It Took a Freshman GOP Congresswoman To Pull The Mask From FBI Director Comey…

FBI Director James Comey unmasked as a Deep State Black Hat Operative.

Representative Elise M. Stefanik is a young, freshman republican congresswoman from the Albany New York area.  And using a probative questioning timeline, she single-handily pulled the mask from FBI Director James Comey, yet no-one seemed to notice.

Obviously Ms. Stefanik has not been in the swamp long enough to lose her common sense.

In the segment of the questioning below Rep. Stefanik begins by asking director Comey what are the typical protocols, broad standards and procedures for notifying the Director of National Intelligence, the White House and senior congressional leadership (aka the intelligence Gang of Eight), when the FBI has opened a counter-intelligence investigation.

The parseltongue response from Comey is a generalized reply (with uncomfortable body language) that notification of counter-intel investigations are discussed with the White House, and other pertinent officials, on a calendar basis, ie. “quarterly”.

With the statement that such counter-intel notifications happen “generally quarterly”, and against the backdrop that Comey stated in July of 2016 a counter-intel investigation began, Stefanik asks:

…”when did you notify the White House, the DNI and congressional leadership”?

BOOM!  Watch an extremely uncomfortable Director James Comey outright LIE… by claiming there was no active DNI -which is entirely false- James Clapper was Obama’s DNI.


Watch it again.

Watch that first 3:00 minutes again.  Ending with:

…”Because of the sensitivity of the matter”  ~ James Comey

Director Comey intentionally obfuscates knowledge of the question from Rep Stefanik; using parseltongue verbiage to get himself away from the sunlit timeline.

The counter-intel investigation, by his own admission, began in July 2016.  Congress was not notified until March 2017.  That’s an eight month period – Obviously obfuscating the quarterly claim moments earlier.

The uncomfortable aspect to this line of inquiry is Comey’s transparent knowledge of the politicized Office of the DNI James Clapper by President Obama.  Clapper was used rather extensively by the Obama Administration as an intelligence shield, a firewall or useful idiot, on several occasions.

Anyone who followed the Obama White House intel policy outcomes will have a lengthy frame of reference for DNI Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan as the two primary political operatives.   Brennan admitted investigating, and spying on, the Senate Intelligence Committee as they held oversight responsibility for the CIA itself.

The first and second questions from Stefanik were clear.  Comey’s understanding of the questions was clear.  However, Comey directly evaded truthful response to the second question.   When you watch the video, you can see Comey quickly connecting the dots on where this inquiry was going.

There is only one reasonable explanation for FBI Director James Comey to be launching a counter-intel investigation in July 2016, notifying the White House and Clapper, and keeping it under wraps from congress.    Comey was a participant in the intelligence gathering for political purposes – wittingly, or unwittingly.

As a direct consequence of this mid-thought-stream Comey obfuscation, it is now clear -at least to me- that Director Comey was using his office as a facilitating conduit for the political purposes of the Obama White House.

Unfortunately, a slightly nervous Stefanik, never forced Comey to go back to the non-answered question and respond by saying:

No, Mr. Comey, there WAS a DNI in place in 2016, please answer the question of when did you notify him (Clapper) and the White House?

….. then it would get a little ugly:

Why did you notify Clapper and the White House but delay congressional notification?

With all the banter about these hearings, and against this slight moment of clarity of purpose, it bears repeating:

There is only ONE KNOWN Factual and CRIMINAL activity currently identified: the unmasking and leaking of Mike Flynn’s name to the media.

FBI Director Comey states his organization is “investigating”.  Fair enough, however – not a single congresscritter asked HIM if he is the source of the unmasking or leaks.

♦ How can a congressional committee conduct an investigation if they don’t know if the primary witness, the lead investigator, is the source of the leaks?

♦ Wouldn’t the very first step, the actual basis of the foundation for the investigation itself, be to ensure the person conducting the investigation did not participate in the illegality of the conduct being investigated?


Avoid the shiny things.

