ๆญฃๅจๅ ่ฝฝ่ง้ข...
่ง้ขๅ ่ฝฝๅคฑ่ดฅ
๐จ BREAKING: Outside the Alexandria courthouse โ Christian prophet Joseph Daniel Phillips confronted Maureen Comey, daughter of disgraced exโFBI Director James Comey, just moments after her fatherโs indictment. With righteous fire, Joseph told her how evil she and her fatherโs actions were, calling out corruption face-to-face as she left... show more
28,954 ๆฌก่ง็ โข 10 ไธชๆๅ โขvia X (Twitter)
0 ๆก่ฏ่ฎบ
ๆๆ ่ฏ่ฎบ
ๅๅงๅธๅญ็่ฏ่ฎบๅฐๆพ็คบๅจ่ฟ้
![JAMES COMEY LEAKED CLASSIFIED INTELLIGENCE TO THE NEW YORK TIMES in order to push the Russia Collusion narrative onto the American people to take down Trump. Adam Schiff wasn't the only leaker of classified intel. James Comey specifically leaked classified intel to the NYT in order to enable a special prosecutor to take down Trump and conspire with other mainstream media organizations to fool and lie to the American people to push them to go against Trump with a false narrative. This is basically "Project Mockingbird." The main media channels were colluding with government in order to take down a sitting president and undermine the U.S. This has been going on since 2016 against Trump and still is to this day. The FBI concluded numerous legacy news media stories that crafted the false Russia collusion narrative contained illegally leaked classified intelligence but failed to definitively identify the leakers. But agents did force a stunning admission that ex-FBI Director James Comey used a special conduit to the Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times in his bid to polish his image and push for a special prosecutor to take down President Donald Trump. Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman admitted to agents in interviews he routinely communicated on behalf of Comey, his longtime friend, with Times reporter Michael Schmidt, whose work was among the newspaper's 2018 Pulitzer-winning stories on Russian election interference. The goal, Richman told the FBI, was "to correct stories critical of Comey, the FBI and to shape future press coverage" outside of the bureau's official press office, according to internal FBI memos that current Director Kash Patel delivered to Congress this week. While Richman was known to have been publicly quoted in news stories as an advocate for Comey, he admitted to agents โ who were part of the FBIโs Arctic Haze classified leaks inquiry โ that he was given access by Comey to what turned out to be highly classified information up to the SCI level and sometimes provided information to reporters on an anonymous basis. Richman insisted he did not believe he had confirmed or provided classified intelligence to reporters but said he could not be 100 percent, the memos state, noting he could only make his leak denial โwith a discount.โ "Richman was pretty sure he did not confirm the Classified Information. However, Richman told the interviewing agents he was sure 'with a discount' that he did not tell Schmidt about the Classified Information," one FBI memo recounted. In the end, the Justice Department decided not to pursue any criminal charges against Comey or any of his lieutenants or now-Sen. Adam Schiff despite potential evidence of leaks, saying it could not be certain of who leaked what and when. But its interrogation of Richman and his admissions of significant contact with the Times' Schmidt provide the most detailed account to date of how Trump critics like Comey โ who was fired by the president โ used the media to craft narratives that ultimately turned out to be untrue or misleadingly overstated, the memos show. Just the News also revealed this week that a career intelligence officer who worked for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee for more than a decade repeatedly warned the FBI beginning in 2017 that then-Rep. Adam Schiff had approved leaking classified information to smear then-President Donald Trump over the now-debunked Russiagate scandal. Schiff has denied the allegation. Newly-declassified FBI memos also include details on classified leaks investigations dubbed Tropic Vortex, Foggy Falls, Riding Hood, Sirens Lure, Echos Fate, and Genetic Christmas. Comey, Richman, and โArctic Hazeโ The FBI leak investigation code-named โArctic Hazeโ revealed key details about Richman โ Comeyโs longtime friend, confidante, and media conduit โ including what was at that time his nearly decade-long source relationship with Michael Schmidt of The New York Times. The leak investigation zeroed in on four news articles which contained leaked classified information. The first was a New York Times article by four reporters โ Schmidt, Matt Apuzzo, Adam Goldman, and Eric Lichtblau โ from late April 2017 titled โComey Tried to Shield the F.B.I. from Politics. Then He Shaped an Election.โ The second was a Washington Post story by Ellen Nakashima from early April 2017 titled โNew details emerge about 2014 Russian hack of the State Department: It was โhand to hand combatโ.โ The third was another Washington Post piece by Karoun Demirjian and Devlin Barrett from late May 2017 titled, โHow a Dubious Russian Document Influenced the FBIโs Handling of the Clinton Probe.โ The fourth was a Wall Street Journal article by Holman Jenkins Jr. from late May 2017 titled, โThe Trump-Russia Story Starts Making Sense.โ The April 2017 Times article by Schmidt quoted Richman defending Comey: โJim sees his role as apolitical and independent. The F.B.I. director, even as he reports to the attorney general, often has to stand apart from his boss.