Image 01 Image 03

Trump To Formally Demand DOJ Investigate FBI Spying On His Campaign UPDATE: DOJ Responds, IG To Investigate

Trump To Formally Demand DOJ Investigate FBI Spying On His Campaign UPDATE: DOJ Responds, IG To Investigate

“Whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for Political Purposes”

As we noted yesterday, the leftstream media is busily trying to spin the Obama FBI’s spying on the Trump campaign.

Today, President Trump has announced that his will formally demand that his DOJ investigate “whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for Political Purposes – and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama Administration!”

The Hill reports:

Trump has spent the last few days sounding the alarm on Twitter about claims that an FBI informant was embedded within his campaign. He has alleged, without evidence, that the FBI sought to spy on his campaign for political purposes, which Trump argued would be a scandal “bigger than Watergate.”

The New York Times reported Friday that an FBI informant met with two former Trump campaign advisers, George Papadopoulos and Carter Page, after they’d received information that those two had contacts with Russia.

Trump’s calls for an investigation into the matter come as House Republicans have pushed for access to documents that reveal the identity of the informant who gave investigators information about possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

If the Obama administration weaponized the FBI, NSA, and / or other executive agencies for political purposes, it’s, as President Trump noted yesterday, “a very big deal.”

Sharyl Attkisson is still doing the work journalists are supposed to do and has developed a detailed “Collusion Against Trump” timeline that is a must-read.

Here’s just a small excerpt:

March 4, 2017: President Trump tweets: “Is it legal for a sitting President to be ‘wire tapping’ a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!” and “How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”

March 10, 2017: Former Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat, steps forward to support Trump’s wiretapping claim, revealing that the Obama administration intel officials recorded his own communications with a Libyan official in Spring 2011.

March 20, 2017: FBI Director Comey tells House Intelligence Committee he has “no information that supports” the President’s tweets about “alleged wiretapping directed at him by the prior administration. “We have looked carefully inside the FBI,” Comey says. “(T)he answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components.”

FBI Director Comey tells Congress there is “salacious and unverified” material in the Fusion GPS dossier used by FBI, in part, to obtain Carter Page wiretap. (Under FBI “Woods Procedures,” only facts carefully verified by the FBI are allowed to be presented to court to obtain wiretaps.)

March 22, 2017: Chairman of House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) publicly announces he’s seen evidence of Trump associates being “incidentally” surveilled by Obama intel officials; and their names being “unmasked” and illegally leaked. Nunes briefs President Trump and holds a news conference. He’s criticized for doing so. An ethics investigation is opened into his actions but later clears him of wrongdoing.

In an interview on PBS, former Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice responds to Nunes allegations by stating: “I know nothing about this…I really don’t know to what Chairman Nunes was referring.” (She later acknowledges unmasking names of Trump associates.)

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE (FS 5/20/18, 6:25 p.m.)

The DOJ has asked the IG to determine “whether there was any impropriety or political motivation in how the FBI conducted its counterintelligence investigation of persons suspected of involvement with the Russian agents who interfered in the 2016 presidential election.”

Fox News reports:

The Justice Department asked its watchdog to look into any alleged “impropriety or political motivation” in the FBI’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, the DOJ said Sunday night — hours after President Trump ordered a review looking into whether federal agents infiltrated or surveilled his campaign for political purposes.

. . . . “The Department has asked the Inspector General to expand the ongoing review of the (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) application process to include determining whether there was any impropriety or political motivation in how the FBI conducted its counterintelligence investigation of persons suspected of involvement with the Russian agents who interfered in the 2016 presidential election. As always, the Inspector General will consult with the appropriate U.S. Attorney if there is any evidence of potential criminal conduct,” DOJ spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores told Fox News.

She also released a response from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein: “If anyone did infiltrate or surveil participants in a presidential campaign for inappropriate purposes, we need to know about it and take appropriate action.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


rabid wombat | May 20, 2018 at 4:06 pm

About time…..

DouglasJBender | May 20, 2018 at 4:08 pm

Would this be the same DOJ that colluded with Obama and Hillary to attempt a soft coup against Trump?

Stefan Halper <= read more about this guy over at CTH. He was paid – to organize the spying? By O regime? hmm mmm mmmm

POTUS is spot on in calling for an investigation.

