FACTS ABOUT THE "BOGUS PALESTINIAN STATE"

#FAKEPALESTIANSTATE

 

 
FACTS ABOUT THE "BOGUS PALESTINIAN STATE" WHAT THE LEFT , THE COLLEGE PROFESSORS AND THE OBAMAS AND THEIR ISLAM LOVING ISLAMODICK BRIGADE WILL NOT TELL YOU.

“In the Six-Day War, Israel captured Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. But they didn’t capture these territories from Yasser Arafat. They captured them from Jordan’s King Hussein. I can’t help but wonder why all these Palestinians suddenly discovered their national identity after Israel won the war.”The truth is that Palestine is no more real than Never-Never Land. …Palestine has never existed…as an autonomous entity. It was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their homeland.”

– Joseph Farah, Arab-American journalist, editor and CEO of WorldNetDaily
When Jews began to immigrate to Palestine in large numbers in 1882, fewer than 250,000 Arabs lived there, and the majority of them had arrived in recent decades. Palestine was never an exclusively Arab country, although Arabic gradually became the language of most the population after the Muslim invasions of the seventh century. No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine.When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: “There is no such thing as ‘Palestine’ in history, absolutely not.” In fact, Palestine is never explicitly mentioned in the Koran, rather it is called “the holy land” (al-Arad al-Muqaddash).
“Yasser Arafat and the Islamists who control the Wets Bank and Gaza talk of ‘the need to realize justice for the Palestinian people, to restore their international status and their seat in the United Nations.’ They referred to it as ‘our country, Palestine’ and expressed the hope that it would be ‘restored its freedom.'”The meaning of this message is clear: Palestine is a country that belonged to the Palestinians until it was invaded and usurped by the Jews. Jerusalem was the Palestinian capital now being Judaized by Israel. Justice will be served only if the Palestinians are allowed to re-establish their sovereignty in it.

“That all this is unadulterated fiction has not prevented many governments from accepting it. Nor has it deterred pundits from upbraiding Israel for failing to ‘give back’ Palestinian land.

“In fact, there never has been a state called Palestine, nor have the Palestinian Arabs ever been an independent people, and Jerusalem never has been an Arab or Muslim capital. Jerusalem has had an absolute Jewish majority for more than a century (and a plurality before that), and for the last three thousand years, only the Jewish people have called it their capital…To inveigh against ‘Judaizing’ Jerusalem is like protesting the Arabization of Cairo.”

Today's Palestinians are not the original Palestinians of ancient times. The real Palestinians were Greeks not Arabs. Greek people are the original indigenous people which disappeared over 5,000 years ago after they were defeated by the Jews. The Israelis are the now the indigenous people of the area, not the fake Palestinians lying to people claiming they are the original ones. Today's fake Palestinians are descendants of Arab Muslims who later and infested the area.

The Palestinians:
No, they are not any ancient people, but claim to be. They were born in a single day, after a war that lasted six days in 1967 c.e. If they were true Canaanites, they would speak Hebrew and demand from Syria to give them back their occupied homeland in Lebanon, but they are not. If they were Philistines, they would claim back the Isle of Crete from Greece and would recognize that they have nothing to do with the Land of Israel, and would ask excuses to Israel for having stolen the Ark of the Covenant.

More about the largely vacant desolate land of Israel "Palestine" in the 1800s - massive Arab immigration following Jews' return = the true origin of the (today's) so called "Palestinians"

How odd that such last names as al-Masri (the Egyptian,), al-Djazair (the Algerian), el-Mughrabi (the Moroccan), al-Yamani (the Yemenite) and even al-Afghani are so common among those claiming to be "Palestinians."

Today's Palestinians are immigrants from many nations: "Balkans, Greeks, Syrians, Latins, Egyptians, Turks, Armenians, Italians, Persians, Kurds, Germans, Afghans, Circassians, Bosnians, Sudaneese, Samaritans, Algerians, Motawila, Tartars, Hungarians, Scots, Navarese, Bretons, English, Franks, Ruthenians, Bohemians, Bulgarians, Georgians, Syrians, Persian Nestorians, Indians, Copts, Maronites, and many others." (DeHass, History, p. 258. John of Wurzburg list from Reinhold Rohricht edition, pp. 41, 69).