โ Schmidt wrote that โconfidants like Mr. Richman say he was constrained by circumstanceโ while โnavigating waters in which every move has political consequences.โ Richman also reportedly said that Comey displayed โa consistent pattern of someone trying to act with independence and integrity, but within established channelsโ and that โhis approach to the Russia investigation fits this pattern.โ The Times article wrongly argued that, in the case of the Trump-Russia investigation, Comey โconducted the investigation by the book.โ The FBI memos show that Arctic Haze was opened by the FBIโs Washington Field Office as a media leak investigation in mid-August 2017, after a redacted source in late June 2017 โreported the unauthorized disclosure of classified information in eight articles published between April and June 2017โ and after a DOJ request at the start of August 2017. Arctic Haze was predicated on the four aforementioned stories. The FBI closed the investigation in early September 2021 โ with the DOJ charging no one with leaking classified material โ with the bureauโs closure document providing details about the FBIโs failed attempt to catch the leakers. The bureau document indicated that it had been treated as an โEspionage Investigation.โ The FBI said the โfactual predicationโ for the leak inquiry was largely based on the classified information which first appeared in the April 2017 Times piece. The FBI noted that Comey had โpublicly indicated on several occasions that classified information contributed to his decisionโ to unilaterally and preemptively announce in early July 2016 that he did not believe any reasonable prosecutor would charge Hillary Clinton over her mishandling of classified information on a private email server and his further announcement in October 2016 that the Clinton emails investigation was (briefly) being reopened. The bureau said Comey had four reasons for making the announcements the way he did, including that โComey had concerns the Classified Information, which directly related to whether or not the Attorney General [Loretta Lynch] should have been recused from the Midyear Exam investigation, would be leaked to the media or would otherwise be disclosed.โ Comey had told the Senate Intelligence Committee in July 2017 that โone significant item I canโt, I know the committeeโs been briefed on. Thereโs been some public accounts of it, which are nonsense, but I understand the committeeโs been briefed on the classified facts.โ The bureau said that, in classified testimony to a bureau watchdog, โComey confirmed the specific Classified Information, which was discussed in the New York Times article, and indicated it did impact his decision to make unilateral, public statements about the Midyear Exam [Clinton] investigation.โ Recent declassifications provide more details on the classified intelligence which swayed Comey to let Clinton off the hook, as well as revealed more information on so-called Clinton Plan intelligence which the Comey FBI seemed to ignore as it launched the Crossfire Hurricane investigation into Trump. Comey hires Richman to afford him Top Secret Clearance. The FBI said that โComey instructed the FBI to hire Richman as a Special Government Employee (SGE)โ in 2015 and โto grant him a Top Secret clearance with access to Sensitive Compartmented Informationโ and that โFBI records indicated Richman was hired to work on โGoing Darkโ matters.โ The bureau said its investigation โrevealed Comey also hired Richman so Comey could discuss sensitive matters, including classified information, with someone outside of the FBIโs regular leadership. Comey also used Richman as a liaison to the media.โ โThe investigation revealed Richman had been a source for Michael Schmidt, one of the reporters credited with writing the article at issue, and The New York Times since at least 2008,โ the bureau wrote. โRichman first spoke with Schmidt regarding an investigation into illegal activity in sports. Prior to Richman becoming an SGE, Schmidt visited Richmanโs house numerous times. The New York Times quoted Richman several times, both on the record and on background, in stories regarding Jim Comey. After he was terminated by President Trump, Comey used Richman as a conduit to convey to the media memoranda of his meetings with President Trump.โ โAccording to Richman, Comey and Richman talked about the โhammeringโ Comey was taking from the media concerning his handling of the Midyear Exam investigation. Richman opined Comey took comfort in the fact Richman had talked to the press about his feelings regarding Comeyโs handling and decision-making on the Midyear Exam investigation. Richman claimed Comey never asked him to talk to the media,โ the FBI notes say. The FBI wrote that โRichman recalled Comey told him there was some weird classified material related to Lynch which came to the FBIโs attentionโ and that โComey told Richman about the Classified Information, including the source of the information.โ The FBI said that โinvestigators learned that FBI Office of Public Affairs was told to assist The New York Times with the April 2017 articleโ and that โComey either directed or otherwise authorized FBIโs official assistance to The New York Times.