Posts Tagged ‘JAMES COMEY’

A Tale of Two Fired FBI Directors

May 25, 2017

WHAT’S UNDER THE ROCKS IN THE BOTTOM OF THE SWAMP

The collective memory of the Swamp critters including the totality of the Journalist Cartel is about one nanosecond when it comes to negative information about liberals.

When President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey a few months into his Presidency, the collective mainstream media had a meltdown. To this day, they are gnashing their teeth and renting their garments as investigators are investigating investigators.

Yet, President Clinton fired his FBI Director the day before the so-called Vince Foster suicide and the fawning Journalists didn’t even roll their eyes; imagine that!

Clinton told reporters there had been “serious questions” about Sessions’ “conduct and leadership.” He asked his attorney general, Janet Reno, to review Sessions’ tenure and the situation at the FBI. I don’t know if she had a secret meeting on an unlit airport tarmac during the middle of the night but according to Bill “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” Clinton, “She has reported to me in no uncertain terms that he can no longer effectively lead the Bureau and law enforcement community,”

I think Director Sessions was not sleazy enough to serve in the Clinton Administration! William Steele Sessions was born in Fort Smith, Arkansas, was an Eagle Scout and recipient of the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award from the Boy Scouts of America and served an enlisted tour in the United States Air Force before being commissioned and serving as an Officer. He received a BA and LL.B Degrees at Baylor University. He served as a federal judge before being appointed Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation by President Ronald Reagan. Sessions served as FBI director from 1987 to 1993, when he was dismissed by President Bill Clinton. Does that sound like somebody who would fit well in the Clinton Administration?

Strangely, Bill Clinton ordered park rangers to investigate the murder of Vince Foster instead of the FBI.

The FBI got involved anyway and issued reports that linked Hillary Clinton to Foster’s so-called suicide. This report mysteriously disappeared from the National Archives.

According to the former FBI agents of that time, they claimed that days before his death, First Lady Hillary Clinton ridiculed Foster in front of his peers. She said things like, “You have failed us.”

Vince Foster’s death was determined to have been a suicide by inquiries and investigations conducted by the United States Park Police, the Department of Justice, the FBI, the United States Congress, Independent Counsel Robert B. Fiske, and Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr.

This is the United States of America, all these investigators can’t be wrong can they? Well, at least one WAS NOT WRONG. Kenneth Starr’s at-the-time lead investigator, US attorney Miguel Rodriguez, emphatically disagreed with Starr’s conclusion that Foster committed suicide, referring to photographs and medical testimony suggesting a second gunshot wound on Foster’s neck, evidence he asserts Starr suppressed. Concerning the cover-up, he wrote in his resignation letter, “As an ethical person, I don’t believe I could be involved in what they were doing.”

I spent 34 years in the Air Force flying combat missions and defending the Constitution and this is what I get? A corrupt government that spies on United States Citizens and our best Allies while U.S. citizens who get in their way are murdered like Vince Foster and Seth Rich!

Miguel Rodriguez was not alone in his condemnation of the phony Vince Foster Investigation. James Norman, former senior editor at Forbes Magazine, discussed and wrote about Foster having a Swiss bank account and possible espionage.

The comments of Patrick Knowlton, a grand jury witness who had been at the park where Foster’s body was found, were included as part of Starr’s Report over Starr’s objection. Judge John D. Butzner wrote to Judges Peter Fay and David Sentelle after Knowlton submitted a motion that his comments be included as part of an appendix to the final report, “I suspect that if we deny this motion we will be charged as conspirators in the cover-up,” and concluded “I suggest we let the motion and attachments speak for themselves.” Judge Fay wrote that Knowlton contradicted “specific factual matters and takes issue with the very basics of the report” filed by Starr. Knowlton’s comments were ordered included as part of the official report on September 26, 1997. Two days later, Starr filed a 9-page motion to appeal and asking that the comments by Knowlton not be included in the report. The next day, Starr’s motion was denied and Knowlton’s comments were included as part of the final official Report on the Death of Vincent W. Foster.