Why wouldn’t congress ask this simple question?

Admiral Mike Rogers answers that approximately 10-20 people within his NSA organization had the potential to unmask and/or leak to the media.  Fair enough.

♦ Wouldn’t the first question as follow-up be to ask Admiral Mike Rogers if he is one of those numbered possibilities?

♦ Wouldn’t the second follow-up question, in an authentic inquiry, be to ask Mike Rogers: if he is one of the possibilities with access to that information, then was he actually the person who unmasked or leaked?

If Mike Rogers and James Comey admit they are in charge of two of the possible source organizations for leak activity (expressly known illegal behavior)… then what affirmative confidence has either person expressed to congress to ensure the inquiring body that they personally were not the originating source?

And why didn’t congress ask them?


There is NO PEA in this shell game of distraction.

Why didn’t congress ask them?

Occam’s Razor – Because the question(s), the brutally obvious question(s), then lead to the follow-up:  If the only criminal activity is the sourcing of the leak, and the two people giving testimony are potential suspects in that criminal activity, then: A)  How can we trust their testimony, and B) Why are we even having this hearing”? (with two people who are suspects in an ongoing investigation)…

The answers reveal the current intention of the intelligence committee is not to actually investigate, but rather to give the outward illusion of investigation.

If they were not merely giving an illusion….  Congress would be pointing out that FBI Director James Comey has a direct and specific conflict of interest that is so glaringly obvious it’s unfathomable no-one see it.

Director Comey, and to a lesser extent Rogers, would have been in direct contact with the prior administration individuals, and entities acting on their behalf, who were politicizing the information being gathered and lying about (ie. leaking to the media) the content therein.

“Because of the sensitivity of the matter”  ~ James Comey

Didn’t Comey further claim in this hearing that lying about the content of (or even the existence of) a counter-intelligence investigation was not itself a criminal act?    Hello?

That said, James Comey has an expressed interest in claiming an ongoing investigation exists (even if it doesn’t) just to ensure the prior administration contact and behavior was shielded behind the wall of “an ongoing investigation”.  Comey says: “Because of the sensitivity of the matter”..  Where “the matter” is the politicized and entirely false information from the White House.

FBI Director James Comey has singularity of knowledge and has cleverly placed himself in a position where there is no “oversight” of his claims.

…”Because of the sensitivity of the matter”  ~ James Comey

See how that works?

At one point in his political life Comey may have been a White Hat, but there’s no doubt his behavior is exactly what a black hat operative would be doing to shield his connection to the black hat activity of the prior administration.

Summary:  Hillary Clinton political operatives manufactured the illusion of a computer connection between Russian entities (financial banks) and the Trump campaign/organization.  Those manufactured points of evidence were then passed along to White House entities who used the political intel community (Clapper to Comey) to open an investigation of nothingness – to nowhere.  The mere existence of that investigation was then used as the originating point for a series of media intel leaks (the narrative) intended to cloud and damage the Trump campaign/organization. FBI Director James Comey, as head of one of the investigative agencies, became part of that political apparatus.  Now, usefulness exhausted and with the media engaged, it’s CYA time all around for the originating entities.

“Because of the sensitivity of the matter”  ~ James Comey


This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, Cyber Security, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2017, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Russia, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

960 Responses to It Took a Freshman GOP Congresswoman To Pull The Mask From FBI Director Comey…

  1. Comey needs to be IMMEDIATELY fired for lying to Congress.

    Liked by 26 people

  2. Nunya Bidness says:

    Sensitive to whom?

    Liked by 3 people

    • Spencer's Mom says:

      It is disappointing that no one challenged him on that – why didn’t they ask, “What do you mean by ‘sensitive’? Sensitive to whom? What difference does that make? etc.”

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Peter G. says:

    Lock them up. Lock her up.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. HBD says:

    If not for Sundance explaining this stuff, I’d miss it like many who get mesmerized by the “shiney object” stuff

    Liked by 19 people

  5. mustang4176 says:

    Agree. Comey is up to his neck in the muck of the black swamp.