โ Disgraced and fired FBI special agent Peter Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, with whom Strzok was having an affair, appear to have been involved in briefing the Times, according to the bureau memos. โStrzok stated he believed FBI Executive Management told them to meet with the New York Times. Strzok said he recalled being told to provide an investigator-level briefing on the Midyear Exam investigation,โ the FBI said. โDuring the March 30, 2017, meeting, the Times told Strzok and Page they had the Classified Information.โ The โsummary of investigative stepsโ by the FBI included interviews with bureau and intelligence community officials, document reviews, phone and email records researches, the review of a 2017 โTropic Vortexโ investigation conducted by then U.S. Attorney John Durham and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, and more. โBased upon discussions with DOJ, these investigative steps did not generate sufficient proof to charge any individual with willfully transmitting the Classified Information, conspiring to transmit the Classified Information, or aiding and abetting another personโs Transmission,โ the FBI concluded in 2021. The FBI claimed that โthe investigation has not yielded sufficient evidence to criminally charge any person, including Comey or Richman, with making false statements or with the substantive offenses under investigation.โ Inspector General calls Comey's leaks "unauthorized" DOJ inspector general Michael Horowitz wrote a report released in August 2019 criticizing Comeyโs decision to leak his so-called โComey Memosโ โ including details about Trumpโs alleged comments about Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn โ to the media in 2017 in an effort by the then-fired FBI director to spur the appointment of a special counsel. Horowitz wrote that his investigation โinterviewed 17 witnesses, including former Director Comey and Daniel Richman, the individual who, at Comey's request, shared the contents of one of the Memos with a reporter [Schmidt] for The New York Times.โ Comey told Horowitz that the day after being fired by Trump, he retained Richman as an attorney. โWe have previously faulted Comey for acting unilaterally and inconsistent with Department policy,โ the DOJ watchdog wrote. โComeyโs unauthorized disclosure of sensitive law enforcement information about the Flynn investigation merits similar criticism.โ Comey admitted in 2017 that he had hoped leaking this information โmight prompt the appointment of a special counsel.โ Horowitz concluded Comeyโs leaks were โan attempt to force the Department to take official investigative actions.โ โComey had several other lawful options available to him to advocate for the appointment of a special counsel, which he told us was his goal in making the disclosure,โ Horowitz wrote. โWhat was not permitted was the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive investigative information, obtained during the course of FBI employment, in order to achieve a personally desired outcome.โ Horowitz sent a criminal referral to the DOJ over Comeyโs memos at the time, but the DOJ declined to prosecute. Comeyโs leak efforts were successful, however, as Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel within days of the Comey Memo leaks making their way to the New York Times. An article in the Times penned by Schmidt was titled โComey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigationโ and was published on May 16, 2017. Then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel the next day. After two years, Mueller โdid not establishโ any criminal Trump-Russia collusion. Other classified leaks inquiries also come up short, here is a list: The newly-declassified FBI memos also detail a host of other failed or botched classified leaks investigations that made their way into legacy media. They were given operational code names such as Tropic Vortex, Foggy Falls, Riding Hood, Echos Fate, and Genetic Christmas. Tropic Vortex: he Justice Departmentโs Tropic Vortex classified leaks investigation focused on an unspecified October 2016 article by The New York Times as well as an early March 2017 article written by Times reporters Schmidt and Michael Shear and titled, โComey Asks Justice Dept. to Reject Trumpโs Wiretapping Claims.โ Foggy Falls: The FBIโs Foggy Falls classified inquiry focused on a Washington Post article by three reporters โ Ellen Nakashima, Devlin Barrett, and Adam Entous โ from mid-April 2017 titled, "FBI obtained FISA warrant to monitor former Trump adviser Carter Page.โ The bureauโs Riding Hood investigation included a main focus on a Buzzfeed News article from early April 2017 written by Ali Watkins and titled, โA Former Trump Adviser Met With A Russian Spy.โ The FBI speculated that the classified information in that article may have informed a mid-April 2017 story by the Washington Post written by three reporters โ Ellen Nakashima, Devlin Barrett, and Adam Entous โ and titled, "FBI obtained FISA warrant to monitor former Trump adviser Carter Page.โ Siren's Lure: The FBIโs unsuccessful Sirens Lure classified inquiry focused on three Washington Post stories. The first was one by four reporters โ Matt Zapotosky, Sari Horwitz, Devlin Barrett, and Adam Entous โ from late May 2017 titled, "Jared Kushner Now a Focus in Russia Investigation.โ The second was an article by three reporters โ Ellen Nakashima, Adam Entous, and Greg Miller โ from late May 2017 titled, "Russian Ambassador Told Moscow that Kushner Wanted Secret Communications Channel with Kremlin.โ The third was a piece by four reporters โ David Filipov, Amy Brittain, Rosalind Helderman, and Tom Hamburger โ from early June 2017 titled, "Explanations for Kushner's Meeting with Head of Kremlin-linked Bank Don't Match Up.