Jonathan Turley: slammed the mainstream media on Friday for its "willful blindness to mounting evidence of wrongdoing in the Russian investigation."

Liberal law prof shreds media for 'willful blindness' to facts of 'wrongdoing in the Russia investigation'

'None of that seems to matter...'

Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

 CHRIS ENLOE

Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, a self-described liberal who teaches at George Washington School of Law, slammed the mainstream media on Friday for its "willful blindness to mounting evidence of wrongdoing in the Russian investigation."

What's the background?

On Friday, the Justice Department announced the first indictment resulting from U.S. Attorney John Durham's investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation.

The DOJ revealed that former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith will plead guilty to falsifying a document that was used to obtain a surveillance warrant Trump campaign aide Carter Page. Clinesmith is accused of altering an email document to downplay Page's association with the CIA.

What did Turley say?

According to the constitutional lawyer, the DOJ's announcement is more evidence of the media's willful ignorance to the facts surrounding the Russia investigation, with regard to activities conducted by FBI agents and top DOJ officials.

"The implications of this criminal plea is enormous but the media has engaged in a pattern of willful blindness to mounting evidence of wrongdoing in the Russian investigation by FBI and DOJ figures," Turley began.

"Notably, the Flynn plea was widely reported as a major conviction despite the fact that the agents themselves stated that they did not believe Flynn intentionally lied. Pleas by others resulted in less than a month of jail, including Papadopoulos who received only 14 days," he added.

"Those pleas were given endless and breathless discussion in the media. This is a direct and major falsification by a critical figure in the Russian investigation. It follows referrals for criminal charges against other figures like Andrew McCabe. None of that seems to matter," Turley continued. 

Indeed, in the early days of Robert Mueller's investigation, the media widely reported on each new development, suggesting the indictments stemming from Mueller's probe were evidence that Trump's campaign committed wrongdoing in the 2016 election.

However, that changed completely last year when Mueller concluded that Trump's campaign, in fact, did not collude with Russia.

Still, the media has been slow to accept the Mueller investigation's findings, and, as Turley noted, the wrongdoing done by government officials who oversaw and played critical roles in the Trump-Russia investigation.

In an op-ed for The Hill, Turley summarized this investigative double-standard being employed by Democrats.

"So, just to wrap up, we have a collusion investigation that was shown to be based on false or unreliable information. It was launched and maintained by officials who were accused by an inspector general of misconduct, false statements, or procedural errors, and now we have an actual criminal guilty plea. Yet many in Washington continue to insist there is no reason for Durham to keep digging. As Biden says, 'Gosh almighty,'" Turley wrote.

The elites coup attempt the President becomes clearer.

New Russia probe memos expose massive errors in NYT anti-Trump story, Steele dossier

The first document is a 57-page summary of a three-day FBI interview in January 2017 with Christopher Steele's 'primary sub-source' in the anti-Trump allegations and 'dossier.' Document number two takes apart a New York Times article written by Michael Schmidt, Mark Mazzetti, and Matt Apuzzo.

Image

New York Times

(Mario Tama / Getty Images)

By Sharyl Attkisson

Last Updated:
July 17, 2020 - 11:30pm

8K

• Article
• Dig In

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has released two newly-declassified documents related to government surveillance abuses against the Trump campaign in 2016.

The first document, withheld from public view until now, is a 57-page summary of a three-day FBI interview in January 2017 with Christopher Steele’s so-called "primary sub-source" in the anti-Trump allegations and "dossier."

According to the analysis by Sen. Graham's office: 

• The document reveals that the primary "source" of Steele’s election reporting was not some well-connected current or former Russian official, but a non-Russian-based contract employee of Christopher Steele’s firm. Moreover, it demonstrates that the information that Steele's primary source provided him was second and third hand information and rumor at best.
• Critically, the document shows that Steele's "primary sub-source" disagreed with and was surprised by how information he gave Steele was then conveyed by Steele in the Steele dossier.

Document number two, also withheld from public view until now, takes apart a New York Times article written by Michael Schmidt, Mark Mazzetti, and Matt Apuzzo.

Comments made by then-FBI agent Peter Strzok undercut a litany of claims made in the Times article, which was entitled: "Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contact With Russian Intelligence."

Claim in NYT article: "Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump's presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials."

Note by Strzok: "This statement is misleading and inaccurate as written. We have not seen evidence of any individuals in contact with Russians (both Governmental and non-Governmental)" and "There is no known intel affiliation, and little if any [government of Russia] affiliation[.] FBI investigation has shown past contact between [Trump campaign volunteer Carter] Page and the SVR [Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation], but not during his association with the Trump campaign."

