Judicial Watch Reveals Surveillance Targets Requested by U.S. Ambassador Yovanovitch and State Department – But Bigger Question is Missing…

There are times during research when searching for details leaves the obviously immediate questions unanswered.  This is one of those examples.  Judicial Watch is hot on the trail of a State Department effort to monitor domestic political opposition.

Specifically former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, initiated a request for State Dept. officials to conduct surveillance on: Jack Posobiec, Donald Trump Jr., Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Michael McFaul (Obama’s ambassador to Russia), Dan Bongino, Ryan Saavedra, Rudy Giuliani, Sebastian Gorka, John Solomon, Lou Dobbs, Pamella Geller and Sara Carter.

More details:

(Via JW) Judicial Watch has obtained information indicating Yovanovitch may have violated laws and government regulations by ordering subordinates to target certain U.S. persons using State Department resources.

Yovanovitch reportedly ordered monitoring keyed to the following search terms: Biden, Giuliani, Soros and Yovanovitch. Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the State Department and will continue gathering facts from government sources.

Prior to being recalled as ambassador to Ukraine in the spring Yovanovitch reportedly created a list of individuals who were to be monitored via social media and other means. Ukraine embassy staff made the request to the Washington D.C. headquarters office of the department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs.

After several days, Yovanovitch’s staff was informed that the request was illegal and the monitoring either ceased or was concealed via the State Department Global Engagement Center, which has looser restrictions on collecting information.

“This is not an obscure rule, everyone in public diplomacy or public affairs knows they can’t make lists and monitor U.S. citizens unless there is a major national security reason,” according to a senior State Department official. If the illicit operation occurred, it seems to indicate a clear political bias against the president and his supporters.

Yovanovitch, a career diplomat who has also led American embassies in Kyrgyzstan and Armenia, was appointed ambassador to Ukraine by Obama in 2016. She was recalled by the State Department in May and remains a State Department employee in Washington D.C. (read more)

Judicial Watch is on an honorable and righteous mission; and I do not mean to diminish the importance of their work. However, I find myself slightly annoyed at this issue because a simple question is not being asked.

Obviously Maria Yovanovitch was aware of some pre-existing process that facilitated the surveillance of U.S. persons adverse to the interests of the U.S. State Department; and obviously some process was initiated in order for it to be “ceased or concealed”, right?

Well, the simple question is “HOW”?

How exactly does the U.S. State Department monitor people or persons they define as adverse to their interests?

Unfortunately I think we might have the answer to that question: SEE HERE

And also unfortunately, within that explanation there is another obvious question that doesn’t require thousands of pages of evidence, testimony and FISC debate.

Despite all of the extensively legally written scripts describing the process no-one, including the judges outlining the problem, pauses to ask the simple question “WHY“?

One of the weird aspects to both Collyer and Boasberg is that both FISC judges did not ever seek to ask the “why” question: why are all these unauthorized database searches taking place? Instead, both judges focus on process issues and technical procedural questions, seemingly from a position that all unauthorized searches were done without malicious intent. (more)

  • How does the state department monitor their adversaries?
  • Why is the NSA FISA(702) database used to monitor non-foreign persons?

Simple questions that should not require years of investigations to answer.

Frustrating….

 

This entry was posted in Big Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, Election 2020, FBI, IG Report FISA Abuse, media bias, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Secretary of State, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, USA, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

267 Responses to Judicial Watch Reveals Surveillance Targets Requested by U.S. Ambassador Yovanovitch and State Department – But Bigger Question is Missing…

  1. Bogeyfree says:

    Question for Ristvan

    Can Hannity and Bongino sue the government and via this suit get discovery on all texts, emails and phone calls where Hannity or Bongino’s name is mentioned?

    Liked by 20 people

    • linda4298 says:

      I saw that Jack Posobiec is considering legal action.

      Liked by 12 people

      • Bogeyfree says:

        So Americans have no legal recourse for illegal spying on them?

        Liked by 3 people

        • De Oppresso Liber says:

          It infuriates me as much as anybody else, but we know the obvious result(s):

          “They” (whomever that may be) will hide behind the old national security canard, and insist their motives were as pure as the driven snow. Then the appointed/compromised judge will toss the case.

