FBI Concealed Evidence That "Directly Refutes" Premise Of Trump-Russia Probe: GOP Lawmaker

After hinting for months that the FBI was not forthcoming with federal surveillance court judges when they made their case to spy on the Trump campaign, Texas Rep. John Ratcliffe (R) said on Sunday that the agency is holding evidence which "directly refutes" its premise for launching the probe, reports the Daily Caller's Chuck Ross.

Texas Rep. John Ratcliffe provided Sunday the clearest picture to date of what the FBI allegedly withheld from the surveillance court.

Ratcliffe suggested that the FBI failed to include evidence regarding former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, in an interview with Fox News.

Ratcliffe noted that the FBI opened its investigation on July 31, 2016, after receiving information from the Australian government about a conversation that Papadopoulos had on May 10, 2016, with Alexander Downer, the top Australian diplomat to the U.K. -Daily Caller

While Australia's Alexander Downer claimed that Papadopoulos revealed Russia had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton, Ratcliffe - who sits on the House Judiciary Committee - suggested on Sunday that the FBI and DOJ possess information which directly contradicts that account.

"Hypothetically, if the Department of Justice and the FBI have another piece of evidence that directly refutes that, that directly contradicts that, what you would expect is for the Department of Justice to present both sides of the coin to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to evaluate the weight and sufficiency of that evidence," Ratcliffe said, adding: "Instead, what happened here was Department of Justice and FBI officials in the Obama administration in October of 2016 only presented to the court the evidence that made the government’s case to get a warrant to spy on a Trump campaign associate."

The FBI referred to Papadopoulos in a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application - however what has been released to the public is so heavily redacted that it's unclear why he is mentioned.

As The Hill's John Solomon notes, based on Congressional testimony by former FBI General Counsel James Baker - the DOJ / FBI redactions aren't hiding national security issues - only embarrassment.

Other GOP lawmakers have suggested that evidence exists which would exonerate Papadopoulos - who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Maltese professor (and self-professed member of the Clinton Foundation), Joseph Mifsud.

Ratcliffe suggested that declassifying DOJ / FBI documents related to the matter "would corroborate" his claims about Papadopoulos.

Republicans have pressed President Trump to declassify the documents, which include 21 pages from a June 2016 FISA application against Page. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes has said that the FBI failed to provide “exculpatory evidence” in the FISA applications. He has also said that Americans will be “shocked” by the information behind the FISA redactions. -Daily Caller

President Trump issued an order to declassify the documents on September 17, but then walked it back - announcing that the DOJ would be allowed to review the documents first after two foreign allies asked him to keep them classified.

"My opinion is that declassifying them would not expose any national security information, would not expose any sources and methods," said Ratcliffe. "It would expose certain folks at the Obama Justice Department and FBI and their actions taken to conceal material faces from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court."

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-15/fbi-concealed-evidence-directly-refutes-premise-trump-russia-probe-gop-lawmaker

7 mins MUST watch

Cabal players in their own words

Obama

Clinton

Comey

NoNam

Netanyahu

Irrefutable proof!

Saudis grant Turkish authorities access to consulate to investigate Khashoggi disappearance

Saudi officials have granted Turkish authorities permission to inspect its consulate in Istanbul Monday, nearly two weeks after the disappearance of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, CNN reported. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has threatened that if the U.S. imposes sanctions on it for Khashoggi’s death, it could retaliate by dramatically increasing the price of oil.

What happened to Jamal Khashoggi?

On Oct. 2, Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, in order to finalize his divorce. His fiancée was waiting outside. While he undoubtedly planned on exiting the building alive and free, Khashoggi was aware that the Saudi regime viewed him as persona non grata. He had frequently criticized the Saudi government and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in his writings, including in his Washington Post column.

What happened next is still unclear. Khashoggi never walked back out of the consulate building. Turkish authorities have claimed that they have evidence he was killed and that his body was later removed from the embassy. U.S. officials reportedly said that they have reason to believe that the Saudis planned to kidnap him and take him back to Saudi Arabia. The crown prince has been known to ruthlessly punish those who oppose him or the state.

What inspection?

