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.


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. Thank you for all you do Sundance.

  2. surakvulcan says:

    Now isn’t that interesting. The list of targets includes many of President Trump’s biggest supporters in opinion journalism, mostly at Fox News and Fox Business.
    There was a recent report that Bret Baier, Martha MacCallum, and Chris Wallace sneered at President Trump in a conference call with advertisers. Does that include selling their colleagues into illegal political surveillance? Is that a news story that the new Paul Ryan Fox News can cover?

  3. Frankly, “Washington, DC has overlooked – and, richly profited from – criminality for so very, very long that it has grown completely insensitive to it.” Probably, “rule #1” was: “keep your nose down, do your job, work toward your pensioon-date, and above all, never ask why.”
    And, “until Donald Trump 2016,” that basically worked.

    • Ray Runge says:

      So, Let us ask Why? Because the 100% contrivance of a narrative that supports impeachment continues to distract the world and no consequence to the perpetrators has been devised.
      Why? Because the scenario continues to be effective.

      • Judith says:

        I’m not paying attention to impeachment porn because it is a distraction. And because I never subject myself to propaganda TV. I am focused on draining the swamp, first and foremost. And I’m noting all of the *real,” not fake, crimes that are taking place, including the ONGOING, TREASONOUS COUP. If PDJT can’t do this alone, then we the people must step up. By the book.

    • James Carpenter says:

      It’s done working… soon.
      Not to jump the shark, but I nominate Marie Yovanovitch for joining at the ankle with Lois Lerner using iron shackles. This would facilitate their personal and joint exploration of an ocean trench.

  4. Retired USMC says:

    My, my, my…how the left loves to spy….They used to call it treason.

  5. The Boss says:

    Interesting that Yavanovich selected “Soros” among other names. She fears him for some reason. Perhaps she’ll have to answer that question in a public setting, or assert her Fifth Amendment rights.

    • Steve in MT says:

      Checking to make sure that her paymaster is happy?

    • albertus magnus says:

      I think some of the leftist names are just there to provide a false sense of spying on both sides…sort of like when DEMS start quoting Romney or Bushies used to quote Leiberman.

    • thedoc00 says:

      No. it is not that she fears him but wanted to see who was reporting about him. It was a reverse search looking for sources reporting on him.

    • DeWalt says:

      Simple. She was making sure she wasn’t being a patsy and getting double crossed. She knew the creatures she was dealing with.

    • lakelurelife says:

      In a den of vipers, do the vipers trust each other?

    • PS says:

      Let’s face it, Soros is not exactly a common conversation topic for your average Republican, doubly so on international calls. If someone says Soros in a call, the NSA should sweep it up and a request like this would flag it out. And we know that the unmasking process works so well, it’s trivial for them to flag the name of the person inquiring about Soros. Now you’ve connected a name to a call, and you have advance warning someone is sniffing around the dirty laundry.

    • barnabusduke says:

      Probably for misdirection only. (CYA)

    • howardrichman says:

      She doesn’t fear Soros; he was part of their conspiracy! They knew that Giuliani was on their trail. The four search terms (Biden, Giuliani, Soros and Yovanovitch) were designed to give them advanced warning if any of the Trump supporters (i.e., Jack Pasobiec, Donald Trump Jr., Laura Ingraham, etc.) were also getting close.

      • felipe says:

        Ah yes, trip wires.

        • TheLastDemocrat says:

          Like I have said. There were likely people monitoring Trump, ready to report to Central Command if they heard “Ukraine” and “Biden” in the same sentence.

        • howardrichman says:

          Maybe Sundance is wrong here in suggesting that these searches may have been through the NSC databases. If their function was simply to act as trip wires, these may have simply been searches of all of the available public media. The conspirators needed to know *when* they had to initiate their planned Ukraine impeachment fraud, which they initiated a couple weeks ago in order to prevent Barr from investigating their earlier illegal actions in Ukraine.

    • Bogeyfree says:

      Easy – You spy to get dirt on your opponent AND you spy to learn if you opponent has any dirt on your team?

    • Sherri Young says:

      Maybe Soros was the one who originated the list of look-ups.

  6. sDee says:

    Thank you Sundance – Exactly. That is the stuff that makes my head hurt!

  7. Cheese says:

    That is exactly the way I think of the “whistle blower”. He is actually a spy, spying on the President. Why is that ok?