          Liked by 4 people

        • DSP2 says:

          These State department employees are acting just like the Nazis. No difference at all. Our federal government needs to be culled drastically.

          Liked by 2 people

          • De Oppresso Liber says:

            You used exactly the correct term, DSP2 – culled. We desperately need to cull our government…….from the life-long, oxygen stealing bureaucrats, all the way up to the corrupt, TREASONOUS Speaker of the House!

            The only problem with that is I don’t think there’s enough cowboys (with enough lariats!) from Texas up to Montana, down to Arizona and then back, to throw enough loops at those coyotes…..we would need a mighty big corral 😉

            Like

          • B.T says:

            Actually it is illegal to spy on our citizens. There is a loophole. That’s why Goerge Papadopoulos and Carter. Page were spied on overseas . if someone else is being surveilled in another country and incidental information is picked up on US citizen it’s admissible. So FBI used their assets like Stefan Hamper, Joseph Mitsfud, Alexander Downer. and planted them in their paths under guise of energy, business. They tried so hard to coax anything they thought they could use. Remember they were targeting Papadopoulos before July 31 investigation opened. They needed this to backtrack on their illegality to justify their investigation. Papadopoulos reads like a spy novel except it was our government. Also I read a story of whistleblower who was concerned that DOD paid Stefan Hamper 1 million dollars. He didn’t know who Hamper was just this was an excessive amount to comparable work. This whistleblower definitely treated as well as Schiff’s anonymous gossip. Sickening when I know how whistleblowers have been treated when they are on the wrong side. There is no trump digging up dirt. I’ve known about this for over a year. Guilliani confirmed what has already been investigated. I wonder if Schiff knows that Ukraine reopened Burisma probe this past March.

            Like

        • Y’all Know What Time It is says:

          Make whoever ordered it partially liable for any damages won by the laintiff.

          Like

        • wyoskeptic says:

          One of the problems is that unless the enabling legislation specifies fines for non-compliance, it is necessary to prove actual measurable damage done to the one seeking redress. If one is spied on and that fact does not come to light, where is the damage? If one is spied on, but that fact does not damage one’s reputation nor limit one’s civil rights in any other area, it is all but impossible to sue for “theoretical” damage.

          It falls into the no man’s land between civil law vs criminal law.

          Like

      • richard verney says:

        At the very minimum, surely they can do what Juudicial Watch are doing, and sue the Government/Agencies?Departments for all emails/documents/memos etc with their names on them.

        FOIA requests can probably answer HOW people are spied upon, but probably cannot answer WHY they are being spied upon, unless the disclosed documentation sets out the reasoning. To set out the reason WHY in writing, would be clumsy of the spy master.

        Like

      • farrier105 says:

        Did someone repeal the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT? Does Judicial Watch not use that statute all the time to obtain documents?

        Like

        • OldParatrooper says:

          Classified materials are not available via FOIA. FISA 702 records are classified due to the sources and methods used to obtain them. So you can submit a FOIA request for State Department records on yourself and the 702 materials won’t be coming.

          Like

          • farrier105 says:

            We do not know if the State Department documents are classified, for one thing. You can only discover that by filing FOIA. If they are not, and State Department does not respond to the request, the requestor can sue under FOIA.

            Secondly, individuals file FOIA on RULE 6E material all of the time. That is, in effect, classified material.

            You can file, and more importantly, you can SUE, and, as Judicial Watch has shown us, you can get materials. It might be REDACTED, but you can get them. Frequently Judicial Watch gets REDACTED DOCUMENTS, which means they included CLASSIFIED MATERIAL. Often, Judicial Watch has SUED and gotten the material.

            Therefore, you can sue, get such documents, even if CLASSIFIED PARTS ARE REDACTED, which was the root of my previous objection.

