White House Counsel Don McGahn Questions Ranking Member Adam Schiff About Evelyn Farkas…

In the White House letter today from Chief-Counsel Don McGahn to Democrat Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff, attorney McGahn queries the discovery and admissions of former Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas during her March 2nd MSNBC interview.

Remember, the letter to Adam Schiff and Senator Mark Warner was delivered at the exact moment Sean Spicer was giving his press conference:

Oh, sorry, I can’t stop laughing.  She is so busted.

In addition President Trump’s White House Chief-of-Staff, Reince Priebus, was discussing it earlier in the day –SEE HERE–  McGahn’s Letter Is Below:

For those who might be unfamiliar with the March 2nd revelation as it was posted two days ago – SEE HERE

[TRANSCRIPT]  “I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.”

“Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.”

“So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more.  We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to [Democrat politicians].”

This entry was posted in Big Government, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, media bias, Notorious Liars, NSA, President Trump, Professional Idiots, Russia, Spying, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

361 Responses to White House Counsel Don McGahn Questions Ranking Member Adam Schiff About Evelyn Farkas…

  1. John Galt says:

    “Oh, sorry, I can’t stop laughing. She is so busted.”

    Not so fast. Putin hacked her MSNBC interview!

    Liked by 15 people

  2. Trumppin says:

    ‘Read my lips – NO!’ Putin snaps back at liberal reporter on Russian elections accusations

    Liked by 5 people

    • Alison says:

      Wouldn’t it be great if Putin offered to testify.

      Liked by 14 people

    • jello333 says:

      There are actually TWO main reasons for all the “Russia Russia Russia!” stuff. One, of course, is to try to keep Trump off-balance and preoccupied, along with trying to “delegitimize” his election, hint at impeachment, and so on. That’s obvious just from watching the MSM and listening to all the Never-Trumpers.

      But there’s a larger, more important, more sinister reason:

      They want to make it hard, really hard for Trump to get along with Russia, and with Putin in particular. They KNOW Trump and Putin could work together in a way that would help stabilize the whole world, and make it that much harder for the globalists to do their thing. And as a consequence of all the GOOD done by those two, Donald would gain praise and credibility of a historic nature, strengthening his popularity and influence beyond anything the haters could ever control.

      So yeah, even though it would be a GREAT thing to have good, cooperative relations between the US and Russia… for some people, it would be HORRIBLE.

      Liked by 8 people

      • Maquis says:

        My sentiments to a “T”!

        Destroying, and delaying, that constructive rapprochement is job one for the globalists right now.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cdquarles says:

        For all of Putin’s and GW Bush’s faults, they did know enough about each other and respected each other. Putin is a Russia First guy. Trump is an America First guy (the first one in a long time). They will respect each other. Last time I checked, we have not declared war on Russia nor have they declared war on us. We, and they, will remain on a ‘Trust but Verify’ footing given the shenanigans going on with Soros in Russia, since we have not had the sense, so far at the Federal level, to see Soros for what he is. Forget Soros’ billionaire status. That’s a distraction. Key is his personal character and philosophy (yes we all have these. We will be ‘allies of convenience’ with Russia where we should (ISIS/ISIL) We will be ‘at odds’ with Russia in other areas (energy). Right now, I trust our President. He won’t always get them right, and like the last great American President, Reagan, Americans will be better off with him as CEO of the Executive part of our Federal Government.

        Liked by 1 person

    • navysquid says:

      One thing I heard Sam Malone filling in on Mike Gallagher’s radio show say that rang true to me is…How many Russian citizens wake up each day to go to work and are driving or walking along listening to the radio or TV and they hear all the Democrats from America saying, “Muh Russians! Muh Russians! Muh Russians! (Ok I ad libbed a little) and they are thinking, What did we do to the Americans? I am working my butt off and am getting thrown under a bus by an American Media for who knows what?” That’s true.