โ Echos Fate: The bureauโs Echos Fate classified leaks inquiry focused on two Washington Post stories. The first one mentioned by the FBI was a mid-January 2017 story by David Ignatius originally titled โFour burning questions on Russiaโ which was renamed โWhy did Obama dawdle on Russiaโs hacking?โ The second was by three reporters โ Greg Miller, Adam Entous, and Ellen Nakashima โ published in early February 2017 and titled, โOfficials Say Flynn Discussed Sanctions.โ Genetic Christmas: The FBIโs failed Genetic Christmas classified leaks investigation focused on an NBC News article written by three reporters โ William Arkin, Ken Dilanian, and Cynthia McFadden โ which was published in mid-December 2016 and was titled, โU.S. Officials: Putin Personally Involved in U.S. Election Hack.โ Series of leaks fed "blatantly false" information to media: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard recently harshly criticized this specific leak to NBC News, as well as one to The Washington Post, arguing that they fed a false narrative that the intelligence community had already reached a conclusion on Russian leader Vladimir Putinโs intentions during the 2016 election when the Obama-ordered Intelligence Community Assessment had not yet been completed. โDeep State officials in the IC begin leaking blatantly false intelligence to the Washington Post, as proven by the unpublished PDB and previous IC products, claiming that Russia used โcyber meansโ to influence โthe outcome of the election.โ โฆ Another leak to the Washington Post falsely alleges that the CIA โconcluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervenedโ in the election to help President Trump,โ the Gabbard-led Office of the Director of National Intelligence assessed last month. ODNI added: โAt this point, there is no official IC assessment that contains that conclusion [...] IC officials again leak to the media, this time claiming [to NBC News] that IC officials believe โwith a high level of confidenceโ that Russian President Vladimir Putin was personally involved in the โU.S. Election Hackโ.โ Source: Just The News](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1955649487805837436/amplify_video_thumb/1955643816204996608/img/tboj1ANSkZ47kssp.jpg)
![Great summary here of the ongoing situation involving Lindsey Gaetani (Lindsey Gaetani) and her efforts to (by herself) file a motion in court (that was thwarted by either Brian Tully, Pam Friedman or Jen McCabe's cousin). FULL TRANSCRIPT; Alright, so let's get right into this one. Today we're unpacking a really intense and personal story from Lindsey Gaetani. It's a story that involves a major court case, a huge data leak, and a truly bizarre and frankly shocking confrontation that she says went down inside a public courthouse. And it all kicks off with one jarring sentence. "I thought I just told you that you had to wait for Pam [Friedman]." I mean, can you imagine you walk into a public building trying to file a legal document and you're met with that? According to Lindsey Gaetani, this is exactly what a court clerk said. It's a statement that immediately set the tone for a pretty unbelievable standoff. And yeah, that's the big question here, isn't it? What on earth could lead to a situation where a citizen is apparently being barred from entering a courthouse by the very clerks who are supposed to work there for the public? We're going to piece together all the events just as Gaetani tells them to figure out how she got here. Okay, so let's jump right into the deep end to the most dramatic point in this story. Gaetani showing up at the Norfolk Superior Courthouse for a really critical hearing. She was there to file a motion, which is basically a formal request to the judge to protect her own private data because she felt like she had no one else to turn to. The first thing she does, she says, is call her state-appointed advocate, a woman named Pamela Friedman. But instead of getting help, she says Pam actually tried to stall her, telling her to just wait outside. You know, which is kind of strange, right? Especially given how urgent this all felt to her. So Gaetani decides, forget this, I'm calling the clerk's office myself. And that's when things get even weirder. She says she was told flat out that she was not allowed in the building without her advocate. And to her, this made absolutely no sense. I mean, any citizen should have the right to walk into a public courthouse and file a piece of paper. So here's how this whole thing just explodes. Gaetani goes inside anyway, a clerk immediately confronts her repeating that she was told to wait for Pam. Gaetani just says, I'm coming in and asks if they're refusing to take her motion. When they say yes, that's the tipping point. She pulls out her phone and says, okay, I'm recording this. And that's when she claims one of the clerks charges at her and starts screaming for security. A scene like that, it doesn't just happen in a vacuum, right? There's a reason for it. To really get the stakes here and to understand why Gaetani felt so desperate that day, we've got to rewind. We have to look at what triggered this whole chain of events in the first place. And it all comes down to a massive data leak. So what's this all about? At the heart of everything is the release of Gaetani's personal phone data. And we're not talking about a few text messages. We're talking about a complete extraction of her entire digital life. And when I say massive, I mean, it's hard to even wrap your head around. But it boils down to this one number. That's right, 15, 15 years of her life completely unredacted taken from her phone and handed over to the defense team in a case where she was a key witness. 