Claim in NYT article: "... one of the advisers picked up on the [intercepted] calls was Paul Manafort, who was Mr. Trump's campaign chairman for several months ..."

Note by Strzok: "We are unaware of any calls with any Russian government official in which Manafort was a party."

Claim in NYT article: "The FBI has obtained banking and travel records ..."

Note by Strzok: "We do not yet have detailed banking records."

Claim in NYT article: "Officials would not disclose many details, including what was discussed on the calls, and how many of Trump's advisers were talking to the Russians."

Note by Strzok: "Again, we are unaware of ANY Trump advisers engaging in conversations with Russian intel officials" and "Our coverage has not revealed contact between Russian intelligence officers and the Trump team."

Claim in NYT article: "The FBI asked the NSA to collect as much information as possible about the Russian operatives on the phone calls ..."

Note by Strzok: "If they did we are not aware of those communications."

Claim in NYT article: "The FBI has closely examined at least four other people close to Mr. Trump ... Carter Page ... Roger Stone... and Mr. Flynn."

Note by Strzok: "We have not investigated Roger Stone."

Claim by NYT: "Senior FBI officials believe ... Christopher Steele ... has a credible track record."

Note by Strzok: "Recent interviews and investigation, however, reveal Steele may not be in a position to judge the reliability of subsource network."

Claim by NYT: "The FBI's investigation into Mr. Manafort began last spring [2016]."

Note by Strzok: "This is inaccurate ... our investigation of Manafort was opened in August 2016."

Claim by NYT: "The bureau did not have enough evidence to obtain a warrant for a wiretap of Mr. Manafort's communications, but it had the NSA closely scrutinize the communications of Ukrainian officials he had met."

Note by Strzok: "This is inaccurate ..."

There is as yet no explanation in the documents or from the New York Times as to the identities of the four "American officials" who apparently provided the misleading and false information; or what their motivation was. 

However, it is clear that inaccurate reporting such as that in the Times had a significant influence on the trajectory of the Trump-Russia collusion probe, which ultimately concluded there had been no collusion on the part of Trump, anyone in the Trump campaign, or any U.S. person.

And in China Xi does the same

Vladimir Putin becomes Russia's president for life

BY DOV S. ZAKHEIM, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR —  07/05/20 02:00 PM EDT 1,054

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL

US colleges accepted billions in unreported foreign donations from China and Russia: report...so far $6 billion found,

US colleges accepted billions in unreported foreign donations from China and Russia: report

Adversaries are infiltrating American colleges

Adam Glanzman/Bloomberg via Getty Images

 PHIL SHIVER

The Department of Education has uncovered billions of dollars in unreported donations to American colleges from China and Russia, the Department told House Republicans during a briefing and in a letter this week.

The DOE has so far found $6 billion in unreported donations as a part of House Republicans' inquiry into U.S. colleges under investigation for violating Section 117 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, Townhall reported Friday. Section 117 prohibits an Institution of Higher Education from falsely reporting or failing to report foreign gifts of $250,000 or more.
According to a letter obtained by the news outlet, the DOE's Office of the General Counsel wrote: "Some IHE leaders are starting to acknowledge the threat of foreign academic espionage and have been working with federal law enforcement to address gaps in reporting and transparency. However, the evidence suggests massive investments of foreign money have bred dependency and distorted the decision making, mission, and values of too many institutions."

The letter went on to state that the DOE shares Congress' concerns over the potential that foreign adversaries could use "strategic investments" in order to turn American colleges into "indoctrination platforms."
The inquiry is part of a wider effort to probe the Chinese Communist Party's influence within the United States. Earlier in April, Attorney General William Barr claimed that China is in a "full-court blitzkrieg" against the U.S., part of which was the strategic infiltration of American universities.
Also in the letter, the DOE noted that certain academic institutions have been dragging their feet in assisting the investigation.
"The Department has yet to receive critical information needed to confirm the accuracy of previously submitted Section 117 reports. Certain institutions have yet to produce requested emails, metadata, and other information regarding business relationships with, and faculty funding from, Chinese, Middle Eastern, and Russian foreign sources," the letter stated.
Those institutions have reportedly claimed Freedom of Information Act exemptions and privileges in order to resist turning over records.
During the briefing, the DOE allegedly told House Committee staffers that evidence has been found suggesting some colleges based decisions on donations they received.
Speaking in regard to the news, a GOP source told Townhall: "This is not a partisan problem. This is an American problem."