  8. Gaius Gracchus says:

    This woman did not choose to do this out of the blue. This is emblematic of the corruption of the Deep State.
    At this point, life in prison with hard labor is to weak a punishment. Either this problem is addressed with extreme prejudice or we do not have a country.

  9. Grassleysgirl/Breitbartista says:

    NSA= Nobody Safe Anymore!
    or. Normal Spying in America!????

  10. Johnny says:

    How about pulling the damn plug on the State Department access to the NSA Data bases.

  11. Steve in MT says:

    DOJ, FBI, IRS, and now Department of State. Are there any governmental agencies that aren’t illegally spying on American citizens?

  12. Mike in a Truck says:

    How ? By using the same intelligence assets that the Left, the Hippies,the pro Hanoi crowd railed against. Oh wait- they grew up and became those
    very people they hated.Now Hanoi Jane is sticking her traitorous face back in the news.She was never prosecuted for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Well at least we got AAFE’s to remove her stupid workout video.

  13. Jimmy says:

    I have a question for if we survive the coup. Could the corruption be fixed by reforms? Gradual firings and hirings? Purges? Can these people be fired? Can whole agencies be disbanded and rebuilt? Of course, once you have big and largely unlimited government, it become less and less possible to rid it of corruption. It has enormous power, therefore, it becomes corrupt.
    If the government survives the coup, it would seem to me that there will need to be purges. As a practical matter, could there be?

    • IGiveUp says:

      In theory, it could be done. Its been done before. However, it requires an unconditional surrender and a strong belief by the victors in their own cultural heritage. For those reasons, we probably can’t do it.

    • Pew-Anon says:

      Sure. But it would take the will of Congress to defund/dissolve whole agencies. And that would take We the People electing a Congress with such a will. Are we up to that? America, more than any other nation, gets the government it deserves.

      • gsonFIT says:

        How about 5 years and out for Apparatchik.

        • TarsTarkas says:

          You have to be careful who’s the guy or girl deciding who to slide into place to replace the time expired veteran. That’s how Mueller corrupted the FBI, forcing field agents to rotate to headquarters or get out.

    • cantcforest says:

      “Could the corruption be fixed by reforms? Gradual firings and hirings?”
      IMO, no.
      It will take 4AM raids, trials, and hangings to stop this.
      Institutional processes are the only known example of perpetual motion.

      • hoghead says:

        Cantc, uh, I think it’s “Institutional processes are the only known example of perpetual slow motion.”

    • Doppler says:

      Great question, Jimmy If we survive as a country, it would still be very difficult to reform, in part because we all rely on technology and the technology spies on us 24/7 with/without consent. In part because everyone with a will to reform, also has a will to “just walk away.” Corrupt institutions are more likely to be abandoned and fail, than to rejuvenate as healthy institutions. What would it take? A new internet designed to block and disable the constant spying on us that is worth so many billions. You can’t disable the government’s spying capabilities while leaving the means of spying available to foreign governments, hackers, and everyone who wants to sell us anything. There has to be a return to privacy, but would people pay for secure technology that is no longer free? One idea that occurred to me is to require tech companies that spy on us to share their revenue derived from use of our data with those of us spied upon, and share with us our data that is being sold. That way people would see what data is being stolen, and how much people are paying for it. But I don’t know if a secure internet could make it as a business model. Who would pay for it, when we’re all conditioned to expect it to be free?

    • Ray Runge says:

      Jimmy, the cure is greatly facilitated by perp walks.
      The honorable Chris Wray has already deployed educational seminars for the FBI to diminish leaks. Little change in the agency iis noted.

    • gildie says:

      There’s only ever been one sure-fire way for the little people to wrestle control back from their corrupt governments. You know what it is & so do I.

      • Child of Morning says:

        and This needs to become part of public discussion. The idea that Justice and change does not only come from government.

  14. TwoLaine says:

    So I was right. Barr met with Murdoch privately to tell him who was being spied on at Fox (this time around).

  15. Because these are people that appear to have sources in the government and the State Department wanted to have a little talk with those sources.

  16. Zy says:

    Pretty pathetic effort by everyone but Sundance.

  17. Reserved55 says:

    According to Rudy’s reporting, she wouldn’t grant visas to the Ukrainian officials trying to give the DOJ evidence of the DNC’s 2016 election interference.

  18. Pew-Anon says:

    If I’m reading this correctly, the “HOW” question is only relevant if the surveillance continued after being “concealed”. If it “ceased”, then the “HOW” question is moot. It was illegal…it ceased…end of story. No “HOW” there…except for any applicable criminal charges, but we all know that won’t happen.