    Liked by 11 people

  6. Brenda says:

    All of the dirt and sneak makes me want to vomit, and weep. Then I pray. Vengeance is God’s.

    Liked by 12 people

  7. Rickster says:

    Remember Rogers trip to Trump Towers? A lot of people thought he was one of the good guys and was helping out. After what I saw today I believe he was there to plant false info. He’s a Swamp Creature if I ever saw one.

    Liked by 12 people

  8. EWSoCal says:

    I wasn’t able to watch everything. Did anyone ask the straight question of “Do you know who the leaker is?”

    Liked by 1 person

    • 3x1 says:

      Everybody testifying on anything from here forward should be asked that.

      I’d like to see Senators and Representatives asking their colleagues that while on public microphones.

      Any answer other than “yes” or “no” should get the question repeated a la Perry Mason: “Isn’t it true you know who the leaker is?”

      Great advertising fodder for 2018 primaries.

      Anyone who doesn’t give a straight answer deserves to be unelected.

      Nail every liar.

      Liked by 6 people

  9. Shickalee says:

    Why did Trump retain Comey in the first place?


  10. Publius2016 says:

    The shock was hubris…to think that his place as impartial would be questioned. If Congress was notified, Ryan and McConnell would’ve known. The reality is that this “get Trump operation” will fail because the truth will come out. Our President is willing to make the changes needed to save our Republic as his speech today shows. There is no turning back from our “American System” of national industry, national bank, and unlimited potential. MAGA!

    Liked by 4 people

    • OmegaManBlue says:

      Would partly explain Ryan trying to distance himself before the election. Would explain McConnell not wholeheartedly backing Trump. This info was most likely passed around to other members of congress (McCain and Graham). I am left to wonder if Ryan or McConnell ever told Trump about any of this any time after the election.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. fleporeblog says:

    I was actually shocked and proud of her during her line of questioning. I think at the beginning of the Q and A Comey didn’t realize that this freshman congresswoman was going to trap him. The fact he said he would discuss it quarterly means on 2 occasions he has discussed the investigation with the WH and other IC folks (Clapper and Brennan). She was angered at the fact that up until recently, the Gang of Eight were not provided any details.

    I am going to write her and ask her to question Clapper and Brennan about whether they received the quarterly debrief from Comey. She has a great opportunity next week unless others get to her.

    Liked by 25 people

  12. Ziiggii says:

    As a direct consequence of this mid-thought-stream Comey obfuscation, it is now clear -at least to me- that Director Comey was using his office as a facilitating conduit for the political purposes of the Obama White House.

    I concur!

    Liked by 18 people

  13. saintoil says:

    Fake news now reporting a slam dunk for Comey, Trump must admit he was wrong. HAR. Seriously, I hope Donald has a good plan to deal with this weasel. No doubt in my mind he just has to go. He’s intolerable. I pray sessions is gathering a case.

    Liked by 4 people

  14. dbobway says:

    And this is supposed to be a bad day for the President?

    I know a lot of liberals, Not all of them are this naive!

    If this is a bad day, I can’t wait for the good days.

    They are going to be biggly!

    Liked by 5 people

  15. 3x1 says:

    Don’t forget the Britd are into this up to their eyeballs.

    5 quid says they just leaned on Rupert to pull Napolitano off the air after his mentioning British Intelligence helping out by tapping US citizens (as all five eyes do in a legally evasive circle-yerque (a Bot made me misspell that)

    Furthermore, ANY honest Intelligence Community member could do a core dump exposing the op to destroy Trump and be guaranteed a pardon. Why does nobody step forward? 1) Brennan-types would Seth Rich them or 2) they’re all dirty.

    Ike was right.

    JFK was right.

    They’ll go as far as a Nork nuclear incident to distract. These people have no moral compass. No souls.

    Liked by 11 people

    • An act of war would require Trump to declare Martial Law … essential, given the millions of illegals in our country.


