Rep Doug Collins Releases Testimony from FBI Legal Counsel James Baker Day #2….

Georgia Congressman Doug Collins releases transcripts of day #2 testimony from former FBI chief legal counsel James Baker (full pdf below).  Baker was the legal advisor to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe during the investigation candidate Donald Trump; a key FBI small group insider during the soft-coup construct.

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

96 Responses to Rep Doug Collins Releases Testimony from FBI Legal Counsel James Baker Day #2….

  1. Bucky Badger says:

    Drip, drip, drip…

    Flood is coming.

    Liked by 9 people

  2. freepetta says:

    Thank you Rep Collins!! Hopefully there will be coverage of these outrageous shenanigans. Att: AG Barr!!

    Liked by 18 people

  3. 1stgoblyn says:

    I am not even halfway through Day #1’s transcript. Too much homework, Sundance! Have pity.

    Liked by 3 people

    • wlbeattie says:

      Sundance et al – has made me become lazy!
      I now have trouble just ticking “like”! 😏👍

      Liked by 2 people

    • stringplayer55 says:

      Shouldn’t you be requesting pity from Rep. Collins rather than Sundance?

      But my, how liberal heads must be exploding about now. That you and I might be behind in our reading and have headaches just trying to keep up pales in comparison to watching liberal heads explode! 😀


      Liked by 2 people

      • 1stgoblyn says:

        Nah, don’t think so. Rep. Collins put it on the internet, Sundance put it on the only blog I read, so it is homework from him. And I love them both for it.


  4. Zorro says:

    So many things are coming at the Demosocialists and their propagandists that they have to spin right and then reverse the spin to the left. This is causing physical brain concussions.

    Liked by 6 people

  5. crazydawgg says:

    I like to think the worms are squirming bigly.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. freepetta says:

    From the bit I’ve read so far with Rosenstink, McCabe etc etc if this wasn’t a coup attempt then I don’t know what is!!

    Liked by 4 people

    • mikebrezzze says:

      It’s more like a coup attempt by the Keystone cops!

      Liked by 4 people

      • freepetta says:

        They are all devious pieces of 💩, but dumb as a box 📦 of hair.

        Liked by 1 person

      • GB Bari says:

        I woud not describe them that way. They managed to cast a huge cloud over the Trump presidency for over two years now. They were quite resourceful and dangerously bold,

        Plus the Coup team had the eager cooperation of a huge amount of US media to simply avoid asking questions or looking beyond the fake information that was steadily leaked to reporters.

        To me, that 95% of the media rolled over and aided and abetted the criminals is worse than the criminals themselves.

        Yes some of us have been wise to the deceit and treachery for over half of that time thanks to Sudance’s and a small handful of other’s diligent iinvestigative research and reporting.

        Liked by 7 people

        • sturmudgeon says:

          That the media “aided and abetted” IS bad… but, IMHP, it perhaps equals the Treason of the criminals… certainly NOT as evil as what these people? did.

          Liked by 1 person

          • stringplayer55 says:

            Yes, I might have the same quibble. Consider, though, that the coup could/would/should not have survived its first breath without the eager participation of the propaganda arm of the DNC. If the media were at all interested in reporting what was really going on at the FBI/DOJ/CIA/ODNI/SoS/UN ambassador (hmm, what ties all of those together?), then the coup would have been long dead and Comey, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Lynch, Yates, Strzok, Page, Rice, Powers, … would all be wearing orange right now.

            It is only because of the direct participation of the media to assert themselves as part of The Resistance that this coup has been dragged out. But gotta protect the first Community Organizer in Chief, don’t ya know?

            Hang ’em all. (Figuratively, spooks. I’m not advocating going outside the law.)

            Liked by 2 people

          • GB Bari says:

            Well, consider that in 1974, President Richard Nixon resigned because he was going to be impeached and convicted essentially of the Watergate COVERUP, not because of the thrid rate burglary done by the WH “Plumbers.”

            So the country thought that the coverup was worse than the crime.

