wolfe leaked information to reporters about the committee’s work, including its subpoena last fall of an individual believed to be former Trump adviser Carter Page.

But in several tweets in September 2017, Watkins, while dating Wolfe and working for Politico, seemed to point the finger at attorneys for President Trump over various media disclosures.


In one tweet, Watkins noted how the Intelligence Committee is “SOOO frustrated in recent weeks by the constant dribble of leaks about who's testifying to them.” She then said the committee believes “Trumpster lawyers will leak info about upcoming appearances, blame the committee, then use as a pretext not to cooperate.”

It's unclear who was responsible for those specific leaks -- the tweets were posted about a month before a different reporter published the story on the Page subpoena. But the indictment strongly suggests Wolfe was a top source for committee stories and that Watkins was among the reporters who got information from Wolfe.


The indictment said Wolfe, 58, began dating Watkins -- who is in her 20's -- in 2013 when she was an undergraduate student working as a news intern. The indictment said the pair ended the relationship in December 2017.

In an April 2013 tweet, Watkins also tweeted about the fictional Netflix television show “House of Cards,” where a young reporter has an affair with an older member of Congress.

“I wanted to be Zoe Barnes...until episode 4,” she tweeted. “Sleeping with your source- especially a vindictive congressman? #badlifechoice #HouseofCards”

In another tweet, Watkins asked: "So on a scale of 1 to ethical, how does everyone feel about pulling a @RealZoeBarnes for story ideas? #TOTALLYKIDDING @HouseofCards."

The “House of Cards” tweets were posted months before prosecutors said her relationship with Wolfe began.

The revelations also have raised questions about how much her employers knew about the relationship. Watkins previously worked for BuzzFeed, Politico and McClatchy.

The New York Times said Watkins informed her editors about the previous relationship when she was hired. The newspaper also said Watkins claimed to have told both Politico and BuzzFeed about the relationship, though she continued covering the committee.

The Times article said the newspaper only learned Thursday that the DOJ sent her a letter in February about the record seizure. She joined the newspaper in Decmber 2017.

Since the story went public, her employers have expressed concerns about the government obtaining her records.

“This decision by the Justice Department will endanger reporters ability to promise confidentiality to their sources and, ultimately, undermine the ability of a free press to shine a much needed light on government actions,” New York Times spokesman Eileen Murphy said. “That should be a grave concern to anyone who cares about an informed citizenry."

“We’re deeply troubled by what looks like a case of law enforcement interfering with a reporter’s constitutional right to gather information about her own government,” said Ben Smith, the editor-in-chief of BuzzFeed News.

This is the first known instance of the Trump administration obtaining the records of a journalist.


The Obama administration also drew criticism for going after reporter records, including a move to subpoena Associated Press journalists’ phone records and seize records for several Fox News phone lines as part of leak investigations.

In the latter case, court documents showed investigators also secured a search warrant for the personal emails of former Fox News correspondent James Rosen. Facing an uproar at the time, the Justice Department eventually tightened its rules for pursuing reporter records, though Attorney General Jeff Sessions has ramped up leak investigations under the Trump administration.

In the case of Wolfe, the former Senate aide is accused in the indictment of lying about his relationship with Watkins, identified in court papers as "REPORTER #2.”

Wolfe later admitted the relationship after he was shown photos of the two of them together, according to the indictment.

Prosecutors said Wolfe communicated with other journalists, too, and lied to the FBI in December 2017 about contacts he had with several reporters -- including sharing non-public information about committee matters.

He is not charged with leaking classified information.

The indictment indicated Wolfe and Watkins exchanged tens of thousands of electronic communications and often daily phone calls, and they would meet at the reporter’s apartment.

On April 3, 2017, Watkins’ byline appeared on a BuzzFeed article that revealed that Page had met with a Russian intelligence operative in 2013.


Wolfe allegedly called her nearly a half-hour after the story went live and had a phone conversation for about seven minutes.

In December 2017, Wolfe messaged her, according to the indictment, and said: “I always tried to give you as much Information (sic) that I could and to do the right thing with it so you could get that scoop before anyone else.”

On Friday, before boarding Marine One, President Trump reacted to the indictment of Wolfe.

“I'm a very big believer in freedom of the press,” the president said, “but I'm also a believer that you cannot leak classified information.”

Wolfe's employment with the committee ended in December 2017

JAMES A. WOLFE, FORMER SENATE INTEL SECURITY DIRECTOR, INDICTED FOR ALLEGEDLY LYING TO FBI

The slightest whiff of a potential Trump scandal/conspiracy, with no actual evidence.

Clapper, the director of the combined NSA, CIA and FBI, said he has seen no evidence of a Trump collusion with the Russians.

Just today, former CIA Director John Brennan comes out as another high-level intelligence official to say there's no "there" there, regarding Trump collusion with the Russians.

Meanwhile, there's a stack of evidence a mile wide that the Hillary Clinton campaign was in collusion with the Russians, that neither House or Senate Democrats, or the complicit liberal media want to discuss!

1) Hillary Clinton, while secretary of state, signed off on a deal that gives the Russuans at least 20% of U.S. uranium.
2) Hillary Clinton's illegal private e-mail server, that while she was Secretary of State, allowed the Russians and the Chinese to access her e-mails and know in real time what the U.S.'s strategic planning was (both Hillary and the other high-level officials she communicated with, including President Obama, on her server) and to further compromise the internet security of every official she communicated with, for further hacking. One example: following a large Russian donation to the Clinton Foundation, Bill Clinton was given a $500,000 speaking fee by the same Russian company.
3) Hillary Clinton taking donations from Russia (and many other bad-player nations) at the Clinton Foundation, and using those donations to sell access to officials at the U.S. State Department.
4) Hillary Clinton's treason over Benghazi. We still have no answers, over 4 years later, where Obama and Frau Hitlery were, while Americans were dying at the embassy. And further indications that Benghazi was used to funnel guns and funding to questionably reliable Islamic militant groups in Syria.
5) Hillary and Obama's treason over allowing Russia to invade Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, with absolutely no action.

Would that Democrats or the Destroy-Trump media would give the slightest fair and balanced attention to these PROVEABLE treasonous acts by Hillary and those around her.

Actually nobody forced Trump people to lie and some of them are up on some serious charges. Trump sure is acting guilty btw.