Apparently Halper has been spying on campaigns since Reagan for the Bush cabal. The Deep state is real and here. Now let’s see how folks deal with it. I bet denial will be the flavor of the day for a long time.

    oldgoat36 in reply to forksdad. | May 20, 2018 at 6:25 pm

    The deep state has been around a long time, and have been the true source of power. I think Obama and Hillary were meant to expand their sphere of influence and power, and allow them to be more open, which is why they and their propaganda machine media are going absolutely nuts over Trump. Those who are NeverTrumpers are more than likely part of the cabal of enablers who have gotten wealthy for their efforts.

iconotastic | May 20, 2018 at 4:19 pm

I am a little confused about the use of the term ‘demand’. As head of the Executive branch wouldn’t the better term be ‘order’? What is the subtlety I am missing here?

    Sanddog in reply to iconotastic. | May 20, 2018 at 4:41 pm

    The DOJ hasn’t exactly shown themselves to be capable of obeying a lawful order for the last year or so. Congress, which has legal oversight, has been basically told to FOAD by the DOJ in response to numerous orders.

      iconotastic in reply to Sanddog. | May 20, 2018 at 5:29 pm

      Congress has oversight responsibilities but the DoJ is part of the executive branch, iow, they work at the pleasure of the president. While individuals can, and should, refuse to obey illegal orders this certainly doesn’t sound illegal.

      02sbxstr in reply to Sanddog. | May 20, 2018 at 6:14 pm

      FOAD — translate please

        I believe that is the acronym for F**k Off and Die

          mathewsjw in reply to Leslie Eastman. | May 20, 2018 at 11:38 pm

          How About an article about why the DoJ IG can’t investigate Obama’s NSC staffers, DNI Clapper, DoJ Counter Intelligence Sally Yates, CIA Brennan, CIA Director or Counter Intelligence Sally Yates Nor any other authors or staff that wrote the ICA on Russian Interference in Elections that started Operation ‘Crossfire Hurricane’

The “Great Reveal” continues as the media/DC cartel squirm.

The official Democrat talking points have been released. According to them, Trump is obstructing justice by ordering this investigation.

    MarkS in reply to myiq2xu. | May 20, 2018 at 9:23 pm

    The Dems are Pavlov’s dogs, mention Trump and the mindless response is “collusion” or “obstruction”

JohnSmith100 | May 20, 2018 at 4:33 pm

I think that the FBI and DOJ were deeply compromised during Obama’s reign. It seems likely that the same is true for other agencies.

Heads need to roll.

    oldgoat36 in reply to JohnSmith100. | May 20, 2018 at 6:29 pm

    Ya think? Holder and Lynch and Comey and McCabe and Mueller and Rosenstein and Page and Strzok to just start the list…

    Valerie in reply to JohnSmith100. | May 20, 2018 at 9:26 pm

    Heads have already rolled in the American sense of the phrase: none of these people remain in high public office.

    Some of them should probably be prosecuted.

Jeff Sessions recusal and appointment of a special prosecutor in 3, 2, 1, …

In theory it is a great idea. In practice, Trump will direect Sessions, who will direct Rosenstein to appoint a special prosecutor. Then Rosenstein will just append it to Meuller’s mandate.

Trump has to be careful how he does this. The best way, to direct Sessions to appoint a special prosecutor from one of a list Trump provides.

Capitalism…. selling fans and throwing in a roll of toilet paper.

Seriously, if the DOJ/FBI is severely compromised at the highest levels, what is the best way to get to the bottom of this? Who do you call? TrumpBusters?

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to labrat. | May 20, 2018 at 6:27 pm

    I am afraid that the only way to get to the bottom of this is going to involve wet work. All the legal means have been compromised with the help of both theoretical parties.

      What is “wet work”? Only time I heard the term was in the movie Red/Red2 and I kinda doubt you mean the same thing that Victoria did.

        Subotai Bahadur in reply to MarkS. | May 20, 2018 at 11:18 pm

        Russian “tradecraft” phrase dating from the Soviet era also used in the West. мокрое дело, tr. mokroye delo. Refers to the shedding of blood and other bodily fluids in the process of removing a specific designated enemy deliberately and permanently. The former Soviet KGB [now the SVR] is said to have had a Spetzburo 13 [Bureau of Special Designation-13] also known as the “Department of Wet Affairs” (Odytel mokrykh del).

        My use of the phrase is to invoke the concept common in our polity that when matters of great import are contested, it has become far from unusual that inconvenient people conveniently die. By means that defy logic or explanation.

        We have had assassination attempts by the Left already. I expect more, and that matters will not remain one-sided. Clausewitz: Der Krieg ist eine bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln. “War is merely a continuation of Politics by other means”. In the absence of a social contract, a political contract, or the rule of an agreed on definition of law, there can be no other means.