            The current U.S. media has engaged in a full-blown COVERUP of the Muh Russia / Spygate / FISA-gate scandal. Yes the scandal was very bad and the perps need to be harshly dealt with.

            But the fact that the vast majority of U.S. news media – who are supposed to represent the people’s best interest and “speak truth to power” – completely failed and would have permitted this scndal to be successful were it not for a tiny few brave people in the alternative media and in the government, and President Trump’s dogged determination and perseverance.

            So maybe I’ll agree to making them equal – the seriousness of the crimes and the seriousness of the media’s coverup.


      • wlbeattie says:

        IMO the Coup was very carefully and cunningly crafted.
        (SD: has shown that).

        But, I don’t think the coup perpetrators were expecting:-
        1. Trump would fight back so hard
        2. Trump was basically very “clean”
        3. Trump could bypass the MSM filter
        4. Trump would reach directly to his supporters via Social Media
        5. Trump would ignore the plotter’s provocative acts
        6. Trump would continue on with his #PromisesKept
        7. Trump could outwit the RINOs in on the plot
        8. Trump would Clean out his Administration (albeit slowly)
        9. Trump supporters were so stalwart & invested in him!
        10. The many citizen Journalists/Investigators, aiding with their analysis

        Liked by 4 people

      • Fools Gold says:

        No, we were lucky as hell Trump got out and worked his ass off to retain the senate and judge choices! And by the way this schiff ain’t over by a long shot! As far as I’m concerned we got a breath of fresh air, the CoC and donkey loving repubics haven’t been flushed!


  7. Will J. says:

    The Dems can actually see the storm clouds now starting to roll in.

    It’s almost time. Put the beer in the fridge and get the popcorn ready.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. Alex M says:

    The 45th President Of The United States Just Said: “What They Did Was Treason. This Was An Attempted Coup.”

    Liked by 10 people

    • FPCHmom says:

      He should keep talking about it in those terms. The outraged media will have to cover it (even if it to call him irresponsible for using those terms) and regular Americans will start to understand the magnitude of it.

      I look forward to him running against the swamp and all of it’s deep corruption in 2020.

      Liked by 4 people

  9. Moe Grimm says:

    I urge all my fellow CTH Brothers and Sisters to call the following relentlessly, with no quarter until we have the beginning of indictments. To date we know there is an plethora of irrefutable evidence of what 0bama’s administration did and given those who had daily high level access to him he had to have been at least a
    passive if not active participant. Each day I detail to them a subset of treasonous offenses committed against our good and kind Heartland. THIS MUST NOT GO UNPUNISHED and in the end could well avoid the beginning of armed civil insurrection. It seems even the normies are waking from their collective coma. now taking notice. Yet, we remain far from the end of this. FOR OUR CHILDREN, OUR GRANDCHILDREN, OUR COUNTRY. NEVER AGAIN.

    Dept. of Justice Main Switchboard: 202-514-2000
    Department Comment Line: 202-353-1555
    TTY/ASCII/TDD: 800-877-8339

    Write to Barr/DOJ:
    U.S. Dept. of Justice
    950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
    Washington, DC 20530-0001
    Comment Line: 202-353-1555
    TTY/ASCII/TDD: 800-877-8339 (or Federal IP Relay Service)

    Insp. General Michael E. Horowitz
    U.S. Department of Justice
    Office of the Inspector General
    950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
    Suite 4706
    Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
    Phone: (202) 514-3435
    Fax: (202) 616-9881

    For the normies:

    Liked by 7 people

  10. Newhere says:

    Starting around page 30 …. you get the sense that in the minds of these self-important and utterly unself-aware officials, the mere fact that President Trump proceeded to office, and proceeded to take actions as a duly elected president, constituted evidence of “obstruction of justice.” Never mind all of the, y’know, manifestly illegal conduct they themselves were engaging in at the time . . .

    How many times in this ordeal can one’s head explode.

    Liked by 6 people

    • trumppatriot says:

      Agree. It is angry-making to read what was taking place and the audacity of these elitist g-persons who thought they had the right to sit in judgment of the President elected by the people who, in the end analysis. . . .were smarter than any of them!