There are villages populated wholly by settlers from other portions of the Turkish Empire in the 19th century. There are villages of Bosnians, Circassians, and Egyptians. -Parkes, James William, History of the Peoples of Palestine, Hammondsworth, Great Britain, 1970, p. 212.

There are very large contingents from the Mediterranean countries, especially Armenia, Greece, and Italy, Turkomen settlers, a fairly large Afghan colony, Motawila, immigrants from Persia, tribes of Kurds, a Bosnian colony, Circassian settlements, a large Algerian element, Sudanese… -Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1911 ed.

[Ibrahim Pasha, the 1831 Egyptian conquerer of Palestine] "left behind him permanent colonies of Egyptians at Besian, Nablus, Irbid, Acre, and Jaffa. Into Jaffa alone, "at least 2,000 people have been imported." -Ernst Frankenstein, Justice For My People, London, Nicholson and Watson, 1943, p. 127.

In 1860, entire Algerian tribes immigrated en masse to Safed. The Muslims of Safed, are "mostly descended from these Moorish settlers and from Kurds that came earlier to the city."
-De Haas, Jacob, History of Palestine, The Last Two Thousand Years, New York, 1934, p. 425.

"I learn of the arrival of about 6,000 of the Beni Sukhr Arabs at Tiberias who are very seldom seen this side of the Jordan."
-British Consul James Finn in apers Relating to the Distubances in Syria, no. 2, June 1860, p. 35.

After 1870, "the [Turkish] forward policy included…the planting of Circassian colonies in the country."
-Smith, CG in Studies on Palestine During the Ottoman Period, Jerusalem, 1975, p. 93.

"The Arabs would have sat in the dark forever had not the Zionist engineers harnessed the Jordan river for electrification. Now they swarm into Palestine in seeking the light."
- Winston Churchill, 1922 "A Peace to End All Peace"

"This illegal [Arab] immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery."
-Palestine Royal Commission Report, London: 1937

"So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied until their population has increased more than even all world Jewry could lift up the Jewish population."
-Winston Churchill, 1939.

MV: "Recently the Israeli government forcibly expelled hundreds of children solely because there are not Jewish."

Liar. They were deported, along with their parents, because their parents had overstayed their visas. Any country in the world does the same thing.

MV: "Israel set up a propaganda hospital in Haiti after the devastating earthquake as part of its "Brand Israel" campaign hoping that a phony show of sympathy will make people forget about Israeli killing and occupation of millions of Palestinians. Only the American media, naturally, went along with the ploy. After the cameras left, Israel entirely fled from Haiti."

Another lie. After the Israeli field hospital left–a hospital dedicated to emergency treatment rather than long-term convalescence–(after being the wonder of the other delegations for its equipment and expertise in emergency medicine), a large group of Israeli teachers, social workers and aid workers arrived to treat trauma and rebuild schools, they're still there. A contingent of the Israeli police also spent six months in Haiti at that government's request, to help preserve law and order. They returned with the highest compliments of the Haitian government.

MV: "The biggest infiltrators are the occupying Zionists who came, conquered and continue to oppress."

The biggest lie of all. Many Arabs identify their origins by their family names. Here are some of the most common family names among the "Palestinians":