            Like

          • farrier105 says:

            Also, see the Judicial Watch filing with the State Department for “all unclassified and classified record management systems…” be searched in their request for these records.

            https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ukraine-monitoring-FOIA-request-October-2019.pdf

            Like

        • William A. Henslee says:

          Have you ever tried to get a response to a legitimate fOIA request–like does the FBI have a file on you and can you get it? Good luck with that. The delays and runarounds are designed to make you give it up

          Like

      • farrier105 says:

        State Department on Freedom of Information Act:

        https://2001-2009.state.gov/m/a/ips//index.htm

        Like

      • farrier105 says:

        By golly, Judicial Watch already is making a FOIA request of State Department. Now, if they are refused, Judicial Watch has the right to take the refusal to court as they routinely do.

        In the link Sundance made to the Judicial Watch complete report:

        “In the public records request to the State Department Judicial Watch asks for any and all records regarding, concerning, or related to the monitoring of any U.S.-based journalist, reporter, or media commentator by any employee or office of the Department of State between January 1, 2019 and the present. That includes all records pertaining to the scope of the monitoring to be conducted and individuals subject to it as well as records documenting the information collected pursuant to the monitoring. The FOIA request also asks for all records of communication between any official, employee or representative of the State Department and any other individual or entity.”

        Judicial Watch will have the right to litigate a State Department refusal to produce documents. I assume that any targets of such surveillance can file a FOIA for records the State Department has that include THEIR NAMES, and, if production of said documents is refused by the State Department, the individuals can do as Judicial Watch does and file a suit under FOIA.

        Like

      • OlderAndWiser says:

        Can they file a civil suit against Yovanovitch and others?
        Or is the only recourse that the DOJ indict Yovanovitch and others?

        Like

    • Bogeyfree says:

      If they can sue, I hope they can uncover their method of communication and break their encryption code so EVERYTHING can be revealed.

      Liked by 2 people

    • How can the Judges say it was done without malicious intent when they never even asked WHY it was being done?

      Liked by 8 people

    • YES…Getting access to the material might be a stretch but the trial would have to be in the RIGHT Court Room!!!

      However, some “light reading”:

      Illegal Search and Seizure is: Amendment IV
      The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
      https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment

      Right to Privacy:
      The Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. § 552a) protects personal information held by the federal government by preventing unauthorized disclosures of such information. Individuals also have the right to review such information, request corrections, and be informed of any disclosures. The Freedom of Information Act facilitates these processes.
      https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/personal_Information

      Like

    • Torino Style says:

      The question NOT being asked still is – where ELSE is this information being kept and reviewed by non-government entities who are working for/with government entities and political parties (socialists and democrats)?

      Ever heard of “the Cloud”?

      It’s all there now. It’s all being searched, categorized and used nefariously – just in case we the people rise up and DEMAND that the government surveillance be stopped. They have it all “privatized”.

      All cell phone users are most likely being categorized by affiliation, internet searches, beliefs, phone conversations, photographs, texts, contacts, spending habits, common routes and behaviors. We all probably already have out very own “social score” already. You don’t think Zuckerhead is working with private contractors, the DNC, and foreign governments as well?

      The cat is out of the bag and they aren’t putting that genie back in the bottle.

      Like

  2. fractionalexponent says:

    How? CIA
    Why? Regime change

    CIA resides at U.S. embassies.
    Regime change is what they do…when they’re not starting wars.

    Liked by 14 people

    • Newhere says:

      I keep telling people: when the CIA is doing its own dirty work, out in the open and on our own soil, we the American people aren’t merely the unwitting underwriters of their regime change crimes, we’re the target.

      Liked by 15 people

    • WhiteBoard says:

      during the insurance policy the Global Engagement Center was expanded by the 2017 NDAA signature and allocated 120 million ..

      “The FY 2017 NDAA expanded the GEC’s mission to include countering the adverse effects of state-sponsored propaganda and disinformation” specifically Russia

      Like

  3. This is probably among the reasons why former the Sec. of State and the woman who will never be president had the wherewithal to conduct her state “business” on a private, clandestine server.

    1) She probably had a lot to do with instituting the surveillance and
    2) Without proper 4th Amendment controls, she knew the “wrong” people might be looking at her.