      • 3x1 says:

        Hmmmm, wonder what powers over rogue agencies might appear with martial law… Hmmmm

        If any of the weasels weaseling before Congressional inquiries had a conscience, they’d be keeling over left and right from stress heart attacks.

        These guys are so used to lying, they don’t miss a beat.

        Liked by 4 people

  16. Ziiggii says:

    Where “the matter” is the politicized and entirely false information from the White House.
    FBI Director James Comey has singularity of knowledge and has cleverly placed himself in a position where there is no “oversight” of his claims.
    …”Because of the sensitivity of the matter”  ~ James Comey

    At least in a “public” hearing… one would love to be a fly on the wall of a closed door session of the ‘Gang of Eight’!

    Liked by 4 people

  17. smartyjones1 says:

    The Albany Congresswoman did a fine job. Someone could/should follow up on her revelation.
    The analysis coupled with her q&a with Director Comey is stunning.

    This is the finest effort on today’s event seen, hands down. Nice job Sundance.

    Liked by 8 people

    • She will be taken aside and told the “rules'” about ” no go zones” , and how it is better to appear intentionally obtuse than to create embarrassment by using common sense. “No DNI until recently ” what a whopper by Comey ( even the hardcore phonies flinched on that one ) from July 16 to Juanuary 20 , we all know DNI was that dopey political tool Clapper, so was this previous then serving DNI briefed? Duh , of course he was ! Shameful , Comey outed as a petty , scared, cya phony .

      Liked by 3 people

  18. truthandjustice says:

    Edward Snowden ✔@Snowden
    Red flag: NSA Director careful to discuss only who can unmask USP identities in reporting, not who can access collection involving USPs.
    10:36 AM – 20 Mar 2017

    Liked by 11 people

  19. Jim Bryan says:

    Ummm…. They both look like hell! I sense desperation and worry!

    Liked by 5 people

    • justfactsplz says:

      I noticed that too. Huge bags under their eyes. Painful and deceitful expressions on their face. Squirming in their seats. They were lying through their teeth. I new Comey was a black hat and said so recently. However I thought Rogers was a white hat until today. His body language spoke volumes about his honesty. I am beginning to think all of the White Hats must be retired ones not currently working for the government.

      Liked by 4 people

  20. Rip Tide says:

    Our government is such a joke! This hearing just hilights that fact. DJT is trying, but what good does it do to have a country with laws if they are not enforced? Is anyone in the government guilty of crimes in the past eight years going to be punished? If any of us had done things that Clinton, Comey, Abedin, Podesta, and maybe even Obama have done, WE WOULD BE IN JAIL!!

    What is the DOJ doing right now? I would have thought we’d see something from Sessions by now that shows some teeth! What are they waiting for? We all know there is plenty of evidence out there to put people away. Could it be that the depths of this corruption are just too deep to dig out??

    This deep state thing/crap really pisses me off. Who can we really rely on to do the right thing? How does anyone know who is white hat and black hat. This makes me just want to go there and bust some ass. Is anyone else mad about this? Uggghhhh.

    Liked by 4 people

  21. Judy Schmalz says:

    So where do we go from here? WHO is going to out this guy? I pray that Trump will have caught this little slip.


    • ccr196647 says:

      Someone who knows how on the computer needs to send Sundance’s article here pluss the comments to Trump and to AG Session. I would but I do not know how to send it.


  22. Just_me says:

    Can anyone explain why Comey reopened the Clinton investigation right before the election, which, IMO, hurt her, if Comey is a black hat? Seems like that would not be something Black Hats or Obama would want to do.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Ziiggii says:

      Someone said it, I think correctly, in the other thread…. to scoop up the Weiner evidence. Otherwise, that would be hanging out there like dirty underwear!