If the Obama administration weaponized the FBI, NSA, and / or other executive agencies for political purposes, it’s, as President Trump noted yesterday, “a very big deal.”

No, somebody is going to have to make it a big deal. Until then, it will just be business as usual. The minimum we must see is a raft of indictments, a couple of “Trials of the Century”, convictions, prison terms, and a yuuge purge of a considerable portion of the Executive Dept. Otherwise, the government will be nothing but a large and very expensive load of “damaged goods”—and we’ll all know it, but we’ll still be stuck with it.

inspectorudy | May 20, 2018 at 6:35 pm

If it is Horowitz the current IG then this could very well be the end of the deep state. When the punishment for this kind of abuse of IC facilities is made clear to the participants, I would imagine that there will be several canaries stepping forward to save their own skins. Once the dam breaks the flood will be like none we have ever seen. BTW, Sessions should not be out of this effort since it has nothing to do with Russian collusion but is simply a matter of sedition.

    I suspect there is already in informant, FOR the Trump Team this time…who has supplied name, dates, and other information.

    I’m perplexed by this move. No IG has jurisdiction over anyone no longer in government, beginning with Sally Yates and Loretta Lynch, and certainly including Andrew McCabe and James Comey. How does the IG investigate this? He cannot even request to speak to any of the principals. What about records and communications, or have they been delivered to the Obama Presidential Library since Lynch was a cabinet official? How would Horowitz or any IG acquire such records without a grand jury, which cannot be used by the IG himself?

    Many questions, few answers.

      amwick in reply to JBourque. | May 20, 2018 at 8:20 pm

      I think much of the investigating has has been done. They just need an order to write the report. It’s all over except the shoutin’.

        Investigating something without color of law? Something’s not right about that. But we’ll see.

          Subotai Bahadur in reply to JBourque. | May 20, 2018 at 11:23 pm

          We have seen that such was the process used by the UniParty to investigate/spy upon the Trump campaign BEFORE the FISA warrant based on perjury. It is either a case of sauce, goose, gander; or it is a matter that there is no rule of law and everybody’s dance card is going to be full right smartly.

      Mac45 in reply to JBourque. | May 20, 2018 at 11:28 pm

      The IG does have jurisdiction to investigate past practices within the department, either the FBI or the DOJ. So, even though he does not have anyway to force any former employee to speak with him [this was why the administration was in no hurry to terminate the FBI and DOJ players in the Trump Campaign investigation, including Comey] if his investigation of departmental practices turns up any evidence of criminal behavior by former employees, he can refer the investigation to the DOJ for criminal investigation. This expands the authori8ty to compel witnesses to cooperate by an order of magnitude.

      The initial referral to the IG, rather than to a USA or even the FBI, is to establish a basis to authorize a criminal investigation [this has partially been accomplished already]. It also allows the DOJ to control the pace of the investigation. Remember, ;the actions of most of the DOJ has been an attempt to protect hig ranking members of the Obama administration from criminal prosecution for their activities against Trump.

        The IG certainly wasn’t able to investigate the national security division when Sally Yates was calling the shots. I’m just pointing out the IG is a very strange choice due to the limitations of the position. The wording of the inquiry implies it is about bad intentions. How do you discern bad intentions if you can’t speak to people about their intentions at the time? Is that not a logical paradox? But yes, we’ll see.

          Mac45 in reply to JBourque. | May 21, 2018 at 2:45 pm

          In a case such as this, the IG has much greater power than the DOJ, in a criminal investigation. The IG has access, under current rules and laws, to virtually everything held by the DOJ/FBI as well as the power to interview anyone, including former employees of the Department. He can not compel them to answer. But then neither can the FBI or DOJ. All the subject has to do is to invoke his or her 5th Amendment rights and that ends the questioning, unless there is a grant of immunity. And, as the IG is investigating practices within the Department, he does not have to obtain warrants of subpoenas for documents [though he can], including texts, emails, or voice recordings held on Department servers on in Department files.

          Once the IG finishes his inspection, then a report of his findings, including whether he believes that there were any violations of department rules and regulations any potential violations of federal law is presented to the head of the Department. At that point, the AG would assign the case to a USA for development of a prosecutable criminal case and/or pursue disciplinary job actions against violators. IGs can obtain warrants and make arrests for violations of federal law, which are uncovered during IG investigations. Whenever possible, the Office of Attorney General is contacted as that agency would be responsible for prosecution of criminal law violations.

regulus arcturus | May 20, 2018 at 7:18 pm

Rosenstein will find himself implicated (more) very shortly, methinks.