      Most of the Russian people are like us in that they wake up kiss their spouse good day and head off to work at the factory never even thinking twice about America. Yet, the Dems, McCain, and Grahamnesty (one and the same) want us all to believe they are bloodthirsty killers and need to be eliminated off of the map…hmmmmm…..where I have heard that language before about a country? That’s right, Palestinians and Iranians…

      Liked by 5 people

      • Trumppin says:

        if russia was so horrible why are they not fleeing as refugees to america?

        Liked by 2 people

      • jello333 says:

        “What might save us, me, and you
        Is that the Russians love their children too…”

        An amazing, amazing song from back in the 80s by Sting… called “Russians”.

        In Europe and America, there’s a growing feeling of hysteria
        Conditioned to respond to all the threats
        In the rhetorical speeches of the Soviets
        Mr. Krushchev said we will bury you
        I don’t subscribe to this point of view
        It would be such an ignorant thing to do
        If the Russians love their children too

        How can I save my little boy from Oppenheimer’s deadly toy
        There is no monopoly in common sense
        On either side of the political fence
        We share the same biology
        Regardless of ideology
        Believe me when I say to you
        I hope the Russians love their children too

        There is no historical precedent
        To put the words in the mouth of the President
        There’s no such thing as a winnable war
        It’s a lie we don’t believe anymore
        Mr. Reagan says we will protect you
        I don’t subscribe to this point of view
        Believe me when I say to you
        I hope the Russians love their children too

        We share the same biology
        Regardless of ideology
        What might save us, me, and you
        Is that the Russians love their children too

        Liked by 1 person

        • nimrodman says:

          Yes, and liberals loved loved LOVED that song at the time.

          Why? Because those sentiments were useful as a cudgel against a Republican conservative, President Ronald Reagan at the time (who was painted as a warmonger in contrast to the oh-so-humanist and “just like us” Russians).

          Now, liberals hate hate HATE muh Russians.

          Why? Because that sentiment is useful as a cudgel against a Republican conservative, President Donald Trump.

          Times change but the anti-American proclivity of liberals and Democrats remains the same.

          Liked by 1 person

          • nimrodman says:

            … as does their hypocrisy.

            Liked by 1 person

            • jello333 says:

              That’s one of my favorite things about what Donald has accomplished over the past couple years: He’s forced people to put their hypocrisy on full display for the world to see… and yeah, the whole Russia Russia Russia! thing is as huge an example as I can think of. Because like you say, back in the day liberals would have accused others of “hiding under their beds from Reds” for doing the exact same thing THEY are doing now.

              Liked by 1 person

          • jello333 says:

            Yeah I know. I was never a “normal” liberal, I don’t think. I mean in that I tried NOT to be hypocritical about my views on things…. I really couldn’t care less what letter a politician had next to their name if they were doing something I thought was wrong. No, I wasn’t nearly as open-eyed as I am now, but I tried to have logical reasons for believing what I believed. (Although I was dead wrong on some “social justice” type stuff, as I’ve admitted here many times.) Admittedly I didn’t like Reagan, but I knew the Russian leadership was just as likely (if not moreso) to get us into major war as he was. So personally, I saw the song not as praising or denigrating any particular leadership, but as encouraging/HOPING that the people of both countries would stand up for what’s right… that being that they were HUMANS first and foremost.

            Like

  3. graphiclucidity says:

    It’s looking to me like Kate Walsh got busted for two leaks today, not just one – Nunes sources and Flynn immunity.

    She’s been a very, very, naughty girl.
    (Calm down 3×1 I was talking about Walsh not Farkas) 😉

    Liked by 7 people

  4. paulraven1 says:

    “t’s so cavalier and unbelievable that I just wonder whether this person knows what the heck she’s talking about.”

    Priebus’s comment sounds as if he’s trying to let her off the hook. That is, like she just misspoke.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Lburg says:

      Got the same vibe, paulraven. Just reading the transcript as a stand alone without video or audio it sure read like “Heard it on the news! Who’d a thunk it possible? That woman’s crazy! Squirrel!