    Liked by 13 people

  4. Newhere says:

    The State department requests monitoring of Americans. Apparently routinely, and with “loose standards” enjoyed by the “Global Engagement” center or some such.

    I have to go ice my brain.

    Liked by 10 people

  5. chojun says:

    I just wanted to point something out –

    Judicial watch is turning out these FOIA requests quite quickly, and the various departments are complying quite responsively (minus the FBI, which until now has had to be compelled by court to comply).

    Just something to consider.

    Liked by 11 people

  6. Rodiebob Williams says:

    Yovanovich is guilty of alot more than spying on US citizens, and that is why she was called to give witness statement..She has alot more to lose, and her way of protecting herself and other parties is testifying about things that are not true..

    Like other people, say the IG that trump nominated, these people are being systematically subverted or simply outed as being democrat operatives..

    This is very concerning though, spying on US Citizens is what the Democrats did, along with George Bush, subverting the Fisa Database to spy on political rivals..

    This can not be allowed and is specifically illegal without approvals and conditions..She had neither!

    How many more laws and policies of our govt will be trampled over by these seditious, arrogant, destroyers of the United States?

    Liked by 7 people

  7. Doppler says:

    Another great article, Sundance, and the most important question. Why? Because they can, and it isn’t just the bureacrats and spies. It’s the tech companies who are rewarded with billions for finding new ways to spy on us and sell our data, all without us pushing back. As I noted above, how effective would disabling our government from spying on us if foreign governments, hackers, and the multi-billion $ tech companies continue to have the capability????

    Liked by 3 people

    • WhiteBoard says:

      its legal if its 3rd party.. 4th amendment doesnt apply. it appears we have all been tricked into believing the 4th amendment applies to our private data, and that are messaging, emailing, calling, microphone, speakers … are our private data venues.

      that is clear deception. Internet Bill of Rights will address the 3rd Party Loophole?

      Liked by 1 person

  8. thedoc00 says:

    At a minimum, the fact she attempted to initiate an illegal act should be a firing offense, if not an punishable under the law. No drawn out process needed to fire this Federal employee, she flat attempted something illegal.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. Rich Gorman says:

    Request: with respect ….. can ALL stop suggesting that ANY PERSON ( Hannity , etc. ) initiate a LAW suit in our LAWLESS COURTS in this LAWLESS COUNTRY / CORPORATION. PLEASE !

    Liked by 4 people

  10. California Joe says:

    Why hasn’t this criminal been fired already? Does anybody in the Trump Administration know that they can fire people who commit misconduct? This woman does not belong to a Labor union so don’t give me that crap again. Nobody in the FBI or CIA is UNIONIZED. That goes for DOJ attorneys as well. No union!”

    Liked by 2 people

  11. Sun Yat Sen says:

    Perhaps all of these SES holdovers and “career diplomats” should be transferred to a new State Dept outpost in northern Greenland. With only a couple phones and no internet access.

    Like

  12. ristvan says:

    A few observations for Treepers.

    As much as JW is commendably active on multiple FOIA, some of what they are doing is just tilting at windmills. As an example, Anything related to HRC State emails is past statute of limitations so even if successful has no future real impact.

    We want to win this thing, then concentrate on the main present/future battlefields. No skirmishes, and no past battlefields already lost. IMO those few main battlefields include:
    1. NEVER AGAIN—Barr, Durham, as supported by IG Horowitz. FISA abuse and EC predicate indictments of Obama team.
    2. Fraudulent impeachment effort by Schiff/Pelosi.
    3. Trade wars (USMCA approval, China).

    Liked by 11 people

    • Judith says:

      The US Constitution is the main battlefield. The rest are strategic advancements toward the ultimate goal of one world rule.

      Liked by 7 people

      • BWTraveler says:

        Agreed, The Constitution is a problem for them. We must make sure Trump has our support in this, we can’t afford to lose, too much at stake here.

        Like

    • David A says:

      Not certain that the obstruction crimes that covered for HRC are past any statute of limitation.