      Liked by 4 people

      • Just_me says:

        That seems like a reasonable explaination, especially if everyone thought for sure Clinton was going to win. Did NYPD keep a copy….I hope.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Paul Killinger says:

        It was the NYPD that busted Wiener. They were the ones who confiscated his computers and made copies of the contents. I suspect those documents now reside safely in Vault 7.


    • mopar2016 says:

      I think that Comey has more than one owner. I think that two or more people own him.
      He looks like he’s scared all the time, and those bags under his eyes are getting bigger.
      He’s probably been afraid for his life for quite some time.
      And rightly so.


  23. SSI01 says:

    Everything I learned from attending the Reid School of Interviewing and Interrogation plus 23 years of interviewing and interrogating people tells me Rep.Stefanik was getting uncomfortably close to something, too close to suit Comey. His hesitation in responding to her first, simple question in this dialog, plus his shifting in his chair – sitting more upright, then to one side, and back a little – all subtle gestures of evasion or distancing of himself from the rep – and the direction of his glance, all tell me he was at the last uncomfortable with the question and was very quickly gauging where this line of questioning might be going, and how to best sandbag the rep.

    If this blog has tumbled to this, we’re not the only ones. I promise you others on that committee have also. This might yet get very interesting.

    Liked by 13 people

    • How about Comey’s “discomfort” when he said he couldn’t REMEMBER whether he briefed Obama on this investigation. That interchange alone should trigger a Special Prosecutor: We cannot be assured that the investigation wasn’t politically compromised.

      Liked by 9 people

      • Publius2016 says:

        No special prosecutor ever


        • Publius2016 says:

          Let Congress do its job.


          • We just did.

            Convince us that the politicized FBI can be trusted with Comey at the top.

            Congress would endlessly delay a new FBI Director who might drain their swamp.

            A Special Prosecutor appointment, coincident with firing Comey for Lying to Congress, would light the fire for approving a new FBI Director before more Special Prosecutors get appointed to accelerate the draining.

            Liked by 3 people

          • Ziiggii says:



          • LCSmom says:

            Except that they might be compromised too, like the intelligence agencies. Then what?


            • Paco Loco says:

              Just the announcement of a Special Prosecutor would see many of the rats running off the ship to save themselves.

              After today’s hearing, I am convinced that the FBI and the Whitehouse worked on behalf of Clinton to set up Trump as a Russian dupe and to smear him before the election. The involvement of the FBI, CIA, NSA and DNI working in some coordinated manner to set up Trump is unprecedented. I would imagine that one of the Dems on the Intelligence Committee knew about this felonious trist and perhaps Schumer did too.

              This whole conspiracy is far more serious than Watergate and really does need a SP to get to the bottom of all this intrigue. Comey and Brennan should be getting a bit apprehensive that this mess will go to trial. Grand Jury time!

              Liked by 3 people

        • Ziiggii says:



    • Skully says:

      Thanks for that explanation, I hope you are right. What did you think of gowdy’s reation to her question. I could not tell if he was looking at her or at someone else.


  24. HolyLoly says:

    I would have pushed for more explanation from Comey. Just what did he mean by “sensitivity of the matter”? Does that mean he didn’t want Congress to know that Obama was investigating the opposition party’s candidate?

    Comey’s duplicity and slimy skirting of answers is nauseating given that he already destroyed his credibility with the Clinton investigation. The guy’s in complete denial about how his own corruption has rendered him completely untrustworthy and ineffective.

    At a minimum, he needs to recuse himself from this investigation. But ideally, he should resign.

    Liked by 6 people

  25. giddyup says:

    good job sundance. this was stunning.

    Liked by 4 people

  26. MrE says:

    I hope Rep. Stefanik has a good guard detail. This line of questioning put a big red target on her back. Enemies of the Deep State – witting or not – have an eerie habit of falling prey to “suicide.”

    Liked by 6 people

  27. NO: Only a Special Prosecutor could honestly and independently investigate them.

    The FBI has been politically compromised.

    Liked by 3 people

  28. Steve O says:

    If someone has to resign for misleading the VP, what should happen to someone who lied to Congress in his official capacity?