FBI Agent Lawrence Monroe interviewed Patrick Knowlton in April and May of 1994. Agent Monroe falsified Mr. Knowlton’s account of the events he reported he had witnessed in Fort Marcy Park. Agent Monroe was detailed to the office of regulatory Independent Counsel Robert W. Fiske, Jr.

Mr. Knowlton’s information refutes the official conclusions that Mr. Foster committed suicide in Fort Marcy Park, primarily because Mr. Knowlton is certain that no car fitting the description of Mr. Foster’s car was in the Fort Marcy lot approximately 70 minutes before Mr. Foster’s body was officially discovered, even though Mr. Foster was dead at the time. Agent Monroe covered up this and other facts Mr. Knowlton provided to Agent Monroe. Prior to 1996, Mr. Knowlton was unaware of this state of affairs and had assumed his information was irrelevant.

When he was provided copies of his interview reports by a reporter, Mr. Knowlton discovered that Agent Monroe had falsified his account, and his account of what he had witnessed at Fort Marcy and contradictory information from his FBI interview reports were published in a London newspaper.

On the same day that this newspaper reached American newsstands, October 24, 1995, the Office of Independent Counsel under Kenneth W. Starr prepared a subpoena for Mr. Knowlton to testify before the Whitewater grand jury in this Courthouse.

That subpoena was HELD FOR SERVICE FOR TWO DAYS, APPARENTLY TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE ASSEMBLY OF THE MEN WHO SUBSEQUENTLY HARASSED MR. KNOWLTON, and then served by FBI Agent Russell T. Bransford.

Beginning the same day Agent Bransford served Mr. Knowlton the secret grand jury subpoena, he was harassed by at least 25 men and Agent Bransford prior to testifying before the grand jury, and one man after testifying:

(a) Eleven or more men on October 26, 1995;

(b) Twelve or more men on October 27, 1995;

(c) Two or more men on October 28, 1995;

(d) FBI Agent Bransford on October 30, 1995; and

(e) One man on November 2, 1995.

The objects of the harassment were twofold, to:

(a) Intimidate and warn Mr. Knowlton in connection

with his grand jury testimony; and failing that,

(b) Destabilize Mr. Knowlton and discredit his

testimony before the grand jury.

This technique of subjecting a witness to an overwhelming campaign of harassment to intimidate and warn, and alternatively to destabilize and discredit the witness is known to federal intelligence and investigative agencies. Those who read my Social Media posts and Blogs know that I was an Intelligence Analyst at NSA more than 50 years ago.

On Wednesday, November 1, 1995 Mr. Knowlton testified before the Washington, DC Whitewater grand jury. Prosecutors questioning Mr. Knowlton during his grand jury appearance had been apprised prior to his appearance of his reports of being harassed by in excess of 25 men. The wrongdoers accomplished their object of discrediting him. Prosecutors did not believe Mr. Knowlton’s bizarre account of having been harassed, at one point asking him to “tell us a little bit about the alleged harassment.” Nor did prosecutors believe much of anything else Mr. Knowlton had to say.

On October 25, 1996 Mr. Knowlton filed a lawsuit in District Court against FBI Agents Russel T. Bransford and Lawrence Monroe (and others), alleging that these FBI agents are vicariously liable to Plaintiff for his damages under the law of civil conspiracy for inter alia, violation of 42 U.S.C. & sect; 1985, “Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights,” part (2), “Obstructing justice; intimidating party, witness, or juror.” The Plaintiff alleges he was intimidated in an attempt to obstruct justice in connection with Mr. Starr’s investigation into Mr. Foster’s death.

I think we all know what the chances of redress are from a Federal Court in the Swamp?

The 1994 Senate Banking committee was precluded by the limited jurisdiction of Resolution 229 from any independent exploration of the issue of how or where Mr. Foster died, and Senator D’Amato’s committee chose not to visit the issue of how or where Mr. Foster died. Therefore, save the 16 day US Park Police investigation, the only investigations into where or how Mr. Foster died were conducted by the good old FBI.