    • frances says:

      The How remains very relevant. For an existing system was deployed at her request and clearly can be deployed again and again and again. And is most likely running right now.

      • gsonFIT says:

        This all occurred well after Brown Baby Jesus left office!

      • Pew-Anon says:

        Was it existing, though? Or did she just start something illegal with the help of sympathetic minions and then stopped when caught? Not trying to be contrarian here, just clarifying.

        • Judith says:

          After PDJT took office he and others were spied upon due to a bogus counterintelligence investigation. After that became a moot point, a back door was discovered giving classified access to anonymous individuals. Could the former ambassador to Ukraine have had knowledge of that back door ? She obviously knew the information could not be obtained legally. #Intent.

    • gsonFIT says:

      I think SD is saying why arent there check and balances on surveillance so the Ambassador to Ukraine doesnt monitor Sara Carter or Dan Bongino.
      Taking it one step further “why does Yavonovich even give a crap who Dan Bongino is? How does she even know he exist.
      Unless he poses a threat!

      • Pew-Anon says:

        Granted, But what I’m asking is if it’s not just a straightforward situation where she openly defied existing checks and balances and then stopped when she was caught? If this is not the case, then I agree the “HOW” question is very relevant. But only if it is not the case.

        • gsonFIT says:

          The checks and balances seemingly forced the surveillance to stop rather quickly. I dont recall where the Ambassador had been previously but she was 25 plus year foreign service veteran. She had worked for both parties. So your question might be “Who” gave her the direction to do this. Her length of service suggest Uniparty.
          This might not be dem or Republican. The shadow government could be on autopilot. SD referred to it as institutional corruption once

      • PBR says:

        the nest of vipers gets bigger and bigger.

    • keeler says:

      The “how” question remains relevant because
      1) If, as implied, the FISA/NSA database is or plays a major role in the “how” we have already seen that process was not only abused, but continued to be abused *after* it deemed illegal. The fact that State may have had access to that intelligence implies that other agencies did as well, and misused them as well. It also begs the question as to whether State should have even had access to the database in the first place, for any reason.
      2a) If it is not related to FISA/NSA, then there is *at least* one other intelligence system government officials attempted, at the very least, to use to illegally spy on American citizens. The existence of such intelligence systems should be known and documented, especially since they have a tendency to be misused.
      2b) Given what is known regarding continued FISA abuse and its mutation into the Mueller Investigation I am not willing to accept the claim the attempt stopped, or that a different approach was not taken, once State’s pipeline was shut down. For all we know, it could have shifted over to some other agency’s intelligence program.
      Perhaps you are correct that the attempt ceased immediately, but there is no way to determine if this was the case unless the “how” question is answered.

      • Pew-Anon says:

        The “*after* it deemed illegal” part would seem to suggest that all the continued abuse identified in the FISA judge memos was the result of this one Ambassador’s surveillance efforts. That seems unlikely to me, but certainly possible. It is also possible there is rampant abuse far outside the DoS, the volume of which would barely be dented by the ceasing of the Ambassador’s schemes, in which case inquiring specifically into the Ambassador’s methods would likely be fruitless.

      • WhiteBoard says:

        do you think the State Department has access to other country’s databases (originally part of the 5 eyes) meaning NSA cant shut them down because its shared … they can only see the queries and report it ?
        and i dont mean 5 eyes really, of couse Obama shared access with other countries… I’m thinking north of Crimea is a good guess. then anyone could use the Ukrainian Embassy to search for them and feed through a subcontractor – from there..
        Was Wiretapped and Crowdstrike the clue the President gave us in his tweets…

    • Bogeyfree says:

      Uh have you read Judge Boasberg Report?
      High likelihood it continued IMO.

      • Pew-Anon says:

        Only if we suppose that all the abuse identified in that report was the sole result of this one Ambassador’s efforts. That seems unlikely.

  19. A2 says:

    Via Samantha Powers, who admitted her access to the data base was used by so-called unknown persons?

    • A2 says:

      I should clarify, that might explain ‘how’ it was done in the past. Obviously her request was turned down. It does prove bias or targeting and thus justifies her removal.

      • WhiteBoard says:

        hmm , are you implying they are maybe allowing querying – BUT NO results return. so its essentially documenting who is accessing it without just cause?
        hence denied? did Yano get query results or not?