    Liked by 13 people

  29. Summer says:

    Hillary Clinton is the root of all these problems. In her insatiable lust for power and riches she committed multiple crimes, then conducted a massive coverup operation, then invented the Russian connection false narrative, then incited and helped organize mass riots and general unrest, continued to push the Russian narrative to shift the blame for her abysmal campaign and revealed corruption to Russia, together with Obama conspired to overthrow the democratically elected President, and in the process facilitated a further destruction of her own party. Anyone doubts that she is planning an assassination together with her Deep State friends?

    As long as this evil woman remains free, the dangerous BS will continue.

    Liked by 9 people

    • milktrader says:

      Destroy the witch. That’s the only way Dorothy gets back home.

      Liked by 2 people

    • mopar2016 says:

      And we need to start impeachment hearings against this Judge in Hawaii.
      These clown judges are setting legal precedent with their nonsense rulings.
      Even if nothing comes of it, these judges need to know that they’re not above the law and that someone is willing to call them out.


    • ccr196647 says:

      I agree with everthing Summer just posted. All I have to say about Hillary and Oboma is they can be glad I am not God. Because I would be giving the death Angel some work and they would be sent down where the climate suits their clothes. They are two evil people.


  30. What I don’t understand is why Comey isn’t gone. Isn’t the director of the FBI a political appointment? If it’s not, it should be, because that’s a tremendous amount of power to retain for one’s entire career.
    Also, my intuition tells me Comey is hiding something. The body language, the gestures, the pauses. There’s a fakeness there every time I see him.
    So, every time there’s a “sensitive matter,” the FBI gets to shield itself from oversight? The congresswoman here is right–sensitive matters above all matters should be known by congressional leadership.

    Liked by 3 people

    • HolyLoly says:

      No. They serve for ten year terms and are somewhat shielded from partisan politics. That does not mean Trump could not request his resignation. The problem with that, though, is that since Trump is a “target” of the investigation, it would appear he is too biased to make a request like that.


      • ALEX says:

        The best hope would be getting the democrats who were so mad about him opening the case in the final weeks to agree that Comey is just to compromised. It will be next to impossible to just fire him as Nixon found out..


      • Trumppin says:

        Comey has a “Limit” of 10yrs in position, it is not a given, he can be fired.


  31. litlbit2 says:

    This undoing of the lies and false narrative of the Russians sheds light on the harsh firing of the Russian ambassadors by obama.
    IMHO, the obama, msm, dnc, GOPe plan, firing of ambassadors, was a setup hoping Trump would step up and welcome the fired (31)back with open arms confirming the Trump connection.
    The fake story was probably in the can.

    This is far from over, even with my limited ability, many things have been exposed by honest folks sick and tired of living looking over your shoulder as they become more and more mired in the corruption.
    Your choices are your responsibility. Karma


  32. I am trying hard not to rage over this and not succeeding very well

    Liked by 7 people

  33. More proof if it’s needed that there are NO white hats involved. It’s just as disrty and suborned as politics. Intel agencies would never tolerate so called white hats, and especially not at the senior levels where appointments are 100% political.

    The last thing Trump needs is a modern day version of the Hoover-Pentagon-CIA(-NSA) cabal JFK faced down and was killed by.

    The Cult of Death that holds sway in the military-intelligence arena has only become worse since 1963.

    Liked by 2 people

  34. @Sundance:

    When I listened to Rep. Stefanik’s questioning, I learned that the counterintelligence investigation was opened in July of 2016. I wondered exactly what pretext that Comey had to open the counterintelligence investigation in July of 2016 because I believe that date predates the wikileaks disclosures. He has to have a pretext, right, and wikileaks was not available yet, so what could it be? I think I found the answer. Byron York wrote a piece about how the dems have concocted a narrative that Trump went weak on Russia’s so-called aggression in the Ukraine. They manufactured a narrative that Trump intervened in the drafting of the plank of the Republican platform on Ukraine to significantly weaken the condemnation of Russia.