      Like

  5. paulraven1 says:

    Breitbart is reporting that Mike Flynn is trying to make an immunity deal to testify about the Russian connection.

    Like

  6. Joshua2415 says:

    The Farkas Fracas?

    Liked by 3 people

  7. mikebrezzze says:

    Frakas fraked up!

    Liked by 3 people

  8. ecmarsh says:

    I bet that bugged eyed gal, Dr. Farkus hasn’t been in the mood since Sundance outed her. Her poor old husband is probably living in hell right now.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Bull Durham says:

    “He who says it first is right.” The first law of Mass Communications, by Goebbels.

    “Flynn offers to testify for immunity.” First statement launched by WSJ on Fox. Thereafter, it is the ‘truth’ accepted by all who hear that first.

    If you read Flynn’s lawyer’s letter, you would see the first statement launched by WSJ which is “right”, therefore the “truth”, is actually propaganda.

    That’s how it works.

    Liked by 4 people

  10. maggiemoowho says:

    Lol,

    Liked by 4 people

  11. anthohmy says:

    In the first debate Hillary squacks about all the world leaders she has been personally speaking with in the lead up to the election. She says it in a way that sounds like it is other than

    “thank-you for your donation to the Clinton Foundation” or

    “how did you enjoy the Stingers?”

    Seems like she was talking to them about the election and the US Political process and what the future would hold under hear leadership. So it is okay to talk to world leaders about future plans when you are HRC, but not DJT? Am I catching this? Would it be technically illegal, even if it were true, for DJT to tell Putin he would relax sanctions if he were President, or would he just have to say it generically during a press conference or debate?

    Then we have Soros donating to all kinds of left leaning organizations and fairly open efforts to influence the election.

    Is it actually against the law for Putin to have an opinion about the election or for them to produce media or even bots leaving comments on websites that lean in one direction or another? Any more than Soros doing what he is doing? Should a warrant be put out for Putin for trying to influence US elections? This is the only time in history this has happened?

    Just curious about that small detail.

    So would illegal immigrants posting Facebook posts about their preferred candidate be “interfering in the elections?”

    It is my understanding that the supposed Russian fingerprints on the ‘hacking’ of the devices the F.B.I. had no forensic access to, did not say “Made by The Kremlin” or “From Vladimir With Love”, but rather was identified as a “Russian hacking group with assumed ties to the Russian government.”

    That is all they know for sure?

    And the US hacks Russia all the time, right?

    Don’t they have reciprocity agreements?

    Liked by 7 people

    • Blade says:

      Is it actually against the law for Putin to have an opinion about the election …

      Of course not. What the White House should be doing is collecting a set of data points …

      * Foreign leaders supporting $hillary … off the top of my head: Germany, France, UK, Scotland, EU, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Ukraine, etc. $hillary and her sycophants even made this a badge of honor at various times. This was actually treasonous IMHO. I can only think of a few who appeared to support Trump, that would be Russia, Hungary, Czech, and Egypt. Again, this was campaign fodder for $hillary!

      * Enumerate the complete list of $hillary, Obama, Trump officials actual dealings with Russia. It will show that Trump is the only person *not* involved with them as opposed to the reams of dealings by the leftists.

      He can then release this info in a tweet or a rally, but the most effective method would be for him to do another one of those press conference turkey shoots. This will inject it straight into the mainstream.

      Liked by 6 people

  12. Strea says:

    “if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff dealing with Russians”.
    How would she know this if she was out of government ?