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Avi says:

    I learned yesterday that Baker replaced Weissmann. how did such a reprehensible reptile ever get that high in position?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Deplorable_Infidel says:

      “how did such a reprehensible reptile ever get that high in position?”
      8 years of WJC
      8 years of GWB, who did not purge the WJC dung in the spirit of uniparty
      8 years of BHO
      24 years to allow the scum to rise to the top in the swamp

      Liked by 7 people

      • dd_sc says:

        GW Bush and AG Ashcroft were going to do the usual purge, but Democrats pitched a fit about losing such great people and Team Bush caved.

        Did the same thing when Team Trump started to purge DOJ.

        Liked by 1 person

      • slowcobra says:

        Wow, it hurts more, now that it’s spelled out like that. Ugh. Very sad.


      • GB Bari says:

        His career speaks volumes about the average level of ethics and honesty within the upper echelons of the federal government.

        I’ve never worked for the feds in Washington DC or anywhere. So my take given the empirical evidence is that the average level = very poor.


        • Chieftain says:

          In private sector, government “service” is never a resume enhancer unless it is with a crony capitalist business that is dependent on sales to the government or is under the government thumb. Government “service in a Democrat crime gang run city or crime sanctuary State like Illinois or California is typically a disqualifying event for hiring consideration at ethical companies.

          Liked by 1 person

    • glissmeister says:

      He was deliberately put there. They wanted Weissmann to be there. The bigger question is how did Baker ever get the gig for which Weissmann had been the chosen one?

      Baker dropped a huge bomb outta the gate. Klaymann and the Dennis Montgomery whistleblower case. He put that right on the record squarely in front of Congress. That case supposedly ties into U1 and other Cli-bama syndicate racketeering.

      In a bold and decisive act at the very beginning of his day 2 testimony, Baker drops that ticking MOAB squarely into the testimonial record.

      Liked by 3 people

  12. redline says:

    Scrolled to random page, they’re prying from Baker the fact that, as GC, he approved opening the obstruction case *before* Comey was fired. Baker’s lawyer won’t let him answer.
    p. 46
    Mr. [redacted] : At this point, we’ll have to instruct the witness not to respond to the question.
    Mr. Meadows : But, Counselor, this is critically important. If we’re talking about obstruction before the firing of Director Comey, then it fundamentally undermines many of the arguments that are being made.

    Liked by 8 people

    • chojun says:

      I think you’ve found the crux of the remove Trump strategy.

      The Russia investigation was their tool, and obstruction was the tip of the spear. It looks like they hatched a plan to remove Trump via obstruction and kicked it off by recommending that he fire James Comey.

      It has never made sense to me why Rosenstein would recommend that Trump fire Comey and then investigate him for Obstruction over it. Now it all makes sense. It was all part of the plan.

      I hope everyone appreciates what a miracle it is that Trump emerged unscathed from this.

      Liked by 9 people

      • All Too Much says:

        If the Rosenstein letter was part of a plan, why was he, Rosenstein, so, upset, angry, that it was used as a basis to the Comey termination? Page 26-28 are one example of testimony on this; it was also discussed yesterday.


      • iconoclast says:

        I know what you mean, but PDJT did not really emerge unscathed. His presidency has been handicapped by false allegations of colluding with Russia and obstructing justice. The charges have impeded the president’s ability to govern and likely cost his party seats in the 2018 election.

        Unfortunately, the bad guys have been very effective. The way to return the favor is to utterly expose their hoax and cinch PDJT’s re-election in 2020.


      • twohawk says:

        I don’t think quite unscathed, and he needs to know he has our support.


  13. chojun says:

    Very clearly now the overall strategy is emerging.

    The Trump administration was under investigation (Mueller), so the administration needed cover to start the SpyGate investigation. I believe history will show the SpyGate investigation originated in Congress. Congressional investigative products will compel the Trump administration to clean house in a way that will be considered non-political.