    So in the dems mind for any politician to do anything for anyone there has to be a quid-pro-quo so Trump must have had a quid-pro-quo with the Russians. This is the story that Obama, not Clinton, presented to Comey to get him to start the counterintelligence investigation. The timeline overlaps nicely. The counterintelligence investigation was started in July 2016 at the time that the dems manufactured the narrative that Trump intervened in the republican platform drafting to benefit Russia. If this is true, then it is obfuscation to call the investigation a “counterintelligence investigation” because the investigation wasn’t some general investigation into the activity of the Russians in the 2016 election; rather the very motivation for the investigation was the alleged collusion between Trump and the Russians on the Ukraine. The investigation would have targeted Trump’s campaign because of the very reason for its initiation.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ziiggii says:

      “I wondered exactly what pretext that Comey had to open the counterintelligence investigation in July of 2016…”

      because thats when the DNC hack became ‘known’ – remember it was “muh Russia!” that did that nice little nugget, per every report since!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paco Loco says:

      In July the “golden showers” dossier created by the MI6 about Trump in Moscow found its way to Comey via John McCain.

      Liked by 1 person

    • OP says:

      Read this….dated June 14, 2016

      Here are the First few paragraphs… (my raised eyebrow comment following each paragraph in ()

      ……..”Russian government hackers penetrated the computer network of the Democratic National Committee and gained access to the entire database of opposition research on GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump, according to committee officials and security experts who responded to the breach.

      (Why spread the notion that the Russians got opposition research, what narrative was being developed back then? We know the hack realeased and DUMPED dirt on Hillary and Podesta! So why was the “false narrative” being “groomed”…was this the vehicle to prep for the “Trump dossier”?????? BECAUSE WE NEVER HEARD ANY, I REPEAT ANYTHING THAT COULD BE CLAIMED AS OPPOSITION RESEARCH OTHER THAN FAKE PROSITUTE CRAP…..AND we have “committee officials” saying this…what committee officials? Which committee..,the gang of 8?…the security experts…are these the 2 rubes that are going to testify next week? Why hasn’t the FBI been given “access” to this server?)

      …”The intruders so thoroughly compromised the DNC’s system that they also were able to read all email and chat traffic, said DNC officials and the security experts.”…..

      (So what “chat apps” were they using, how does “CROWDSTRIKE” know about the ability of a hacker to “read chats”…we know since the Vault 7 leak…that this can be done…but we hear about this almost accidentally in June of 2016., BIGGEST QUESTION…WHY, WHY, WHY, hasn’t the FBI been given access to the “hacked DNC server”….HHHMMMMMM???????)

      ….”The intrusion into the DNC was one of several targeting American political organizations. The networks of presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were also targeted by Russian spies, as were the computers of some Republican political action committees, U.S. officials said. But details on those cases were not available…..”

      (WILL WE FIND OUT…ALL….ALL…ALL….the groups targeted? “WHO ARE THE US OFFICALS….when do we get the “DETAILS” on the other cases)


  35. Voice of Reason says:

    The entire intelligence community top rung should be immediately fired. Then strict surveillance should be placed on them for a period of time long enough for any secret knowledge they have to become irrelevant. They are subversive snakes. How dare they think that they are more powerful than the President of the United States, who is their boss.

    Liked by 4 people

  36. PaulSailor says:

    What I wish they would question is why did the investigation start in the first place? Did the FBI start it on their own because Trump said Putin was a strong leader and joked about asking the Kremlin for Clinton’s missing emails? If the FBI is that incompetent, then maybe Trump should request their budget be zero and save us some money.
    There has to be some impetus for the FBI to investigate the opposition party during an election — either significant evidence of actual collusion (and we are told none found after 8 months, though I am suspending belief from the witnesses – Comey, Clapper, Morrell) OR someone in the administration ordered them to do it (and this is the scandal slow roll we have come to expect.)