    Liked by 3 people

  13. Concerned Virginian says:

    A long day here, just getting to TCH to read as much as I can. Thank you, Sundance!
    Here’s where I am so far:
    John McCain trying to act like HE is the President again.
    Adam Schiff and Mark Warner outed for the liars they are.
    Katie Walsh got caught with the goods and was booted out of the White House.
    Reince Priebus getting ready to throw Katie Walsh under the bus before HE gets thrown under the bus.
    Paul Ryan still trying to make himself look like a real “power player” in DC.
    Gen. Flynn going for a deal so the Congress fools don’t eviscerate him public.
    Katie Walsh and Evelyn Farkas both realize that they are expendable Clinton Machine fodder. They better make sure the life insurance is paid up.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Concerned Virginian says:

      Oh yes, and the biggest thing of all:
      President Donald Trump taking care of business and arranging for the snakes and rats to be hunted down and rendered harmless, one by one.

      Liked by 6 people

      • navysquid says:

        “Oh yes, and the biggest thing of all:
        President Donald Trump taking care of business and arranging for the snakes and rats to be hunted down and rendered harmless, one by one.”

        You forgot one more thing:
        Angels to win the World Series this year (2017)…

        Liked by 1 person

    • JoD says:

      Yup, that about covers it!

      Like

  14. Barnestormer says:

    As Rush points out, the surveillance of Trump began when he announced in June, 2015, when his candidacy was viewed as a joke. Question: why spy on the least likely opponent in the field unless you’re spying on the whole field? We know something about Obama’s record for digging dirt on his opponents. (Not as much as Jack Ryan knows, but the general gist.) With Clapper and Brennan at his disposal, how likely is it that Obama could resist the temptation to spy on the entire Republican field, now that we know his surrogates spied on the least likely among them? Hypothesis: Until they were out of the race, all the Republicans were surveilled. “The Russians” became an issue only because Trump won and that’s the best narrative they had for him. Who knows what the Jeb!, or Cruz, or Walker, or Christie or Kasich narrative would have been had one of them won the nomination instead of Trump? Infidelity? Mob business dealings? Middle East arms sales? Dismiss the idea of a party-wide spying operation as preposterously conspiracy theoryish, but then the question would remain: in June, 2015, why the novelty candidate Trump, the butt of every liberal’s joke?

    Liked by 7 people

    • Blade says:

      Hypothesis: Until they were out of the race, all the Republicans were surveilled. “The Russians” became an issue only because Trump won and that’s the best narrative they had for him.

      Could be. I think Occam’s Razor works here …

      It was May 2016 when DNC was “hacked”, also Podesta. The primaries were hot and heavy. Bernie was getting lots of votes but $hillary was getting the super-delegates. A BernieBot decides to level the playing field and takes the emails and leaks them to Wikileaks.

      Caught flatfooted even after being warned to protect their “servers” they get CrowdStrike to examine them. The deep state operators rather than the (D)ummycrats dreamed up the Russia hoax which serves their [ deep state, not democrats ] globalist purposes. Telling the DNC it was Russians is like a parent telling a kid they failed a test not because they didn’t study, but because the teacher sucks or it was unfair. They ate it up.

      Deep State and the DNC percolates this fiction throughout the summer as they were preparing themselves for the coming onslaught of the Wikileaks operation. Deep State targets Trump ( perhaps others as you suggest ).

      They saw their opening to go public at the debate when Trump said Russia should find her missing emails ( remember the look on her face? ), and the Trump + Russia connection was born. Like the little children they are they can never let go of their security blanket, it keeps them nice and cozy and safe.

      The biggest red flag is that the DNC got a private entity to examine the “server” [ we don’t really know anything about the physical devices AFAICT. Even Stephen F. Cohen, a famous lefty Soviet defender points out how suspicious this is on Tucker tonight. As far as I am concerned, no hack ever happened. Without an FBI investigation, in fact apparent refusal to let them in, tells us it is a hoax. Never happened.

      During the last debate October 20 when $hillary committed treason by divulging a top secret sliver of information about nuclear response time, I believe that the enemy went into overdrive to push this narrative to save her shot at the presidency because Trump could easily have made this the biggest story of the year ( but didn’t, still strange to me ). Hence the panic at the end with her finally doing multiple campaign stops, even in friendly territory she took for granted.