        • A2 says:

          I think according to above report, she made the requests that were turned down and raised red flags. I was just speculating that she may have thought she could pull it off considering past practices. An investigation into the alleged charge that she was blocking UKraine officials asking to contact the DOJ should be fairly easy to document.
          Just speculation, as it all must be. Until the truth comes out.

  20. gsonFIT says:

    How exactly does the U.S. State Department monitor people or persons they define as adverse to their interests?
    This is why you are you Sundance and they are they

  21. Zachary Navarre says:

    Did the Democrats impeachment distraction bubble already burst?
    Hardly a mention of impeachment at all on the landing pages of CNN, MSNBC, NBC, etc….

  22. All Too Much says:

    Who, what, when, where, and why.
    My hope, at some point the pressure will so great that one ‘who’ will cave, name names, and bring pressure on those higher up the food change. The top floor of the food chain is where why will be found,

  23. Leon0112 says:

    As Sidney Powell would say about Brady evidence, if you don’t know what evidence is out there, it is hard to know what questions to ask.

  24. LandonK says:

    Is there overlap when she was illegally monitoring Rudy while Trump’s attorney? If so, that would cause Rudy to explode for sure.

  25. IGiveUp says:

    Didn’t read all the comments but personally, I’d hang her after trial. People who don’t defend their own laws and culture don’t deserve to win. I want the stronger side to win, whichever that is.

  26. Arnoldf says:

    It makes sense that with all the corruption by the Dems in Ukraine they would by necessity have an ambassador who was equally dirty.

  27. Dances with Wolverines says:

    The simple questions of “How” and “Why” not being asked by the proper authorities and no accountability for anyone involved is why so many frustrated Patriots are calling for the whole system to be burned to the ground with everyone in it.

  28. amjean says:

    I hope a lawsuit of some sort is applicable.

  29. CopperTop says:

    Hannity spoke about it with Solomon (S Carter too) last week on his show.
    The tone of that show was not tick tock. It was resignation for a long wait on getting to talk about something which they have been personally spoken to by their own journalistic “entity” law teams.
    If anyone has a moment it is the one where Solomon is talking about how he knows he was already targeted in 2005 like this once before and it is the same thing again. The discussion starts just after he reminds viewers of this.

  30. JoeMeek says:

    W. Lewis Amselem, long time US Foreign Service Officer; now retired; served all over the world and under all sorts of conditions. Convinced the State Department needs to be drastically slashed and reformed so that it will no longer pose a threat to the national interests of the United States.

  31. 1hear2learn says:

    Makes me wonder, with the list being a lot of Fox “reporters” whether that explains Barr / Murdoch meeting…

    • Bogeyfree says:

      Have they finally overplayed their hand via possible blackmail and has someone on the list stood up to them and thus Barr and Murdock meeting?

  32. Scarlet says:

    I hate these traitors with every ounce of my soul.

  33. cantcforest says:

    “Could the corruption be fixed by reforms? Gradual firings and hirings?”
    IMO, no.
    It will take 4AM raids, trials, and hangings to stop this.
    Institutional processes are the only known example of perpetual motion.

  34. montanamel says:

    We have the CIA, the Dept of State, The Executive Branch. parts of The Congress et al, The FBI, and the HQ side of the DOJ – is that all now?… what a bunch of weasels…
    With all the mouth action for those lying MSM types….we ought to list them along with the Govt types… Then we got the DNC side, up at the top with all sorts of friends over at the Foundation.
    With all these players in this deal – you’d think someone could ID a single target and get some traction with some crowbar hotel action started… This “uncovering” of fools and skullduggery is needed, and for that we have SD to thank….but, daylight’s wasting!… Some people just need killing comes to mind… where’s the party?

  35. Bogeyfree says:

    Now for the logical follow up question.
    Will Lindsey have the BALLS to subpoena the ex Ukraine Ambassador before his committee so as a very “concerned Senator” he can ask the HOW and WHY question.
    IMO how he addresses this new revelation should tell everyone, everything they need to know about this man.
    No more playing both sides.
    You are either with him or against him Mr. Graham which is it going to be?

  36. PS says:

    Can I add a third question? If this one failed, how many other requests succeeded?

    • gsonFIT says:

      Over how may years and how many administrations?

    • WhiteBoard says:

      It did not fail.
      the results were returned…
      and later they were notified to stop.
      After obtained, exported and utilized. Im adding the exported part to just throw out the possibility…

  37. Linus in W.PA. says:

    Who were our ambassadors to the UK, Italy, and Australia leading up to the 2016 elections? Were they also commissioning the illegal searches?