      Also we must, IMV, be aware of how they ( the key Obama admin and Obama DOJ, CIA, FBI deep state personnel involved in all the crimes ) plan to beat justice. They are using scissors. They are cutting a seditious illegal conspiracy into a hundred isolated sections, and, after much teeth pulling, admitting to process errors and procedure errors. The reason NONE of them, even the small players, are charged or jailed, is this also gives cover to minimizing and SEPERATING their crimes.

      Also, you CANNOT go after kingpins, without arrests, prosecutions and plea deals of lesser players turning state evidence.

      Liked by 1 person

    • farrier105 says:

      The predicate investigation potentially involves the actors in the cover-up of Hillary Clinton’s email violations of various statutes involving Senstitive Compartmented Information retention and storage without prior authorization (18 USC 1924) and applicable sections of the Espionage Act. The cover-up extends to the present day as I don’t hear James Comey or the other FBI actors, nor do have I heard Hillary Clinton coming clean about the entire conspiracy. The on-going nature of a conspiracy to conceal means the statute of limitations is not in effect. It extends to this very day as the cover-up conspiracy is still operational. At the very least, it will only be three years since the cover-up of the Weiner Lap-Top affair.

      Liked by 2 people

  13. Republicanvet91 says:

    “She was recalled by the State Department in May and remains a State Department employee in Washington D.C. (read more)”

    Clearly someone wanted to know some time ago (before her recall in May) what POTUS allies were doing in Ukraine. Why?
    Clearly someone ordered her to carry this out. Who?

    Liked by 2 people

  14. meadowlarkspring says:

    “After several days, Yovanovitch’s staff was informed that the request was illegal and the monitoring either ceased or was concealed via the State Department Global Engagement Center, which has looser restrictions on collecting information.”

    Maybe she had to be informed it was illegal because President Obama wasn’t the President anymore. Ultimately on January 6, 2017 with the intelligence chiefs briefing of President elect Trump, the then President gave them the okay to manipulate for national security the incoming President. So why can’t they do that to us? The FISA IG report is probably a struggle because all it’s going to say is that President Obama okayed it all.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. Jim Raclawski says:

    I subscribe to the age old adage….. “as the twig is bent, so grows the tree…. ”
    the tree were presented with…. our unaccountable – unelected – permanent bureaucratic executive state…. is bent beyond any possibility of correcting with “pruning “… and our “care takers” are utterly disinclined to hack it back and regain control.
    At what level of dysfunctional existence are we to be confronted with before we .— “… cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war…..”

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Admin User says:

    This is obviously part of the FISA inquiry. When it comes out, it is going to lead all the way back to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

    Like

    • farrier105 says:

      Indirectly it is part of the FISA inquiry. Horowitz is involved in the FBI’s targeting of Carter Page, et. al. Durham has apparently bumped into Democratic Party hegemony over Ukraine and how that affected the use of the NSA database, or the attempted use of that database, by the “Amassador” Yovanovitch (really the DNC’s Governor General of the DNC’s Ukraine colony).

      Liked by 2 people

      • Linda K. says:

        I sure hope Durham questions this Ambassador Yovanobitch. She is the Lois Lerner of the Ukraine, spying on conservatives. These people are truly insufferably arrogant.

        Liked by 1 person

        • farrier105 says:

          They are arrogant because so many of them have gotten away with these behaviors, plus Yovanovitch has some kind of idea how extensive the CIA/DNC network is inside the Ukraine government and society.

          Like

    • gumbeau09 says:

      If that is the case, it will never come out.

      Like

  17. gildie says:

    So, Ambassadors. Where are they in the DC power pecking order?
    Are Senators above them? How about House Representatives?
    How about the Assistant Deputy Director of the Office of Bovine Emissions.
    Is there ANYONE in Washington that DOESN’T have access to that damn NSA database?
    What a free-for-all!
    Talk about a out-of-control clown car, sheesh!

    Liked by 6 people

  18. Darren says:

    I think something is being done about this. Trump said “she has her own problems”. Dan Bongino lost it about the list. Sounded like the government had contacted him. Though he didn’t state this clearly as I recall.

    I keep thinking to myself how many people have FISAs on them right now and what would it sweep up….