(1) First, a “preliminary investigation” in July of 1993;

(2) Second, under the auspices of regulatory

Independent Counsel Robert Fiske; and

(3) Thirdly, under the auspices of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr.

Because of the initial FBI conclusion of “no criminal activity” in July of 1993, FBI agents who worked for Mr. Fiske the first half of 1994 would necessarily have embarrassed the Bureau had they concluded otherwise. And once the agents reported to Mr. Fiske that there was no criminal activity, there could be no abandonment of the FBI’s repeated conclusion of suicide in Fort Marcy Park without a horrendous embarrassment to the FBI and possible criminal exposure to the FBI agents detailed to Mr. Fiske’s investigation, some of whom subsequently were also detailed to Mr. Starr’s investigation.

Given the role and the conclusion of the FBI in its first two investigations into the Foster death, it is manifest that various FBI agents and the FBI operated under a conflict of interest in the role the FBI played in Mr. Starr’s investigation of the Foster death.

Are you starting to get the picture of why Director Comey could not find that Hillary Clinton had committed a crime? Maybe I can draw you a picture? Hillary Clinton was not even under oath when FBI Agents questioned her and they made NO transcript or recording of the questioning.

FBI Director James Comey distrusted former Attorney General Loretta Lynch because he believed she and other top Justice Department officials had political motives to hinder or downplay the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal, a new report reveals.

According to the New York Times, Comey deployed a “go-it-alone strategy” during the investigation into Clinton because he thought Lynch and other Obama appointees would give Clinton, who was in the midst of a presidential campaign, “political cover.”

For example, during a fall 2015 meeting between Lynch, Comey and Comey’s team of advisers, Lynch instructed Comey to no longer use the word “investigation” when publicly talking about the FBI’s investigation into Clinton. Instead, Lynch suggested Comey use the word “matter.”

“I guess you’re the Federal Bureau of Matters now,” one of Comey’s advisers quipped after the meeting.

In addition, just one day after announcing they had received a criminal referral in regards to the FBI’s investigation against Clinton, Lynch’s DOJ revised a public statement to retract the word “criminal.” The DOJ revised their statement to say they received a referral “related to the potential compromise of classified information” — no mention of anything criminal.

Clinton would later seize on the happenstance by insisting that the FBI’s investigation into her and her private email server was not a “criminal investigation” — despite the fact that the FBI was treating her “matter” just like any other criminal investigation.

Later, Comey’s suspicions deepened when the FBI intercepted a document that potentially proved Lynch’s allegiance to Clinton.

From the Times:

During Russia’s hacking campaign against the United States, intelligence agencies could peer, at times, into Russian networks and see what had been taken. Early last year, F.B.I. agents received a batch of hacked documents, and one caught their attention.

The document, which has been described as both a memo and an email, was written by a Democratic operative who expressed confidence that Ms. Lynch would keep the Clinton investigation from going too far, according to several former officials familiar with the document…

If Ms. Lynch announced that the case was closed, and Russia leaked the document, Mr. Comey believed it would raise doubts about the independence of the investigation.

And last June, just one day before investigators were scheduled to depose Clinton, Lynch met with Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, on the tarmac of Phoenix’s airport. That meeting, which many believe is where Lynch struck a deal with Clinton, was the final straw for Comey.

Just days later, he paraded himself in front of the nation to announce the FBI wouldn’t recommend criminal charges against Clinton, despite confirming that Clinton essentially broke the law and anyone else, given the evidence, would have been charged with a crime. Still, Comey excoriated Clinton during the press conference, noting her utter carelessness in dealing with classified information.

For Comey, the investigation was over, until in late Sept. 2016 the FBI discovered potentially new Clinton emails during the course of a separate criminal investigation into Anthony Weiner, husband to Huma Abiden, Clinton’s closest confidant.

Comey felt he needed to inform Congress of the newest revelation. After all, he promised to keep Congress informed. In the end, the new emails didn’t provide any new evidence and Comey again wrote Congress to inform them that their investigation into Clinton was over.