Everyday there is something new on the horizon, that will sink, destroy, end their career or put someone behind bars. All talk, lots of writing, no arrests,no perp walks,no charges filed,no setting of bail. Who isn’t afraid to make the first arrest??
How about a little less talk and a little more action!!!

The rats will soon be jumping off their sinking ship with the Liberal media right behind them. I haven’t been this shocked about the level of corruption in our government since “they” had JFK killed. Ever since then, we’ve done nothing but go downhill to which we’re at the bottom.

Who decides what is “inappropriate” purpose?

repeating my question for an article.. the DoJ IG can’t investigate Obama’s NSC staffers, DNI Clapper, DoJ Counter Intelligence Sally Yates, CIA Brennan, CIA Director of Counter Intelligence Sally Yates Nor any other authors or staff (Strzok) that wrote the ICA on Russian Interference in Elections that started Operation ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ a counter intelligence program targeting Trump Organization and Trump Campaign.

Can someone please explain to me why HRC has not been indicted and prosecuted for all of her crimes? My guess is that she’s a lifetime member in the Deep State with friends in high places that protect her. Why doesn’t the Liberal media focus on this? CNN?

Some report that the so called spies were people who just showed up to report on the Trump campaign because of things they did not like as though they were whistle blowers. This is clearly BS.
For a person to be motivated to report on something as a whistle blower, then they had to have seen something so bad that it violated their values and such – something almost certainly illegal. Since Trump and his operation has been investigated to death and nothing illegal has yet been found, what would be there to motivate a whistle blower type of voluntary reporting and what would they be reporting on that so terribly violated their morals or ethics?
Clearly, the only real possibility was that the spies were placed there by the IC, Hillary’s campaign, or someone related, to specifically spy on Trump, his campaign, and such, for nothing else makes any sense. Reports of these spies being whistle blower type of volunteers was initially stated in the papers to try and soften the spying claim to make those who did this appear to be less guilty.
This is now a continuation of a theme. That theme is how something is reported that is yet another step further into illegal/unethical behavior by the Left, the IC, and/or others, and is followed up by BS claims in the media how the reports are not as bad as many are claiming. Soon we discover that it is as bad as they initially claimed, but the public has it in their heads that it was somehow justified or somehow not so bad despite the final conclusions. The BS reports did their job. Soon, before this false idea can be debunked, another report comes out moving the illegal/unethical behavior bar a bit further, people quickly move on to the next issue, and their impression of the BS claim justifying the first act remains in cemented their mind. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Of course the DoJ sent the IG. The DoJ is essentially investigating itself, since they are co-conspirators with the FBI in the ongoing coup against Trump, which should be obvious to anyone including Trump. I can’t fathom what Trump thinks he’s getting out of this.

    Ragspierre in reply to randian. | May 21, 2018 at 9:16 am

    “Of course the DoJ sent the IG. The DoJ is essentially investigating itself…”

    Yes. That’s the role of any IG.

      randian in reply to Ragspierre. | May 21, 2018 at 3:28 pm

      Why should I believe the IG chosen by DoJ isn’t completely compromised?

        Ragspierre in reply to randian. | May 21, 2018 at 10:46 pm

        Well, a few notes…

        1. I never suggested…or would suggest…that you take any position on the virtue of any IG’s report,

        2. auguring FOR holding out some hope that THIS IG is not compromised is the record of IGs for some years; they’ve brought to light a lot of stuff we needed to know (don’t ask me for specifics…I don’t have that kind of time and you should satisfy yourself…but also don’t just take my assertion at face value),

        3. do you have reason(s) to just assume the IG is a wrongun? I suggest you MAY “believe” anything you want, but you might want to maintain an open mind and a healthy skepticism until a lot more facts come in.

Bucky Barkingham | May 21, 2018 at 8:02 am

They wiil be shocked, shocked, when they find out it’s true.

Henry Hawkins | May 21, 2018 at 1:56 pm

Who is this ‘Jeff Sessions’ I keep hearing about?

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to Henry Hawkins. | May 21, 2018 at 2:49 pm

    An apocryphal creature who is supposed to defend the rule of law and the Constitution. Mythological, as he has not been seen to manifest himself in that role.

We should start up a grass roots milk carton campaign:

“MISSING. Have you seen this man? Last seen at Senate Confirmation Hearing surrounded by shady characters. If found please call 4RULEOFLAW”

I’m near DC. If you have mad Photoshop skills, post it and I’ll tape it at FBI building entrances and post pics here 🙂