INVESTIGATION OF "GET TRUMP" TASK FORCE PICKS UP STEAM

The announcement last week, that the investigation into the origin of Russiagate by Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham has shifted from an "administrative review" to a "criminal inquiry", has profound implications for those involved in running the regime change coup against President Trump.  This change means that Durham now has subpoena power to gain access to documents, can impanel a Grand Jury, and can file criminal charges.  According to ABC News, Durham is looking into the actions of former CIA Director John Brennan, and Obama's Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper, both of whom played pivotal roles in initiating the "Get Trump" regime change operation.

Clapper displayed the demeanor of a cornered rat in an interview with CNN.  Asked about the criminal inquiry being undertaken by Durham, Clapper said that he had been investigating "Russian interference" on orders of the Commander-in-Chief, i.e., President Barack Obama.  He asked if he and others should have been expected to reject what Obama "told us to do," thereby acknowledging that the former President authorized the convening of the task force.  He then doubled down in this line of defense, adding that it is "disconcerting...to be investigated for having done our duty and done what we were told to do by the President."  Perhaps Clapper has never considered that Nazi war criminals did not escape culpability at Nuremberg by claiming they were "just following orders."  One can assume Obama is not pleased by Clapper's admissions. 

Clapper has long held Russophobic views.  For example, in May 2017, he said on NBC-tv's "Meet the Press" that he believes that Russians are "almost genetically driven" to interfere with American democracy, a formulation he repeated in Australia a year later, when he said they are genetically anti-democratic.

The former DNI should have been prosecuted earlier for lying when he told a Congressional inquiry into NSA domestic spying that there is no spying going on, or data being collected, against American citizens.  When he later retracted the comment, he insisted he had not lied, but had "misspoken."  If he engages in such "misspeaking" before a Durham-led Grand Jury, he will be looking at serious jail time.

As for Brennan, former CIA analyst Larry Johnson wrote on the website "Sic Semper Tyrannis", run by former intelligence operatives, that a CIA official told him that Brennan opened a "Trump Task Force" at the CIA in early 2016, with the backing of Clapper.  This source told him that Brennan spoke with operatives in MI-6, (British intelligence) and Australian, Italian and Israeli spies, enlisting them in a campaign to spy on Trump and his campaign.  The source said that this is the network involved in entrapping retired General Michael Flynn, Trump's choice for National Security Adviser, and George Papadopoulos.  He added that Brennan involved Ukrainian networks, to manufacture intelligence to use against Paul Manafort.  Barr and Durham were recently in Rome gathering evidence of this collaboration, while their investigators are approaching officials in the other nations identified by this source.

The Flynn case will be especially explosive, as his attorney, Sidney Powell, has received documents confirming FBI misconduct in Flynn's case, including rewriting the "302" interview reports from Flynn's initial interrogation, to create the appearance that he lied.  Involved in this were FBI attorney Lisa Page, and her illicit lover, FBI special agent Peter Strzok, both of whom figure prominently in the investigation by DOJ Inspector General Horowitz, into FBI misconduct in the filing for FISA warrants against Trump official Carter Page.

These ongoing cases, and not the flimsy, fraudulent charges against Trump related to seeking an alleged "quid pro quo" from Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, will likely shape the political environment heading into the 2020 election.

Reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Leland Roth
    commented 2019-10-31 18:25:07 -0400
    “Perhaps Clapper has never considered that Nazi war criminals did not escape culpability at Nuremberg by claiming they were ‘just following orders.’ One can assume Obama is not pleased by Clapper’s admissions.”

    Typical nonsensical comments by author above^of otherwise fairly good article.

    https://carolynyeager.net/gleiwitz-“false-flag”-incident-pure-fiction

    Why the story was invented in the first place

    Robert H. Jackson, a U.S. Supreme Court Justice from 1941 to 1954, was sent to Europe when the war was ending to make sure thatGermany alone would be blamed for the Second World War. Jackson, as leader of the U.S. legal team, helped draft the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal,which created the legal basis for the Nuremberg Trials.

    After studying some of the documents, Jackson knew well and emphasized that the German declaration of war on the United States was perfectly legal. Therefore, he pointed out, it had to be shown before the court that the war in Europe was, from the beginning, a German aggression contrary to international law (making it a Crime Against Peace). Thus, the invasion of Poland had to be shown to be an aggressive move with no justification, and no blame on Poland. Further study of the files brought Jackson to doubt that a fair trial would support, in any way, the finding of Germany’s exclusive responsibility. On the contrary, he said:

    “The Germans will certainly accuse our three European allies to have pursued a policy that has enforced the war. I say this because the seized documents from the German Foreign Office, which I have seen, all come to the same conclusion: “We have no escape, we must fight, we are surrounded, we are strangled.” How would a judge react if this is found in the trial? I think he would say: “Before I condemn anyone as the aggressor, he ought to describe his motives.”

    And that would be catastrophic, Jackson continued, because

     “… if this trial leads to a discussion of the political and economic causes of the war, this may cause infinite damage, both in Europe I do not know well, and in America that I know fairly well.”