Clinton, her campaign and Democrats later blamed Comey’s late October letter to Congress as the reason she lost to Donald Trump, ignoring her own downfalls as a candidate and the downfalls of her campaign.

The fact that the Times would print any of this is unusual but I am sure it is still slanted.

Back to Mr. Knowlton, in his obstruction of justice fight against the government, he took extraordinary steps to establish his credibility including:

(1) Undergoing a polygraph examination;

(2) Undergoing an extensive psychiatric examination including psychological testing;

(3) Giving a sworn interview;

(4) Obtaining sworn Affidavits of other witnesses;

(5) Assembling and publishing documents and photographs of two of the men who harassed him along with a detailed description of the harassment he suffered in a 147 page Report;

(6) Avoiding affiliation with organizations known to be opposed to the Clinton administration;

(7) Avoiding obtaining funding from conservative organizations in order to avoid any appearance of political motivation or influence; and Filing his Complaint under seal of Court on October 24, 1996 because press reports of his claims on the eve of the presidential election would further undermine his credibility by the appearance of political motivation or influence.

The publicly available record Mr. Knowlton proffered 118 exhibits in support of his claim of an overall conspiracy, 100 of which are part of the publicly available record in the Foster case. These exhibits appear under headings in that filing which, when viewed cumulatively, fairly raise a strong inference that FBI agents obstructed justice prior to and during the time that the FBI investigated under regulatory Independent Counsel Robert Fiske.

As more of the records of the Foster death investigations are declassified and analyzed by concerned citizens, Mr. Knowlton’s position that the intimidation he suffered were overt acts in furtherance of an overall FBI conspiracy to obstruct justice will slowly gain more acceptance. For example, counsel was provided with a copy of the Report of Investigation by Medical Examiner, signed on July 20, 1993 by Dr. Donald Haut, the only MD to view Mr. Foster’s body in situ at Fort Marcy Park. This report found at the National Archives on July 17, 1997, was not part of the Senate Hearings Volumes made public in January of 1995 although it was found in a box indicating that it had been so released. The following is an excerpt of the entry appearing on that Medical Examiner’s Report under the heading NARRATIVE SUMMARY OF CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING DEATH: “…gunshot wound mouth to neck…”

This reported “mouth to neck” circumstance surrounding Mr. Foster’s death explains:

(1) Paramedic Richard Arthur’s sworn testimony: “What I saw is what I saw. …and I saw a small – what appeared to be a small gunshot wound here near the jawline. Fine, whether the coroner’s report says that or not, fine. I know what I saw.”

(2) Why many of the crime scene Polaroid photographs mysteriously vanished;

(3) Why the FBI falsely reported all 35 millimeter photographs were “underexposed” and that despite attempts by the FBI laboratory these photographs “were of limited value;”

(4) Press reports that Miguel Rodriquez resigned from his position with the OIC after he “insisted on conducting a painstaking review of the case [but was] met with stiff opposition from FBI agents assigned to Starr’s probe” — after he had the original Polaroid photographs “enhanced by a specialized lab outside the FBI;”

(5) A press report that a “photograph… reveals that Foster suffered trauma to the right side of his neck, just below the jawline… it has the appearance of a small caliber gunshot wound… a prosecutor on the staff of Kenneth Starr… has shown it to individuals ‘off the record’… this photo was never presented to the panel of four pathologists brought in by the Fiske investigation…”

(6) A press report that “Joe Purvis… said that he was told by a staff member of Ruebel’s Funeral Home in Little Rock that Foster had… an exit wound ‘the size of a dime’ close to the neck at the hairline;” and

(7) Why investigators stated that no autopsy X-rays were taken while inexplicably failing to investigate significant evidence the X-rays were in fact taken but mysteriously vanished.

The Medical Examiner’s report that there was a gunshot exit wound in Mr. Foster’s neck is inconsistent with the official conclusion that this neck wound “did not exist,” and is but one of numerous records in this matter which refute the official conclusions.