Hillary?Obama Russia collusion plot coming to light

Testimony states both Hillary Clinton and then-Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice knew of paid dossier research

May 10, 2020 | Vivek Saxena |  Print Article

Coincidence?

Third Russian Doctor Mysteriously Falls From Hospital Window Amid Coronavirus Outbreak

Names of MH17 victims read out in court as murder trial of four suspects begins

TOBY STERLING AND ANTHONY DEUTSCH

AMSTERDAM

REUTERS 

PUBLISHED MARCH 9, 2020 UPDATED 4 HOURS AGO

00:00

Open this photo in gallery

Presiding judge Hendrik Steenhuis sits at the centre of a panel at the start of the trial of four men charged with murder over the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 on March 9, 2020, in Amsterdam.

PETER DEJONG/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Relatives sat listening with bowed heads and eyes closed as the names of all 298 victims of a missile strike on a Malaysian airliner were read out in a Dutch court on Monday as the murder trial of four fugitive defendants began.

Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 was hit by a surface-to-air missile on July 17, 2014 while flying over Ukrainian territory held by pro-Russian rebels fighting government forces. The airliner was on its way from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur.

None of the accused in the disaster – three Russians and a Ukrainian – were present in the courtroom and all four are believed to be in Russia. Only one sent a defence lawyer.

Judges ruled that the men had waived their rights to attend and said proceedings would continue without them.

The mood in the courtroom was sombre and hushed as prosecutor Dedy Woei-a-Tsoi read out the names of those who died when MH17 crashed in eastern Ukraine on July 17, 2014.

“The silence in this court during the reading of all the names of the victims makes it (MH-17 disaster) clear once again and that means a moment of silence was fitting,” Presiding Judge Hendrik Steenhuis said.

The families of MH17 victims placed empty white chairs in front of Russia's embassy in The Hague, on the eve of a murder trial.REUTERS

Prosecutors say the suspects helped supply the Russian missile system that downed the plane. Russian authorities have consistently denied any involvement in the missile strike.

The four defendants face preliminary charges of the murder of 298 people and of causing the aircraft to crash, resulting in the death of all aboard.

“Many people have long waited for this day,” Steenhuis said in opening remarks. “This tragic loss of so many lives has touched many all over the world.” 

‘NOBODY EXPECTED A TRIAL AT ALL’

The defendants – Russians Sergey Dubinsky, Oleg Pulatov and Igor Girkin and Ukrainian Leonid Kharchenko – held senior posts in the pro-Russian militias in eastern Ukraine in 2014, according to prosecutors.

STORY CONTINUES BELOW ADVERTISEMENT

“It is very important for us because nobody had expected there would be a trial at all,” said Anton Kotti, who lost three family members in the disaster. “We hope the judge gets so much evidence that he can only come to one conclusion: ‘guilty’.”

Sabine ten Doesschate, a lawyer for defendant Platov, told the panel of three judges that her client “had nothing to do with the crash” … He is not responsible, not in any way, not with any participation, not in any capacity.” 

A Dutch-led international Joint Investigation (JIT) team spent years collecting evidence before issuing arrest warrants for the four suspects last year. If convicted, the four men could face sentences of up to life in prison.

However, Russia does not extradite its citizens, and the Kremlin has questioned both the legitimacy of the international investigation and the independence of the Dutch court.

“They (defendants) are now under the protection of the regime in Russia …,” Peter Langstraat, part of the team of lawyers representing 398 relatives of 244 victims, told journalists. Langstraat said he hoped “the long arm of justice” would catch up to the suspects eventually.

“Look at what happened to the Lockerbie case,” he said, referring to the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over which a Libyan intelligence officer was jailed for life. “Finally you know, justice was done.” 

Prosecutor Ward Ferdinandusse told the court that the investigation was complicated by ongoing fighting at the crash site in Ukraine and “active obstruction” by Russian authorities.

Russia has denied such accusations, and President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, has said the Kremlin will wait to see how the trial pans out before commenting.

Ferdinandusse also said that Ukrainians were sometimes forgotten as additional victims of the plane’s destruction.

“Wreckage and bodies fell from the sky, sometimes straight through the roofs of their houses in eastern Ukraine,” he said.

“Many ordinary citizens and emergency personnel worked in difficult conditions in the midst of an armed conflict to recover the victims’ bodies.” 

The aircraft’s downing led to sanctions against Russia by the European Union. It also heightened tension between Russia and Western countries who blame it for the disaster.

The dead included 196 Dutch citizens, 43 Malaysians and 27 Australians, among others.

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.