    Liked by 2 people

    • Darren says:

      We know a lot of them conspired with foriegn countries. I think many of us suspect these same people are working with the Dems… 2 hop rule and all. Maybe this explains thier utter panic.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Darren says:

        Remember FISA allow the good guys to go back in time and sweep up everything. The whole shit show has likely been exposed. Maybe this is why Trump looks so calm but righteously angry.

        Liked by 5 people

    • WSB says:

      Let them take us all in!

      Like

    • Bulldog84 says:

      Did Bongino say the government had contacted him? I’m not surprised. I had a hunch when Barr met with Murdoch that it was about Murdoch’s employees being crime victims. Isn’t Bongino a Fox consultant? Having a higher-up in DOJ inform the victim makes sense when the victims are connected with a major news organization.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Linda K. says:

        Maybe Murdoch is a victim, as well.

        Like

      • jd says:

        Good point. Maybe also about one of Murdoch’s employees being a criminal. Smith bailed without much explanation.

        Like

        • namberak says:

          I’ve nothing whatever to back it up, but when Shemp left so abruptly, then heard Barr had met privately with Rupert the day before, for some reason my gut reaction was Shemp was somehow wrapped up in that phony impeachment poll of Fox’s and pushing “fake news” got him pushed out the door. No rational reason why, just a gut feel.

          Like

  19. steph_gray says:

    Just trying to catch up on this after long weekend away. Yikes.

    I can only say that Howie Carr will be mortified NOT to have been on the list.

    (And I agree that Sundance is on some deeper one. Super secret probation…)

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Judith says:

    Sadly, I believe you’re correct. Potential employers already screen social media content and even request passwords. Customs Agents can examine your cellphone content before they allow entry.

    Iphone updates require user consent for government access. The websites we visit track our activities with cookies. We are tracked by facial recognition on mass transit, at airports and at arena venues.

    Our smartphones and appliances actively listen to our conversations, and some are programmed to recognize certain voices. Our credit cards are chipped, and so are our license plates. We are tracked and traced just about everywhere we go in the world.

    And satellites as well as Law Enforcement cameras can observe minute details from miles away. Space satellites are said to scan the rooms inside a house.

    Most information currently entrusted to private entities has already been hacked, like healthcare providers and email providers, credit cards and government agencies etc..

    Pretty soon people will be chipped and tracable from the moment of birth. There will be no more currency. The next time a Globalist becomes president, the New World Order will be at hand. And half the country will never think twice about it.

    Liked by 4 people

  21. JaneyS says:

    Sundance, what can I as an average citizen do? I have contributed to Judicial Watch, Alliance Defending freedom, and called my representatives with these falsehoods.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. Dusty Smith says:

    Can both answers (how and why) be the same? If so I pick “Brennan”.

    Liked by 3 people

    • JRD says:

      Soros, a Domestic and International terrorist, is running the shadow government. ALL roads lead to Soros including this totalitarian witch with a b.

      In a perfect world the radical Left would be forced to live by their own set of rules and surveillance would be conducted on Soros, on Atlantic Council members, management of Media Matters and all its tentacles, the Democracy Alliance, DOJ, FBI, State, and CIA employees working in concert with him. Also on media he owns, heads of MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Rachel MadCow, Joe Scarborough, Wacko Mica, Chris Wallace, Nicole Wallace, Sam Stein, etc.

      But since the rats are embed and owned by Soros they would be screaming bloody murder immediately.

      Like Trump says: the system is rigged. It is a vast radical left wing conspiracy and when it is exposed they use the CIA excuse and accuse us of being conspiracy theorists.

      May these totalitarians all rot in hell. It is laughable that these comrades say that Russia interfered in the election when they all act like Cold War Soviet Union wack jobs. They are all mentally deranged.

      Liked by 1 person

  23. WSB says:

    Was Google possibly a part of this scheme? I am only offering an opinion, however, there have been a LOT of visits and coordination between the ABC techies and the State Department.

    Like

  24. Merkin Muffley says:

    You’d think that Fox News would be upset that two of its prime time celebrities are targeted for surveillance. You’d think.