    As a servant of the U.S. Government and U.S. war policy, Jackson came up with the only solution: to  ban any discussion on the causes of the war before the Nuremberg tribunal. In other words, not to have a fair trial. In the transcripts of the proceedings, nothing is found on the war policies of the West, Poland, or the USSR since almost all documents and testimonies that would have been relevant in this respect were rejected by the court as irrelevant.
  • Leland Roth
    commented 2019-10-31 18:21:29 -0400
    “Perhaps Clapper has never considered that Nazi war criminals did not escape culpability at Nuremberg by claiming they were ‘just following orders.’ One can assume Obama is not pleased by Clapper’s admissions.”

    Typical nonsensical comments by author above^of otherwise fairly good article.

    https://carolynyeager.net/gleiwitz-“false-flag”-incident-pure-fiction

    Why the story was invented in the first place

    Robert H. Jackson, a U.S. Supreme Court Justice from 1941 to 1954, was sent to Europe when the war was ending to make sure thatGermany alone would be blamed for the Second World War. Jackson, as leader of the U.S. legal team, helped draft the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal,which created the legal basis for the Nuremberg Trials.

    After studying some of the documents, Jackson knew well and emphasized that the German declaration of war on the United States was perfectly legal. Therefore, he pointed out, it had to be shown before the court that the war in Europe was, from the beginning, a German aggression contrary to international law (making it a Crime Against Peace). Thus, the invasion of Poland had to be shown to be an aggressive move with no justification, and no blame on Poland. Further study of the files brought Jackson to doubt that a fair trial would support, in any way, the finding of Germany’s exclusive responsibility. On the contrary, he said:

    “The Germans will certainly accuse our three European allies to have pursued a policy that has enforced the war. I say this because the seized documents from the German Foreign Office, which I have seen, all come to the same conclusion: “We have no escape, we must fight, we are surrounded, we are strangled.” How would a judge react if this is found in the trial? I think he would say: “Before I condemn anyone as the aggressor, he ought to describe his motives.”

    And that would be catastrophic, Jackson continued, because

     “… if this trial leads to a discussion of the political and economic causes of the war, this may cause infinite damage, both in Europe I do not know well, and in America that I know fairly well.”

    As a servant of the U.S. Government and U.S. war policy, Jackson came up with the only solution: to  ban any discussion on the causes of the war before the Nuremberg tribunal. In other words, not to have a fair trial. In the transcripts of the proceedings, nothing is found on the war policies of the West, Poland, or the USSR since almost all documents and testimonies that would have been relevant in this respect were rejected by the court as irrelevant.

    “Perhaps Clapper has never considered that Nazi war criminals did not escape culpability at Nuremberg by claiming they were ‘just following orders.’ One can assume Obama is not pleased by Clapper’s admissions.”

    Typical nonsensical comments by author above^of otherwise fairly good article.

    https://carolynyeager.net/gleiwitz-“false-flag”-incident-pure-fiction

    Why the story was invented in the first place

    Robert H. Jackson, a U.S. Supreme Court Justice from 1941 to 1954, was sent to Europe when the war was ending to make sure thatGermany alone would be blamed for the Second World War. Jackson, as leader of the U.S. legal team, helped draft the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal,which created the legal basis for the Nuremberg Trials.

    After studying some of the documents, Jackson knew well and emphasized that the German declaration of war on the United States was perfectly legal. Therefore, he pointed out, it had to be shown before the court that the war in Europe was, from the beginning, a German aggression contrary to international law (making it a Crime Against Peace). Thus, the invasion of Poland had to be shown to be an aggressive move with no justification, and no blame on Poland. Further study of the files brought Jackson to doubt that a fair trial would support, in any way, the finding of Germany’s exclusive responsibility. On the contrary, he said:

    “The Germans will certainly accuse our three European allies to have pursued a policy that has enforced the war. I say this because the seized documents from the German Foreign Office, which I have seen, all come to the same conclusion: “We have no escape, we must fight, we are surrounded, we are strangled.” How would a judge react if this is found in the trial? I think he would say: “Before I condemn anyone as the aggressor, he ought to describe his motives.”

    And that would be catastrophic, Jackson continued, because

     “… if this trial leads to a discussion of the political and economic causes of the war, this may cause infinite damage, both in Europe I do not know well, and in America that I know fairly well.”

    As a servant of the U.S. Government and U.S. war policy, Jackson came up with the only solution: to  ban any discussion on the causes of the war before the Nuremberg tribunal. In other words, not to have a fair trial. In the transcripts of the proceedings, nothing is found on the war policies of the West, Poland, or the USSR since almost all documents and testimonies that would have been relevant in this respect were rejected by the court as irrelevant.
  • Fern Henley
    commented 2019-10-31 16:20:58 -0400
    Should people in the U.S. be jailed we know that the mafia runs their businesses from jail so this wouldn’t be too horiffic for them. Then if their assets were frozen to pay for the damage to communities they have done it is conceivable that the Queen or even the Vatican would help them get back on their feet. Really how does a justice system already proven inept with just minor criminality go about providing justice for the rank and file let alone for the top brass of the cabal? I don’t suppose you are Solomon but any suggestions? Perhaps a link of LaRouche’s thoughts on the subject is available.
  • Harley Schlanger
    published this page in Articles & Interviews 2019-10-31 15:10:50 -0400