OBAMA DOJ GAVE NATALIA SPECIAL ENTRY MYSTERY SURROUNDS VESELNITSKAYA

http://www.zerohedge

Tyler Durden's picture
Screen Shot 2017-07-13 at 9.09.36 AM

Why Did Loretta Lynch Grant Trump Jr’s Russian Lawyer A Special Visa To Enter America?

With everyone now rummaging through every document, intercept, and memo for something, anything tying Trump to Russia, The Hill’s John Solomon and Jonathan Easley have unearthed details that show the Russian lawyer who penetrated Donald Trump’s inner circle was initially cleared into the United States by Loretta Lynch‘s Justice Department under “extraordinary circumstances” after she had initially been turned down.

Simply put, as The Hill notes, this revelation means it was the Obama Justice Department that enabled the newest and most intriguing figure in the Russia-Trump investigation to enter the country without a visa.

The Moscow lawyer had been turned down for a visa to enter the U.S. lawfully but then was granted special immigration parole by then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch for the limited purpose of helping a company owned by Russian businessman Denis Katsyv, her client, defend itself against a Justice Department asset forfeiture case in federal court in New York City.

 

During a court hearing in early January 2016 as Veselnitskaya’s permission to stay in the country was about to expire, federal prosecutors described how rare the grant of parole immigration was as Veselnitskaya pleaded for more time to remain in the United States.

 

“In October the government bypassed the normal visa process and gave a type of extraordinary permission to enter the country called immigration parole,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Monteleoni explained to the judge during a hearing Jan. 6, 2016.

 

“That’s a discretionary act that the statute allows the Attorney General to do in extraordinary circumstances. In this case, we did that so that Mr. Katsyv could testify. And we made the further accommodation of allowing his Russian lawyer into the country to assist,” he added.

 

The prosecutor said Justice was willing to allow the Russian lawyer to enter the United States again as the trial in the case approached so she could help prepare and attend the proceedings.

But just five days after meeting in June 2016 at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr., presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and then Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, it seems the Justice Department had lost track of her… (as The Hill details)

Moscow attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya showed up in Washington in the front row of a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Russia policy, video footage of the hearing shows.

She also helped arrange an event at the Newseum in Washington, D.C. where pro-Russian supporters showed a movie that challenged the underpinnings of the U.S. human rights law known as the Magnitysky Act, which Russian leader Vladimir Putin has reviled and tried to reverse. About 80 people, including congressional staffers and State Department employees attended the viewing at the Newseum.

At least five congressional staffers and State Department officials attended that movie showingaccording to a Foreign Agent Registration Act complaint filed with the Justice Department about Veselnitskaya’s efforts.

And Veselnitskaya also attended a dinner with the chairman of the House subcommittee overseeing Russia policy, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) and roughly 20 other guests at a dinner club frequented by Republicans.

All of which was a far cry from the narrow reason the U.S. government initially gave for allowing Veselnitskaya into the U.S. in late 2015, according to federal court records.

“There’s zero doubt that she and her U.S. colleagues were lobbying to repeal Magnitsky or at least ensure his name was removed from the global law Congress was considering,” said U.S. businessman William Browder, who was the main proponent for the Magnitsky Act and who filed a FARA complaint against Veselnitskaya, Dellums and other U.S. officials claiming they should have registered as foreign agent lobbyists because of the work.

Furthermore, as The Hill notes, the U.S. Attorney’s office in New York confirmed Wednesday to The Hill that it let Veselnitskaya into the country on a grant of immigration parole from October 2015 to early January 2016.

Justice Department and State Department officials could not immediately explain how the Russian lawyer was still in the country in June for the meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and the events in Washington D.C.

Maybe Washington is a “sanctuary for Russian operatives” City?

We look forward to the hearing where Lynch has to explain how she gave this “russian operative” special access to America, then lost track of her, only to discover her again via NSA intercepts, trying to pitch Magnitsky Act repeal to Trump Jr.

‘For high crimes and misdemeanors’: Dem Congressman submits resolution to impeach Trump

Representative Brad Sherman (D-California) has introduced a resolution to impeach President Donald Trump for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” including obstruction of justice over the president’s firing of former FBI Director James Comey.

*

The initiative, submitted to the House of Representatives, claims the president has “prevented, obstructed and impeded” a federal investigation into his former national security advisor, Michael Flynn.

*

Trump “sought to use his authority to hinder and cause the termination of such investigation(s) including through threatening then terminating James Comey who was until such termination the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation,” reads the proposed resolution.

In May, Trump abruptly fired Comey as the FBI director was leading an investigation into potential collusion between Trump’s aides and the Russian government during the 2016 presidential race.

A month later, Comey testified in Congress on the conversations he had with the president, which he said led him to believe that Trump asked him to stop looking into Flynn.

“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy,” Comey remembered Trump saying, according to Comey’s written notes of their meeting.

The conversation took place on February 14, according to Comey’s memos ‒ the day after Flynn was fired over misleading Vice President Mike Pence about contacts he had with Russia’s ambassador to the US, Sergey Kislyak.