Saudi Arabia and Turkey will jointly conduct an “inspection” of the Saudi consulate. This inspection will take place 13 days after Khashoggi’s Oct 2. disappearance, so it is unlikely that it will turn up any new information. This inspection will be point of a joint investigation agreed to by the leaders of both Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia has threatened retribution if the U.S. imposes sanctions

On Sunday, Saudi Arabia threatened that if the U.S. imposed any retaliatory measures on it as retribution for Khashoggi’s apparent death, it would respond with “stronger ones.” The head of the Saudi government-owned Arabiya news network, Turki Al Dakhil, wrote in an opinion piece: “If President Trump was angered by $80 oil, nobody should rule out the price jumping to $100 and $200 a barrel or maybe double that figure.”

The Saudi embassy in Washington, D.C., later denied that this reflected the position of the government, Bloomberg reported.

Members of Congress have threatened to respond anyway

While President Donald Trump has not indicated if or how the U.S. will punish Saudi Arabia for its potential involvement in Khashoggi’s death and has also said that he will not cancel a $110 billion arms deal between the two countries, members of the U.S. Senate have taken a firmer stance.

Sen. Marco Rubio has said that he believes that “the Trump administration will do something,” but added that “if he doesn’t, Congress will, that, I can tell you, with 100% certainty.”

On Oct. 10, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), and all but one of the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee sent a letter to Trump requesting that the U.S. slap sanctions on any “foreign person responsible for such a violation related to Mr. Khashoggi.”

The Saudi royal family continues to deny any involvement

President Trump tweeted Monday that he had sent Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to meet with Saudi Arabia’s King Salman and that the king had denied “any knowledge of whatever may have happened ‘to our Saudi Arabian citizen.’” During a “60 Minutes” interview Sunday, Trump said that if the Saudis had done “something really terrible and disgusting,” then “there will be severe punishment.” During the same interview he defended the arms deal, saying that he “did not want to hurt jobs” by canceling it.

However, Trump on Monday also cited a theory posed by King Salman during a phone call between the two leaders on Monday, which speculated that Khashoggi may have been murdered by “rogue killers.”

“It sounded to me like maybe these could have been rogue killers, who knows. We are going to try to get to the bottom of it very soon,” Trump said, adding that Salman had given him a “flat denial.” The rogue killers theory could potentially give the Saudi royal family plausible deniability, if conclusive evidence emerges to implicate them in his murder.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/10/15/saudis-grant-turkish-authorities-access-to-consulate-to-investigate-khashoggi-disappearance

GA - Former WVU Running Back Star Arrested for Incest, Sodomy

Former West Virginia star running back Justin Crawford has been arrested in Georgia on some shocking and deplorable charges - incest, sodomy and enticing a child for indecent purpose - all considered felonies.

Details on the allegations are not yet clear at this point. The only certain information so far is that Crawford was taken into custody on Saturday and booked.

This is his mugshot as published by TMZ.

http://www.thegoldwater.com/news/39444-GA-Former-WVU-Running-Back-Star-Arrested-for-Incest-Sodomy

Clintons' Law Firm Steps in to Defend Google/You Tube in Class Action Antitrust Suit Over Discrimination Against Conservatives

(Washington, D.C., October 15, 2018). Today Larry Klayman, the founder of both Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch and now the general counsel of Freedom Watch, as well as a former federal prosecutor of the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice who was on the trial team that broke up the AT&T monopoly, announced that the law firm of Bill and Hillary Clinton has entered its appearance in this case (Freedom Watch, Inc. v. Google/YouTube et. al (Civil Action No. 18-cv-2030), which was recently filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging an illegal agreement in restraint of trade between the social media companies to discriminate against conservatives.

The lawsuit further alleges the purpose of this violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act is to promote a leftist agenda resulting in not just moving the nation far left by helping primarily Democrats to win or solidify control of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, which will also result in feathering the nest with political favors of the leftist CEOs who run the social media companies, such as Google/YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Apple and Instagram, all defendants in Freedom Watch's complaint. Go to www.freedomwatchusa.org to view the class action complaint.

The social media defendants have been big supporters of the Clintons and their agendas. Indeed, a recent video of Google/YouTube executives and officials taken just after the election of President Donald J. Trump revealed them literally crying over the defeat of Hillary Clinton.

Klayman thus had this to say:

"It thus comes as no surprise that Google/YouTube would hire the same law firm that has not only represented the Clintons for decades, but also allegedly participated in the destruction of Hillary's emails on her unsecure private email server, which resulted in alleged obstruction of justice over her illegal actions as Secretary of State at the State Department.

"Let the games begin!"

https://www.freedomwatchusa.org/clintons-law-firm-steps-in-to-defend-googleyou-tube-in-cla