      Now they are so deep in the whacko weeds that they have no choice but to blame everything on the Russians, even opinion polls, tweets and website comments. It is extraordinary. And it means these idiots are in for a momentous smack in the head when it all comes crashing down.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Maquis says:

        Oh, they are so going to miss their security blankets!

        Muh Banky!

        Liked by 2 people

      • Barnestormer says:

        “The Russians” ( “Red Herrings” if I may) appear to be the go-to demons for a host of Dem purposes, ramped up to super demon status after Trump won. Their conception and nurture may well have followed the path you described. What strikes me about the Farkas disclosures, besides their being generally explosive admissions of surveillance, unmasking and leaking (urging it, at a minimum), is how early the surveillance targeted Trump (credit Limbaugh’s observation)–when he was so unworthy of the effort. Why a rump candidate if not the prime ones as well? Russian meddling is one thing; massive corruption of intelligence gathering assets to target the political opposition is a whole different kettle of fish.

        Like

      • jakeandcrew says:

        They saw their opening to go public at the debate when Trump said Russia should find her missing emails ( remember the look on her face? ), and the Trump + Russia connection was born.

        Christiana Amanpour interviews Evelyn Farkas about that event –

        http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/news/in-the-news/farkas-joins-cnn-to-discuss-trump-s-appeal-to-russia

        I’ve watched this several times, and I can’t shake the feeling that at the very end of the interview, Evelyn starts to say something about cyber-attacks, and Christiana holds up her hand in an effort to stop her from continuing (maybe something that Mika should have done). I don’t know – could be a lack of sleep making me loopy.

        BTW – love the dog picture! I’ve got a couple that would love that excuse, too. 🙂

        Like

      • cdquarles says:

        I don’t blame our President at all for leaving that dropped shoe (the response time) right where the Hildebeest left it. Better to not draw any more attention to that one, then, if elected, work with the DOD to overcome the damage.

        Like

  15. DeWalt says:

    Anyone remember Art Bell? On his radio show he always talked about the closer you move to the final truth, events move faster. He called it the Quickening.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Abdul says:

    This happened in March 2 and since then she was not questioned by FBI. ComfeComfey has to go

    Like

  17. Abdul says:

    She is of hungarian descent who hates communism but now a socialist liberal.

    Like

    • Jenny R. says:

      Maybe she doesn’t hate communism so much? Maybe she just hates the Russians?
      I can see why an ethnic Hungarian would (although somehow I doubt Ms. Farkas gives a rat’s behind about that); but one must remember that all the socialists will never forgive the Russians for giving up on the great international cause of socialist utopia for everyone (and that Ms. Farkas might care about).

      Liked by 1 person

  18. Enlightened Vulgarian says:

    “Oh, sorry, I can’t stop laughing. She is so busted.”

    Just another American Beauty. They’ll be more….

    Liked by 1 person

  19. cav16 says:

    Check out Gaeway Pundit!
    FINALLY — INVESTIGATORS UNCOVER KREMLIN CONNECTION IN 2016 US ELECTION!

    Confirmed—
    The Putin Government gave John Podesta 35 millions dollars (1 billion rubles) while he advised Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. tampa2 says:

    As senior foreign policy advisor for Hillary Clinton’s campaign, was Evelyn Farkas, in fact, the assigned member representing Clinton on the “White House Transition Coordinating Council”? That would clearly explain her continued involvement in intel, wouldn’t it?

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/279037-president-obama-takes-first-steps-toward-preparing-successor

    Liked by 1 person

  21. doctorfixit says:

    That Farkas is one weird-looking lady(?) trans(?)

    Like

  22. Richard_Iowa says:

    So, does all of this really that the Democrats actually do agree with Romney?

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s