This is just one example of why government Whistleblowers are as scarce as hen’s teeth. Every government employee and member of the Armed Forces knows that if they report Fraud, Waste and Abuse, their career will abruptly end. Congress passed Whistleblower protection and later strengthened the protection but laws are less than meaningless. The Inspector General system not only does not work, it also cannot work in its present form. The IG works for the Military Commander or Agency Director and simply cannot substantiate any wrongdoing that will embarrass the boss or the organization or the government.

Mr. Knowlton did nothing to deserve this outrageous treatment at the hands of the FBI and the OIC. He did nothing to deserve being yanked into this FBI debacle, having his life turned upside down, and having to endure this fight for his reputation. Patrick Knowlton’s only “crime” was reporting to the authorities what he had seen at Fort Marcy Park — consistent with his understanding of his duties as a good citizen.

Mr. Knowlton’s position that the intimidation he suffered was overt acts in furtherance of an overall FBI conspiracy to obstruct justice should be common knowledge but government atrocities are only remembered for a nanosecond unless they shed light on wrongdoing by conservatives.

I could go on and on but I believe President Donald J. Trump and his handpicked Administration represents the very last stand for America. Not a single one of the other Presidential Candidates had any chance of draining the swamp. No candidate in the future will have the audacity to confront the crooked media, lazy bureaucrats or status quo politicians.

God save America

National Security 101

July 7, 2016

ns4

The American People are not generally knowledgeable about the laws regarding Classified Information. I was not only a Fighter Pilot and Provisional Wing Commander in the Air Force, I was also an Intelligence Analyst at the National Security Agency and graduate of the Air War College. Please permit me to unravel the astonishing FBI Director’s nonsense you watched on TV.

The overwhelming majority of Security Clearances are at the Secret level and most classified information is Secret or lower. Unauthorized disclosure of Secret information would cause “serious damage” to national security.

ns5

I was at a Fighter Wing where only two people on the base had a Top Secret Clearance, the Chief of Intelligence and myself. There are many laws and regulations regarding safeguarding classified information such as the Espionage Act of 1917. Therefore, it was necessary for me to perform many additional duties to protect our very few Top Secret Documents. According to US Code, “Top Secret shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe.”

ns3

You learned that the FBI found information on Secretary Clinton’s emails that was above Top Secret. It was so sensitive that even members of Congress were not authorized to view it. As high as a Top Secret Clearance is, it’s not high enough to authorize the holder of the clearance to even walk through the doors at NSA, CIA or most of the 15 other Intelligence Agencies.

I do not believe even the Secretary of State would be able to enter the Communications Center at the U.S. Department of State, it is likely run by NSA or an outside agency.

ns1

But even if a person has a Security Clearance above Top Secret, that person cannot have access to any information unless he or she has A NEED TO KNOW. When I was a young Airman I had an operation on my shoulder in an Air Force Hospital in Japan. Because I had a Security Clearance above Top Secret, a Full Colonel was in the operating room and by my bedside during the operation and my recovery just in case I revealed something classified under sedation. If I had revealed classified information, the doctors and nurses would have been briefed and security clearances would have been run on every one of them. National Security is taken seriously outside the cozy confines of a few DC politician’s offices.

If Ms Clinton did nothing else except give thousands of emails to her lawyers for review, she committed a felony. Even if her lawyers had active US Security Clearances above Top Secret, they did not have the need to know information that could cause exceptionally grave damage to national security. I doubt that they had those clearances anyway!

As President Obama has so forcefully stated, “This is not a Reality Show!” Indeed, when Barack Obama, Loretta Lynch, James Comey and Hillary Clinton play loosey-goosey with national security, people die. Can we the people have any expectation that they protect the Nuclear Launch Codes or War Plans any better than the Presumptive Democratic Nominee for President protected national secrets on her private server?

ns

If Ms Clinton’s malfeasance only merits a wink and a nod, what would she have to do to elicit prosecution? Is Obama, Lynch, Comey and Hillary the best we can do? Is their lack of performance okay with you because they’re not bombastic and they love our enemies? Don’t we owe more to our men and women on the front lines of the War Against Global Terrorism?