15 years. And look, we're not just talking about old text messages here. This is the stuff you don't want anyone to see: medical records, social security numbers, private conversations she had with her lawyers, even bank passwords and her kids' birth certificates. It was just as she puts it, her entire life completely exposed. But you know what the real kicker was for her? It wasn't just that it happened, but how it happened. She claims she was specifically promised that this kind of private information would be protected. So you can imagine the shock, the disbelief when she found out the leak came from the Commonwealth itself, the very people she thought had her back. So what do you do when the system meant to protect you is the one that throws you to the wolves? Well, according to Gaetani, what came next was just a series of broken promises, and a whole lot of nothing. This is what she says the special prosecutor Ken Mello told her. Right in the middle of this crisis, he apparently promised he would file a protective orderโthat's a legal move to get her data backโand then he would fix it. And for a second, she probably felt a little relief, like, okay, someone's finally going to help me. But that relief, it was short-lived. The next day came and went, and then a few more days, and then weeks started to pass, and still nothing. No protective order was ever filed. All of her most private data was just out there. And the help she was promised never came. So you can see how this played out, according to her. Mello makes this big promise on day one. Then all she's told to do is make a list of everything sensitive on her phone. But as the weeks drag on, nothing gets filed. And then she gets the final blow. She's told Mello was sick, and he's off the case. And just like that, she was completely on her own. And that's what brings motion in hand to that courthouse. Okay, so let's jump back to that day at the courthouse. The scene in the clerk's office has just gone down, security has been called, and Gaetani is, as you can imagine, a complete mess. Then a court officer steps in, and she says he was incredibly kind. He actually calms her down. He listens to her, and he somehow manages to get her a spot to talk to the judge, Judge Rayburn, at a sidebar during the hearing. It finally seems like she's going to get her chance to explain everything. But the second she gets up there, before she can say a single word about her data or her motion, she says the judge just lays into her. This quote, she claims, is the very first thing Judge Rayburn said to her: Taking the clerk's side of the story as pure fact. And you can just imagine how that must have felt. Completely blindsided. Defeated. I mean, how do you even begin to argue with the judge? How do you prove that the clerks, people the judge works with day in and day out, were, from your point of view, not telling the truth? She says she felt like she had no choice but to just stand there and take it. So let's just recap the outcome here, from her point of view. It was a total disaster. Her whole goal was to get a protective order and get her data back. The ruling was that the defense could keep it. Her goal was to be heard as a witness trying to protect her own privacy. The outcome was her getting reprimanded for what happened in the clerk's office. She went in looking for protection and walked out feeling like she was the one who did something wrong. You'd think that would be the end of it, right? But nope. This is where the story takes another really strange turn that just raises a whole new set of questions about what was going on behind the scenes. So sometime later, she gets this phone call out of the blue from someone named Kate Peter. And during their conversation, Kate casually mentions that she heard something had happened down in the clerk's office that day. And that's the million-dollar question, isn't it? Lindsey is absolutely certain that the courthouse foyer was empty. The only people who saw what went down were her and the clerks. So how in the world could Kate know any of the details? Well, the answer Kate apparently gave her is just wow. She says that Jen McCabe has a cousin who works as a clerk right there in that specific office. Okay, so get this. Lindsey says she brings this up publicly. And remember, Jen McCabe is a central witness in the big case. And McCabe denies it, says she doesn't have a cousin there. Who this leaves Lindsey with two possible trails for how the story got out. Theory A, Kate was telling the truth. And the story went from a clerk to her cousin Jen McCabe and then to Kate. Or Theory B, the clerks told the advocate Pam Friedman, who then told Detective Brian Tully, who then told Jen McCabe. Either way you slice it, in her mind, the information leak points right back to official channels. And that's where her story leaves us. With this one final pretty explosive call to action, her whole account just leaves you with these profound questions about privacy, about power, and about the real inner workings of our justice system. And it really makes you wonder, just how deep does this whole thing go?](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1975325974074888293/amplify_video_thumb/1975324964392738816/img/-uoi7sxxI0QTAfoQ.jpg)