    • WhiteBoard says:

      i think you found a commonality between the 2 caught suspects. Ambassador.
      2013- 2017 US ambassador to UK – Matthew Winthrop Barzun
      2013- 2017 US ambassador to Italy – John R. Phillips
      2013- 2017 US ambassador to Australia – Morrell John Berry
      2014- 2017 US ambassador to Canada – Bruce Alan Heyman

  38. Chris K says:

    The big issue to me is you’re not listed Sundance. I like Dan B a lot but you provide better after analysis every day. Why aren’t you on her radar? I only say this partially in jest.

  39. Bogeyfree says:

    So didn’t this happen under Pompeo our Sec of State?
    One would think he would be totally pissed off?
    Is he??
    Interesting question!

  40. So the Dems want blackmail material on target X. They send in the spy to entrap. When the situation is right, the “how” comes in via the spy machine queries and the “why” is simple: so target X can be controlled. This explains the entire DC swamp. Even if you are innocent, unless you know you’re being setup situations can occur where there is no explanation that others will simply believe because you said so. Bingo. All done. Next!
    It is very unfortunate that, with very few exceptions, our govt is corrupt to the core.

  41. emeraldcoaster says:

    “After several days, Yovanovitch’s staff was informed that the request was illegal.” C’mon, we’re to believe her staff was advised of the illegality and Foggy Bottom didn’t follow up on the issue? What did HQ say, “Excuse me, you can’t do that…better put it back”? The level of incompetence and/or complicity is enough to drown an elephant.

    • Bogeyfree says:

      And we are to believe they followed the rule?
      All one has to do is look at the Collyer ruling and orders on FISA searches and then read the Boasberg report showing everything she required was ignored and the spying continued.

  42. IGiveUp says:

    Question: “You are either with him or against him Mr. Graham which is it going to be?”
    Answer: Wrong. I’ll be here after Trump is gone.
    As a practical matter, Graham has done well for himself by not acting.

  43. Bogeyfree says:

    Is it possible to get the entire list of SC registered Republican voters and Independents and Mail each of them this story with the question.
    Shouldn’t Senator Graham immediately call the Ukraine Ambassador before his committee and answer the question how does the state depart spy and why would this be requested?
    And maybe the last sentence should be if Lindsey sits on his hands and doesn’t push for answers, does he really have PT back and is he worthy of your MAGA vote in 2020?

  44. meadowlarkspring says:

    Yes, why…Why is the NSA FISA(702) database used to monitor non-foreign persons…especially when they have other tools like:

  45. jeans2nd says:

    One might surmise the “Why” is already known to the fully politically weaponized Swamp bureaucracy and environs – to protect itself from the wiser and more nimble Deplorables who are knowledgeable to the political machinations of the Swamp.
    The same may be said for the “How” – the Swamp already knows “How,” either approves or doesn’t care, and/or regard it as SOP. The Swamp’s only action/reaction is to protect itself, and go after those the Swamp views as potential danger.
    Betcha a dozen Krispy Kremes this blog owner is on one of those lists, one that is rather more well-hidden. After all, those named above are the “usual suspects,” are they not?

  46. IGiveUp says:

    Can’t wait for tomorrow night’s outrage so we can do this all over again. See you there.

  47. ChampagneReady says:

    This is what I keep talking about—why does Judicial Watch have to file a FOIA request for ANYTHING out of THIS State Department? MIKE POMPEO IS IN CHARGE OF IT. This is TRUMP’S secretary of state!
    Pompeo should just order the subject department employees to search every database of records, phone calls, emails and smoke signals sent or received by Yovanovitch and RUSH them over to Tom Fitton. Why the hell does Tom Fitton have to fight and claw and use judges to force turnover of damaging documents with Pompeo being no differrent than if CLINTON was there ?
    This is outright absurd ! It’s happened time and time again. No cooperation whatsoever.
    Am I the only one who smells a rat here ? Tom Fitton will tell you he does.

  48. IGiveUp says:

    Since Barr couldn’t find this out, let’s close down the DOJ and just let Judicial Watch take over.

  49. PBR says:

    Sharyl Atkisson was interviewed on Huckabee’s show a day or so ago, and she told the story of the O admin spying on her and said don’t think all this spying started with Trump. It has been going on for a very long time. Using govt agencies to destroy your opponents…this is not America!