    A reckoning is coming.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. mdt123 says:

    Dynamite stuff. As PDJT said, no one would believe if this were written as a novel. And we have REAL officials talking about a coup attempt on a made up pretense of obstruction.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Blue Moon says:

      Hey, it worked on Richard Nixon. They railroaded him, the press hated his guts, and in the end this same scenario worked on Nixon, it should have worked on PT (it didn’t). They had no plan cause this is how it is done. Just ask Hillary. She was on the committee and was so crooked then that they kicked her off. She told them how to do it. Stupid, Stupid people. They had no idea what they were up against.


  15. Newhere says:

    Wow. Pages 36-37, Baker asserts that, in terms of FBI authorities and objectives, there is no difference between a counter-intelligence and criminal investigation, in a post-9/11 world.

    That is a stunning admission. Sundance and Andrew McCarthy have written extensively on this. There *is* indeed a difference. Principally, the FBI has expansive spying powers *only* when it comes to counter-intelligence. They’re at least supposed to use the legally dubious “parallel construction” to spill it into criminal. Here, Baker seems to be jettisoning even that formality. He’s basically saying the FBI uses it vast domestic spying powers against Americans without distinguishing between a counter-intelligence and criminal probe.

    Liked by 10 people

    • Deplorable_Infidel says:

      “He’s basically saying the FBI uses it vast domestic spying powers against Americans without distinguishing between a counter-intelligence and criminal probe.”

      According to CIA whistle blower Kevin Shipp, Robert Mueller testified under oath to Congress that the FBI conducted so many warrentless searches (in the thousands) that he could not provide Congress with a number.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Newhere says:

      Truly stunning. Asked whether the point of an FBI counterintelligence investigation is to advise the President on foreign threats, Baker corrects: the role of the FBI in a counterintelligence campaign is to “thwart the activities of an adversary,” which *may* involve alerting government officials, including the President, “if it warrants their attention.” Or it may not. He continues to hedge on whether the President has the constitutional authority to end a counterintelligence probe.

      The FBI isn’t just secretly or arguably a rogue agency. They actively have usurped the Constitutional authorities and prerogatives of elected government.

      Liked by 2 people

    • L4grasshopper says:


      If Baker truly believed that there is no difference, then he should never have been in that job.


    • BitterC says:

      The fact the FBI has access to the NSA database for criminal investigations with or without court approval (I see no justification for anything outside it’s stated purpose…protecting the country from foreign attack….) is one of the biggest, most disturbing take aways for me. I had no idea they could do that


  16. Days getting STORMY for little Mike. He reminds me of the twerp at the bar, who wants to pick a fight with the biggest guy in the room, but the real man takes pity on the loser, and tries to talk loudmouth out of it.

    But the little Mikes of this world never get the message and earn a broken nose and black eye for their big mouths and little ability,..


  17. AnotherView says:

    I took some pleasure this morning watching Barr get the dems and RINOs stirred up when he mentioned spying.

    Liked by 2 people

    • TrumpPatriot says:

      Two questions:
      1. Is there info now as to who were the two cabinet members referred to with reference to the 25th amendment?
      2. In the pages 30’s and 40’s, the attorney with Baker will not permit him to answer any questions with reference to obstruction. Was that because of the Mueller investigation? If so, isn’t that a direct tip-off the investigation at the time was all about obstruction?

      Liked by 1 person

    • bessie2003 says:

      I think Barr took some pleasure in mentioning spying; it’s like he’s toying with his prey before he eats. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  18. doofusdawg says:

    Didn’t read the release yet but does anybody think it’s odd that on the day Barr announced they spied on Trump the headline on Drudge is new human species found. Tell me their is no coordination. And what happened to Drudge.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Maga Truth Seeker says:

    I’ve read the first 48 pages thus far, and these are my thoughts:

    -Rosenstein is in some serious trouble. Baker testifies that not only McCabe, but Page came to him about Rosenstein’s idea of wearing a wire. When Rosenstein doesn’t get the confirmation he was looking for, that’s when he brings in Mueller as the wire.

    – Meadow or Jordan say that Bruce Ohr testified that the FBI/DOJ were looking into obstruction charges and a Special Council prior to Comey getting fire. I do not believe I have ever heard this before. This was a coup from the beginning.