    • OP says:

      Crowdstrike is owns and managed by people who are in cahoots with Ukraine, they wanted the anti Russia narrative, and Hillary to win…

      Follow the CROWDSTRIKE cronies, and their angle…




      Because the FBI was “told not to”!

      Then ask…by who?


  37. ediegrey says:

    I wouldn’t trust Comey or Rogers as far as I could throw them. They wreak of deceit and deception while pretending to be such stalwarts of law and order Disgusting.

    Liked by 6 people

  38. starfcker says:

    “Don’t call us weasels.”

    Liked by 2 people

  39. MaxMBJ says:

    This woman is a star. Her style of questioning is so superior to the histrionics of Chaffetz and even Trey Gowdy, who I like but who would do well to mimic Ms. Stefanik a bit. Cool, calm, surgical delivery that gets the witness on record for later inconsistencies to be judged against … I like it.

    Liked by 9 people

  40. Paul Killinger says:

    We sometimes see a phenomenon in the real swamps down here known as a “Ball of snakes.”

    The difference in the swamp confronting President Trump is those snakes wear coats and ties and go by the name of the UniParty.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Mickey Wasp says:

    Mickey Wasp is in the house !!
    Fellow Treepers – we enlighten Sundance – Sundance takes it to the next level.

    Am I doing my happy dance? No, I’m making the swamp creatures feel my sting.
    Oh Yea … Sundance keep on – keepin’ on .. We are going to ‘Drain that Swamp’ !!


  42. SharonKinDC says:

    At the very end of the video, Comey inserts another remark, although there was no question. He states Congress wasn’t informed b/c due to the order of who is informed, the DNI and Exec branch would have had to be informed prior. IOW, he kept the Exec Branch in the dark… OR did he? Seems like that last bit was some CYA.

    Liked by 3 people

    • benifranlkin says:

      u r confusing administrations and so is Comey…plus he is lying….Comey was kibuutzing with Obama WH ( who with Hillary cooked up this BS) and Clapper in the DNI…he supposedly didn’t tell Congress seniors…but that’s a lie too…i am thinking the Trump WH has known as well….how could they not..but Coates just got there but his DNI knows….

      Liked by 1 person

  43. nm says:

    I still believe the truth will come out on this, bit by bit. The so called Deep State does not like the light shined on itself.

    Liked by 2 people

  44. progpoker says:

    I think you are right on the money, Sundance.
    Comey’s line “Because of the sensitivity of the matter” was uptalk! Like he was saying, you’ll buy this, right? I could feel the question mark at the end of his “declarative” statement!!

    Liked by 2 people

  45. Dukas says:

    What a bobbing head yes man Rogers is sitting next to him. He telegraphs the answers before Comey. Aren’t they suppose to be two different organizations.

    Liked by 1 person

  46. yohio says:

    So why is Comey even around? A guess is because everyone believed Trump would dump him, but Trump thinks differently, maybe if Trump knows what is going on he can use Comey as leverage against Obama. The thought is Trump hold threat of outing Comey and if Comey gets outed he will have to spill on everyone else including Obama. I don’t get the whole Rodgers visits now they don’t seem to be adding up. For a lot of these Senators being former lawyers, they sure are dumb at questioning people under oath. I would never What them as my lawyer, although I bet they’re sure good at plea bargaining and taking payoffs.

    Liked by 2 people

  47. bofh says:

    So if Congresswoman Stefanik’s questions have demonstrated Comey to have a black hat, what (if anything) can we say about Admiral Rogers? He and Comey seemed to try to tag-team a few of the questions, but can we pin a hat-color on him yet?

    Liked by 1 person

  48. Joan calhoun says:

    How can Trump get rid of him?

    Liked by 1 person

  49. ALEX says:

    Here is another interesting point brought up by Snowden today. Remember when Gowdy got Comey to agree to Susan Rice and AG Lynch etc having access to Flynn transcripts if they wanted…

    Well look here.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s