However, when asked during the June Congressional hearing if Trump “at any time” asked him to stop the FBI investigation into Russian involvement in the 2016 US elections,” Comey replied: “Not to my understanding, no.”

Even though many Democrats have accused Trump of obstruction of justice, party leaders seemed reluctant to formally back an initiative to impeach him when the calls first came in May.

Currently, the only co-sponsor on Sherman’s proposed House resolution is Representative Al Green (D-Texas). 

Green was the first Congressman to call for Trump’s impeachment from the House floor in May.

*

“President Trump is not above the law. He has committed an impeachable act and must be charged,” Green said in a statement.

“Our mantra should be ‘I.T.N. – Impeach Trump Now,’” he said.

Impeachment is a three-part process outlined in the Constitution. It begins in the House of Representatives, where a simple majority can vote to impeach a federal official for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

The definition is vague and has long been debated. In 1970, then-House Minority Leader Gerald Ford defined an impeachable offense as “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”

Once the House has voted to impeach, the issue heads to the Senate, which holds a trial. If the official in question is the president, then the chief justice of the US Supreme Court is the presiding judge, otherwise it is the vice president in his role as president of the Senate. The Senate needs a two-thirds majority, or 67 out of 100 votes, to find an official guilty and remove that person from office.

Only two presidents ‒ Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1999 ‒ have ever been impeached by the House, both of which history has judged to be highly partisan proceedings. Neither was convicted by the requisite two-thirds majority in the Senate. President Richard Nixon resigned in 1974, rather than go through an impeachment vote in the House.

Democrats squabble behind closed doors over Trump impeachment plan

Democrats in Congress almost always unite when it comes to opposing President Donald Trump, but strategy sessions are reportedly blowing up over California Representative Brad Sherman’s controversial plan to bring articles of impeachment.

*

During a weekly meeting of House Democrats, many of Sherman’s colleagues protested his decision, according to The Hill. Sherman’s articles of impeachment were circulated through the House of Representatives on Monday.

*

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California) urged her party to steer their energy toward issues such as the economy. Others took issue with other possible consequences of focusing on impeachment.

Representative Michael Capuano (D-Massachusetts) argued that there had to be “a discussion within the caucus, in a public forum, before we do something that would position our colleagues or our future colleagues.”

Capuano went on to say that “emotions are high,” referring to the recent controversy with Comey’s high-profile testimony before members of congress.

Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) went even further in his objection to Sherman’s impeachment plans.

Sherman responded to his colleagues’ concerns after the meeting.

“I said, I couldn’t agree with you more. I’m not doing anything until I consult with colleagues and leadership,” the California congressman said, adding, “I think the Republican leadership is entitled a few weeks to decide what to do with this article.”

Representative Al Green (D-Texas) stood in solidarity with Sherman, saying, Trump “continues to validate the reasons why he should be impeached.”

Green is referring to reported rumors that Trump was considering firing former FBI chief Robert Mueller, the recently appointed special counsel to head the probe into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Chair of the House Democratic Caucus Joseph Crowley (New York) said: “There is a need for a family discussion before any issue of this magnitude is brought further.”

“It is a courtesy to our colleagues,” he added.

Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-California) chimed in to say “any member can introduce any piece of legislation that they want. We are a big tent party.” She added: “But again, I believe that I speak on behalf of the leadership and probably the majority of the caucus when I say that people are waiting to see where the investigation leads.”

Last week Comey spoke out about a meeting with Trump where he accused the president of lying about what happened during one of their previous encounters.

There is a belief among top Democrats that there has not been sufficient evidence presented yet to take such drastic measures as to try and impeach Trump. According to Politico, 71 percent of Democratic voters support impeachment proceedings against the president.

 

The BRUTAL Truths Leftists Who “Want A Revolution” Need to Realize

Screen Shot 2017-06-03 at 3.09.21 PM

Screen Shot 2017-06-03 at 3.10.33 PM

Brian Thomas reports that there have been continued efforts for secession which have gained a surprising amount of support in Texas and California, and other secession efforts are gaining momentum in Oklahoma, Maine, Utah, and New York.

Who is working towards secession? Plans to secede already in the works in California may put the issue to vote by 2018.

Pewtrusts reports:

Just last month, a longshot effort to allow Californians to vote on seceding fell apart after one of the founders dropped out amid criticism of his ties to Russia. But a new group pushing secession has vowed to collect the nearly 600,000 signatures required by July to put the measure on the November 2018 ballot.

Meanwhile, secession efforts in Texas are growing as well.

Pewtrusts continues:

Last May, the Texas Nationalist Movement came within two votes of adding Texas independence language to the state’s Republican platform. And in Oklahoma, Republican state Sen. Joseph Silk in January introduced a bill to remove the word “inseparable” from the sentence in the state constitution describing Oklahoma as “an inseparable part of the Federal Union.”

The move for independence, whether it’s from the right of the political spectrum as in Texas, or the left as in California, reflects the political division felt across the country, said Edward Meisse, a supporter of the Yes California secession group that just disbanded. “We have two diametrically opposed philosophies in our country, and we’re just not getting anywhere,” he said. “I think we should allow states to secede so California can be California and Texas can be Texas.”Screen Shot 2017-06-03 at 3.17.19 PM

What are the legal grounds for secession? Since the constitution doesn’t bring up secession, many feel that the issue should go to the courts. Others feel the debate has already been settled.