    – The fact that Baker isn’t allowed to discuss anything about obstruction leads me to believe that there were such thoughts every early on in this investigation. Baker even gave a “go ahead and launch” email to Strozk, Page, and McCabe about an investigation prior to Comey’s firing.

    The political climate is changing and I think we’re going to get an avalanche of winnamins soon

    Liked by 4 people

  20. MightyMustardSeed says:

    Meadows and Jordan met with Horowitz yesterday.

    Nunes is sending criminal referrals to AG and making a public offer to meet to go over details.

    Collins is releasing congressional testimony.

    In view of Horowitz’s past summaries, it feels like our Patriot Congressmen are pulling back the curtains, flooding every thing they have with sunlight.

    These men are making it impossible for Horowitz to deliver another wishy – washy IG Report.

    AG Barr has unlocked the gate in the ‘stonewall’, and we’re seeing things we had come to doubt we would ever see.

    President Trump has been vindicated, Mueller, Comey, RR, BO, Clapper, Brennan together with MSM, have exchanged places with him, as the accused.

    At last! The right people are under investigation, and they’ll be convicted or discredited by their own words and actions.

    Liked by 3 people

  21. Ilcon says:

    This Jim is lying just like the other Jim.
    When your answer starts with a question you know they are lying. When you are trying to take out a president, you wil remember it in great detail for thr rest of your life.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. One of the next things we need to find out is who gave the orders to FBI assigned lawyers in these congressional hearings. Where is that EC? Who authored it and to whom was it distributed – any Dems in the hearings?
    Step 2, call those lawyers to testify to Congress.
    Step 3, based on their answers and the underlying (il)legality, pursue disbarment. Lotsa lawyers wil then think twice about their crooked ways when heads begin to roll.
    …or something. I’m not a lawyer, but it sounds good in my head.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. Mike says:

    After reading Baker Part 2, I am flabbergasted that the General Counsel of the FBI believed it was plausible that Trump fired Comey at the “behest” of Putin. And so did McCabe, Page, et. al. Pure insanity. Baker must think we are stupid to believe such a fairy tale.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Sue Fowler says:

    American citizens being availed of DC testimonies and hearings. Imagine that! Now we need the ACTION part. You remember from the distant past:
    Prison terms
    Full sentences served.
    Disgrace and shame.
    Remember the good old days of justice and righteousness?


  25. OlderAndWiser says:

    Sundance/Treepers, This is only my second post here. I love all the analysis you guys have done.
    I’ve been following this cluster f*ck of a mess since 2014 carefully, and IMHO, this is a short summary of how it went down and who’s at fault for what:
    1) The whole thing was an HRC and WJC plot hatched in the beginning. (Have you ever read or seen Primary Colors?) They planned it, and found the right people to execute it.
    a) Carried out by John Brennan, P-C law firm, Fusion GPS, Ohr, Steele. These creatures created the specific parts of the collusion dirt and spread it thru various press and gov staff to pointedly get it into the FBI – and specifically Andy McCabe’s organization.
    b) WJC tarmac meeting with Lynch was not at all about the email server – that had already been decided – nor about grandkids. It was about the plot and how Lynch should get DOJ/FBI to move.
    c) The insurance policy was the Obstruction Case. As noted by Sundance the rest was a ploy to bait Trump into acts that would bring a charge of Obstruction. Nothing to do with Comey’s firing.
    d) The rest of the dingbat bureaucrats were totally played; they saw “evidence” provided by “quality” sources and through trusted people and acted on it. Even if they realized they were played, their pride would never let them admit it, so they became part of the cover up and insurance policy.
    2) The other HUGE issue is one that has only tangentially been looked at. There is a culture within the FBI/DOJ (and even with other parts of the bureaucracy) where they feel they are beholden to a constitution but not to the President, who according to said constitution is the one in charge of their jobs. This is an attitude Congress has long encouraged – and Presidents have had to agree to else they would be “impeached”. This is NOT the constitution. The DOJ/FBI have NO JOB in investigating a duly elected President – if someone finds something wrong, they can hand the evidence to Congress and let the Congress do the investigating. Why does no one in the Press mention this? This thinking is what empowers the Deep State – they are beyond the law.
    Talking about bureaucracies – anyone old enough to remember Parkinson’s law on bureaucracies? Research it.
    3) The 25th amendment – my bet is that Sessions was one of the 2. Mattis possibly the second.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Ad rem says:

      In case I missed ya’s…..Welcome to the Treehouse! 😀

      Liked by 3 people

    • bessie2003 says:

      Great points.