    Like

  25. Bulldog84 says:

    So, Yovanovitch was spying on Fox employees. I called it; I said when Barr met with Murdoch that we would learn there was spying on Murdoch’s people. I am not one to toot my own horn, but I just knew it. When you are enough of a cynic, your cynicism is often confirmed, particularly in the times in which we live these days.

    Liked by 2 people

  26. oodeluph says:

    The questions Sundance poses are, indeed, extremely significant and it smacks, at best, irresponsibility or deliberate subterfuge at worst. But, for my money, the real 800 lb. gorilla in the room is, for WHOM is this information being compiled? These aren’t just random bad actors subverting the law, this is a coordinated effort, involving not just one department of the government but different branches. So, who, exactly, is orchestrating this inquisition?

    Liked by 1 person

  27. So the government has all the power, a citizen who is considered threatening to the State’s interest has none, no recourse just shut the hell up and know your peon place.
    What about journalist? I thought they would have some legal recourse?
    Total third world banana republic bullshit going on here… and nobody to stop it… meanwhile Obama’s queen spy still has a position at the state Department funded by the very people she is trying to screw!

    Liked by 1 person

  28. tav144 says:

    She used fellow State Department U.N. Ambassador Susan Power’s log in credentials to access the NSA database.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Bryan Alexander says:

    If, ****** IF *******, AG Barr met with Murdoch to inform him that FOX News employees had been targeted by the State Department, that means the Attorney General of the United States is aware of Illegal Requests to conduct spying on US Citizens and is actively engaged in the investigation.

    Personally, I think AG Barr is “pulling the thread” and that thread is about 1000 miles long. They are still finding who the bad actors are and are slowly outing them.

    Sadly, I don’t think they are thinking about prosecutions. Right now, they are trying to find all the active participants in the ongoing coup.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. tav144 says:

    Seems foolish of her to agree to testify before Congress when she is subject to be charged criminally.

    Liked by 1 person

  31. Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

    The swamp creatures crawl out of the muck to defend each other now and then and the media swoons over them. This just released… leaked to FoxNews… “Fiona Hill, a former top National Security Council expert on Russia, praised the ousted U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, during testimony on Monday before the House Intelligence Committee.” Fully expect the democRATS to leak out some of Hill’s opinions (secret testimony) critical of the president which will be used in the continuing impeachment charade.

    ~~~~~~~ TRUMP 2020 ~~~~~~~

    Liked by 2 people

  32. Trialdog says:

    Did Obama administration appointees and employees ever do their jobs?
    Seems all they ever did was plot and scheme against Trump or anyone who could disrupt their malfeasance, interfere with their corruption, or God forbid, seek to advance the country’s interests rather than The Party’s interests.
    And they all retire with golden pensions while we will toil into our 70s to pay the taxes to fund those pensions.

    Like

  33. stringplayer55 says:

    If Collyer and/or Boasberg were to address the question of WHY the NSA database was used unlawfully, then they might also have to address the issue “Were FISA court judges complicit in allowing unlawful searches?”

    You might think that with two devastating reports from FISC judges on abuse of the NSA database in just two years that Chief Justice John Roberts, in his role of oversight of the FISA Court, might issue a statement in which he directs a deeper investigation into these abuses, whether they reflect partisan efforts to derail certain parties/candidates, and whether t
    FISC judges were participating in those efforts.

    Oh, wait. Scratch that regarding Roberts making a statement in which he directs a thorough investigation of these issues. It is Robert’s who pushed the ACA. It is Robert’s who said that a citizenship question on the census was Constitutional but would not be allowed.

    Roberts is prime evidence of the corruption in D.C. He is a snake, an anti-Constitutionalist of the first order who hates the notion of “Government of the people, by the people, and for the people” who was appointed by Obama’s friend, George W.

    We absolutely need another four years for President Trump and the opportunity for Trump to appoint another Supreme Court justice in order to begin to see real, lasting changes in our federal government which restore their operations to be consistent with the Constitution.