From Pewtrusts:

Despite the heightened interest in secession, many lawyers and constitutional scholars say it’s legally impossible for a state to secede because the U.S. Constitution doesn’t address the issue, and has no provision to allow it.

The U.S. Supreme Court declared in an 1869 case, Texas vs. White, that the United States is “an indestructible union.” And the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in a 2006 letter that “if there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede.”

Has there been talk of secession in your state? Let us know what you think, and sound off in the comments below.

Single-payer healthcare advances in California — without way to pay $400-billion tab…

Screen Shot 2017-06-02 at 11.45.54 AM

By Patrick McGreevy

A proposal to adopt a single-payer healthcare system for California took an initial step forward Thursday when the state Senate approved a bare-bones bill that lacks a method for paying the $400-billion cost of the plan.

The proposal was made by legislators led by Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) at the same time President Trump and Republican members of Congress are working to repeal and replace the federal Affordable Care Act.

“Despite the incredible progress California has made, millions still do not have access to health insurance and millions more cannot afford the high deductibles and co-pays, and they often forgo care,” Lara said during a floor debate on the bill.

The bill, which now goes to the state Assembly for consideration, will have to be further developed, Lara conceded, adding he hopes to reach a consensus on a way to pay for it.

Republican senators opposed the bill as a threat to the state’s finances.

“We don’t have the money to pay for it,” Sen. Tom Berryhill (R-Modesto) said. “If we cut every single program and expense from the state budget and redirected that money to this bill, SB 562, we wouldn’t even cover half of the $400-billion price tag.”

Berryhill also said the private sector is better suited to provide healthcare.

“I absolutely don’t trust the government to run our health system,” he said. “What has the government ever done right?”

Lara’s bill would provide a Medicare-for-all-type system that he believed would guarantee health coverage for all Californians without the out-of-pocket costs. Under a single-payer plan, the government replaces private insurance companies, paying doctors and hospitals for healthcare.

The California Nurses Assn., which sponsored the bill, released a fiscal analysis this week that proposed raising the state sales and business receipts taxes by 2.3% to raise $106 billion of the annual cost, with the rest proposed to come from state and federal funding already going to Medicare and Medicaid services.

Screen Shot 2017-06-02 at 11.47.41 AM

Sen. Ted Gaines (R-El Dorado Hills) called the plan “reckless” and said the taxes would hurt businesses and families while financially crippling the state government.

“It’s offensive to the people who have to pay for it,” he said.

Some Democrats felt the bill was rushed and undeveloped. Sen. Ben Hueso (D-San Diego) withheld his vote on the bill on grounds it does not provide enough detail of what a single-payer system would look like.

“This is the Senate kicking the can down the road to the Assembly and asking the Assembly to fill in all of the blanks,” Hueso said. “That’s not going to happen this year.”

Lara said action is required because of what is happening in Washington.

“With President Trump’s promise to abandon the Affordable Care Act as we know it — for one that leaves millions without access to care — California is once again tasked to lead,” he told his colleagues.

He said his father recently had heart bypass surgery but went through the emergency room for help after his insurance company initially turned him down.

Even if the bill is approved, it has to go to Gov. Jerry Brown, who has been skeptical, and then voters would have to exempt it from spending limits and budget formulas in the state Constitution. In addition, the state would have to get federal approval to repurpose existing funds for Medicare and Medicaid.

Read more about how the single-payer plan would work here

Roger Stone: It Blows My Mind To See What Maxine Waters Is Saying And Doing

Published on May 31, 2017
This is a mirror channel, the official channel of Alex Jones is here https://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJ…
please subscribe to Alex, click the bell, to receive notifications when he goes live

PRESIDENT TRUMP Winning streak

Impeachment of the Libtard Primate Waters underway!! LOSERS GET. MAGA President TRUMP card and winning MAGA
Billy Greene

What in the hell gives HER the moral authority to criticize ANYONE???? Her James Brown wig ought to give one a hint that things are not right with her mind!!
holoholo haole no ka oi

These hysterical Demtards are digging their own graves
bob robertson

Watters admits to her voters all she is doing in DC is to get our president impeached she admits she is neglecting her voters she cares not t get things done in her community what she was elected to do I am sure she did not run on getting someone impeached she probable told them she was going to work hard on getting things done in her community.
phil shea

I reckon O,Reilly was right , she does look like james brown . But for the life of me , I cant see why she has that job
Angela Baiers

Why are tax dollars and Gov resources being wasted on these allegations? Several Gov officials, CIA Clapper, Comey verified no evidence of collusion. This spec prosecutor Mueller could reignite & spend years on this.
Jacqueline Dollard

Just drive around the areas she’s been representing for decades.  A shambles.  Her and the fruits of her “labour” is a HOT MESS
Rich Powers

She is a piece a trash. dumb brain dead mentally enslaved moron. She belongs in the morgue