      To that culture, mindset, withing the FBI/DOJ, that shows up in this transcript where Baker is asked (paraphrasing) if he didn’t think he had a duty to inform someone in the WH about RR’s idea to wear a wire when talking to POTUS and the word salad justification for why that wasn’t a concern, i.e. to notify anyone in the Admin, speaks to that mindset!

      These transcript releases are real treasures in themselves for that insight into the culture of our federal law enforcement employees.


    • Great work, Wiser … every single point!


    • BitterC says:

      Your point 1b) WJC tarmac meeting with Lynch was not at all about the email server – that had already been decided – nor about grandkids. It was about the plot and how Lynch should get DOJ/FBI to move.

      It should not be forgotten that FBI agent Gaeta met with Steele in Rome on the very same day Comey gave his famous she’s guilty/exoneration speech, which was mere days after the tarmac meeting.


    • fabrabbit says:

      Older & Wiser: Good summary & interesting guess about the two cabinet members…I thought perhaps this was something Baker made up to make Rosie look worse than he already does.


  26. All Too Much says:

    Rosenstein’s letter re: terminating Comey came back to bite him.
    Pages 26-28 talk about his vindictive reaction and state of mind. The topic came up yesterday, too.
    Maybe Rosenstein is a little guy, and hates Trump for his height privilege.
    More likely, he had to go overboard in attack plans to prove he didn’t mean what he wrote in the letter.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. CNN_sucks says:

    Comey, Brennan and Clapper hiding behind the “protecting country” BS need to be arrested. No mercy.


  28. trialbytruth says:

    page 143 of interview I think we get the basis for the planned defense on Fisa. Check the Very last sentence.

    “Mr. Ratcliffe. Well, Mr. Baker, with all due respect, you and I both worked at the Department of Justice at different points in time. Do you think it’s appropriate for folks to be aware that the number four person at the Department of Justice is involved in the chain of custody and his wife is involved in any capacity in creating a piece of evidence and those facts are not disclosed to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court? Mr. Baker. So if what you say is true, and I don’t know it to be true, then it seems as though the institution of the Department of Justice should provide that to the FISA court. The difficulty is do the people who are actually going to the FISA court know these details, right? That’s the problem. You have an — in this case, an FBI agent who literally will be signing the application attesting to the accuracy of the information. You have particular attorneys reviewing it, a particular structure up to and including the Director and so on. If

    those people don’t know about it, then — then I’m not sure that they — you know, I would say they didn’t do anything wrong. But the institution of the Department of Justice had a breakdown somewhere, and information that, again, assuming what you say is true, should have been, you know, at least discussed about whether it should go on the FISA application.”


  29. fabrabbit says:

    Trialbytruth: I call bs on that response…that there was a breakdown in getting info that should have been included in FISA docs. We all know how the DOJ/FBI is larded up with rules, protocols, procedures. That doesn’t slip unless done intentionally. Plus there were so few involved in the FISA app that it would have been known. Not to mention the myriad other reasons it was known. Setting up their “got bad intel” incompetent defense.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Noah says:

      Agreed. They always pivot to “lessons learned” posture defensively. Where did it go wrong? Do we need a new bigger agency to share bigger intelligence? Do we need new investigative tools? They can turn every betrayal into a fundraising venture within a couple years it seems.


  30. 8675310 says:

    Why is the FBI counsel’s name redacted in the transcript? He is in a public forum, giving advice, publicly! How is his identity a national secret?


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