    Liked by 1 person

    • AloftWalt says:

      The swamp is broad and deep. It will take more than two Trump terms to drain it. We need to begin focusing on a suitable PDJT successor to continue the draining of the swamp.

      Liked by 1 person

  34. swamph8er says:

    There were thousands of acts that involve ignoring policy and breaking the law. The “why” immediately turns those many infractions into treasonous acts…the summation of which is the coup!
    Also…the IG report is complete (not released) and nobody has been arrested. Don’t get your hopes up.

    Like

  35. Tom Hansen says:

    There has been this meme out there that those officials (Comey, RR, Yate, Buentes,etc.) who signed off on the 4 FISA warrants used the unverified Steele dossier as its predicate for surveillance on Carter Page and others, and claiming it was verified, therefore, purporting a fraud on the court.

    I disagree. I believe the judges were in on it. So, there was no fraud on the court, but there was fraud committed on those that were surveilled, and there was more importantly a conspiracy of both the DOJ/FBI and the FISA Court in attempting a coup on the President of the United States.

    I believe this answers why the two judges reporting the annual reviews only reported the number of violations, but never reported any accountability for those violations, or why the violations even occurred. You would think the court would have put in measures to prevent future violations after the first report. No mention of that is there?

    Like

  36. RICK STEELE says:

    Is anyone peeking under the FISA judges robes? They seem oddly compliant, if not complicit. And remarkably quiet, seeing as how they were so badly mislead. Or…were they?

    Like

  37. with extra foam says:

    Sounds like the judge in these courts is just there to rubber-stamp.

    Like

  38. Zippy says:

    “Judicial Watch is hot on the trail of a State Department effort to monitor domestic political opposition.”

    UNLIKE (insert name of any three letter fedgov agency). That should inspire confidence in “the system,” no? JW’s annual budget using donated money? $34 million.

    Like

  39. Lburg says:

    Interesting document in the DoS FOIA reading room when using search terms “Global Engagement Center” (from the JW article above). There are only 8 results for those terms. However, one of the ‘hits’ was a proclamation of sorts where obama gave (well ok, delegated) Presidential authority to the Secretary of State who was then given the authority to appoint a senior official to “develop guidance for the Global Engagement Center relating to relevant privacy and civil liberties laws, and to ensure compliance with such guidance.” This little missive is dated….. January 17th, 2017, three days before PDJT was inaugurated.

    (Document 5 of 8)
    https://foia.state.gov/search/results.aspx?searchText=%22Global+Engagement+Center%22&beginDate=&endDate=&publishedBeginDate=&publishedEndDate=&caseNumber=

    The task of the Global Engagement Center is to counter ‘disinformation’, so I automatically assume it is the source of disinformation especially since it was hatched in 2016 via legislation sponsored by Ted Lieu. From Wikipedia comes this: “On 23 December 2016, President Obama signed the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act into law.[11] Supporters of the resolution inside the Defense Department have publicly expressed their desire to weaken the interpretation of domestic propaganda protections, laws which prevent the United States Department of State from gathering information necessary to develop targeted propaganda messaging and prevent them from explicitly attempting to influence opinions.[7]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countering_Foreign_Propaganda_and_Disinformation_Act

    So who was the first SoS after this acquiescence of Presidential authority was signed? Rex Tillerson. What ‘senior official’ did he appoint to this rather important position? Lea Gabrielle. According to her bio on the Global Engagement Center website she is former CIA: “While serving in the U.S. Intelligence Community, Ms. Gabrielle was a CIA-trained Human Intelligence Operations Officer, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). She directed and conducted global clandestine strategic intelligence collection operations. Ms. Gabrielle also deployed in tactical anti-terrorist operations in hostile environments with Naval Special Warfare (SEALs), conducting independent operations in support of Tier One Forces. Ms. Gabrielle later served as Director of a U.S. Navy sensitive intelligence program.” However, she is also known as a Fox ‘reporter’ who worked with none other than Shep Smith.
    https://www.state.gov/biographies/lea-gabrielle/

    I have trust issues with this whole set up.

    Liked by 1 person

  40. AloftWalt says:

    And still no arrests and no charges. Ho hum.

    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 )

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