  50. anonymous says:

    The WHY question isn’t being asked because they already have the answer. The answer is most likely due to an agenda so serious it can’t be disclosed yet. I know you are reluctant to hope for that however Ive notixe more recently a few posts show you may be opening to this potential path. Only time will tell if this theory is true but looknat how much has come out already. Seems like prepping the battlefield and public optics for the next phase.

  51. 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?

    • linda4298 says:

      I saw that Jack Posobiec is considering legal action.

      • Bogeyfree says:

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

        • 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.

        • DSP2 says:

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

          • 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 😉

          • 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.

        • Y’all Know What Time It is says:

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

        • 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.

      • 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.

      • farrier105 says:

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

        • 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.

          • 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.

          • 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.

        • 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

      • farrier105 says:

        State Department on Freedom of Information Act:

      • 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.

      • OlderAndWiser says:

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

    • 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.

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

    • 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.
      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.

    • 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.

  52. 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.

    • 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.

    • 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

      • Jan says:

        Can anyone tell me what the CIA has done to protect Americans??? Can anyone tell me one single POSITIVE thing the CIA has done for America.??? Why do we need the CIA???

        • Nancy Murphy says:

          We need to eliminate the CIA

        • TJ says:

          That’s what the military said after WWII. Very few competent officers from the OSS joined. Truman didn’t want to sift through intel, he wanted a summary, but he would later regret creating the agency.
          They recruited fascists to fight communists and communists to fight fascists. Little did they know, the soviets were aware of this and set them up several times. Hundreds of agents were sent to their deaths due to their incompetence in the early years.
          Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA

  53. 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.

  54. 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.

  55. 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.

    • thedoc00 says:

      They are currently the President’s most effective (if not only) Lawfare weapon. While his key leaders may not have full control over their staffs, due to SEIU Rules, it appears they may be able expedite FOIA requests. If so, this speaks more than volumes about Director Wray.

    • amjean says:

      Please donate to Judicial Watch.

  56. 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?

    • California Joe says:

      …and she did this while Donald Trump is President of the United States! Talk about brazen! Talk about being invincible! Unafraid! I’m speechless.

      • Grassleysgirl/Breitbartista says:

        This woman also blocked visa applications for Ukrainian Officials trying to bring facts here ( which wasn’t solicited by the Pres. rather of their own volition)
        to be investigated .Remember Clinton initiated the Treaty with Ukraine to exchange investigative info.

      • Grassleysgirl/Breitbartista says:

        This woman also blocked visa applications for Ukrainian Officials trying to bring facts here ( which wasn’t solicited by the Pres. rather of their own volition)
        to be investigated .Remember Clinton initiated the Treaty with Ukraine to exchange investigative info.

    • aumechanic says:

      I can’t remember were I saw IG Horowitz is compromised.

  57. 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????

    • 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?

  58. 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.

  59. 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 !

  60. 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!”

  61. 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.

  62. 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).

    • Judith says:

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

      • 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.

    • 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.

    • 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.

  63. 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?

    • WSB says:

      Cannot believe this one still has a job…but lacking crystal glassware and silk draperies anyway.

    • David A says:

      Who? Bingo!

    • Bulldog84 says:

      Yovanovitch will likely be indicted. Whoever took the effort to inform her that the “monitoring” (aka spying) list was illegal likely also took the effort to contact DOJ. Keeping her on the State payroll is one way to keep an eye on her until she’s charged.
      If she’s smart she’ll cop a plea and inform on who ordered her to spy.

  64. 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.

  65. 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…..”

  66. 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.

    • 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).

      • 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.

        • 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.

    • gumbeau09 says:

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

  67. 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!

  68. 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….

    • 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.

      • 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.

    • WSB says:

      Let them take us all in!

    • 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.

      • Linda K. says:

        Maybe Murdoch is a victim, as well.

      • jd says:

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

        • 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.

  69. 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…)

  70. 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.

  71. 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.

  72. Dusty Smith says:

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

    • 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.

  73. 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.

  74. 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.

  75. 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.

  76. 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?

  77. 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!

  78. tav144 says:

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

  79. 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.

  80. tav144 says:

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

  81. 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 ~~~~~~~

  82. 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.

  83. 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.

    • 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.

  84. 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.

  85. 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?

  86. 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?

  87. with extra foam says:

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

  88. 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.

  89. 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)
    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]
    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.
    I have trust issues with this whole set up.

  90. AloftWalt says:

    And still no arrests and no charges. Ho hum.

Comments are closed.