"Masri" = from Egypt-Hamas member of Parliament, Mushir al-Masri (the word "masri" littelery means "the egyptian" in arabic !).
"Khamis"= Bahrain "Salem Hanna Khamis" "al-Faruqi"= Mosul, Iraq
"al-Araj" = Morocco, a member of the Saadi Dynasty "Hussein al-Araj"
"al Lubnani" = the Lebanese
"al-Mughrabi" = the Moroccan (Maghreb" – meaning "West" in Arabic, and usually referring to North Africa or specifically to Morocco)
"al-Djazair" = the Algerian
"al-Yamani" = the Yemeni "Issam Al Yamani"
"al-Afghani" = the Afghan
"al-Hindi" = the Indian "Amin al-Hindi"
"Iraqi" = from Iraq.
"halabi" = from Aleppo, Syria
"El Baghdadi" = from Baghdad Iraq.
"Tarabulsi"= Tarabulus-Tripoli, Lebanon.
"Hourani" = Houran Syria.
"al-Husayni" = Saudi Arabia.
"Saudi" = Saudi Arabia.
"Metzarwah"= Egypt.
"Barda---wil" = "Salah Bardawil" HAMAS legislator in Gaza; Egypt, Bardawil Lake area.
"Nashashibi" = Syria.
"Bushnak" = Bosnia
"zoabi"= from Iraq: "Haneen Zoabi".
"Turki" = Turkey "Daud Turki"
"al-Kurd" = Kurdistan.
"Haddadins" = YEMEN descended from Ghassanid Christian Arabs.
"Arab Abu-Kishk" = Egypt.(Bedouins)
"Arab al shakirat" = Egypt (Bedouins)
"Arab al zabidat" = Egypt (Bedouins)
"Arab al aramsha" = Egypt (Bedouins)
"Abu Sitta" = In Arabic' Abu means father and sitta means six. Translated it actually means father of six. (The Abu Sitta family primarily received this name because around the year 1700, a well known knight of the large Al-Tarabeen tribe always had six slaves (i.e. fedawyah, bodyguards), 3 on each side, with him. They were with him wherever he went, day or night. Hence the name "ABU SITTA." = Egypt (Bedouins) "Salman Abu Sitta ".)

Even Yasser Arafat, the most famous "Palestinian" and leader of the P.L.O terrorist organization, was not native to Judea. He called himself a "Palestinian refugee" but spoke Arabic with an Egyptian accent. He was born in 1929 Cairo, Egypt. He served in the Egyptian army, studied in the University of Cairo, and lived in Cairo until 1956! His full name was Mohammed Abdel Rahman Abdel Raouf Arafat al-Qudwa al-Husseini. "Al-Qudwa" tribe origin?

Yasser Arafat also proudly stated in his authorized biography that, "If there is any such thing as a Palestinian people, it is I, Yasser Arafat, who created them."

link.

THE MYTH OF THE SO-CALLED "PALESTINIANS": ...

Date: 03-06-94 From: SHLOMOH SHERMAN To: LOUISE HAGAN Subj: Palestinian Mythology Conference: (9) Religion

[...] OK. Let's talk about displaced people. The Land of Israel (whom the gentiles call Palestine) was a Jewish country since the arrival of Abraham. There was always a Jewish presence there. In the years 70 CE and 135 CE, the Romans forcefully removed large numbers of the Jewish population from the LOI and brought them to Rome as slaves.

Nevertheless, the LOI continued as a Jewish country according to G-d's promises. During the 4th century, the Roman Empire became Christian, and Rome turned the LOI into a Byzantine country in which non-Jewish were brought in and settled by Rome. During the 5th century, there was an economic depression in the Eastern Empire and some of the Jewish population moved to neighboring countries to earn a living. At the same time, Rome encouraged more and more gentile Christians to take up residence in the country. Still, the majority of the population was Jewish.

During the 7th century, the newly converted Arab Moslems came up out of the Arabian Penninsula and conquered the LOI, driving out the Byzantines. Many of the native population, both Jewish and non-Jewish were forcefully converted to Islam and the country was forcefully ARABIZED. Those Jews still living there had pressure put upon them to become Moslems. Some did become Moslems and lost their Jewish identity. Those individuals of the population that became Moslem were ARABIZED. That is, they took up the Arab language and for all purposes were acculturated to "look like" Arabs.

From the 7th century onwards, LOI was an ARAB-SPEAKING country. That does not mean that the people living there were "real Arabs". They were not. They were, in fact, descendants of the original Jewish population and of the Greek speaking population that the Byzantines imported to Christianiize the Land.

Towards the end of the first Christian millenium, the Land was under the control of the Turkish Moslems. From the time immediately following the First Crusade, the Land fell into a sad state. The Turks misuded it economically and ecologically. A once fertile Land under Jewish rule now became a forrest-denuded, malarial swamp. Many people, both Jews and non-Jews left. Most of them were gentiles. The population thinned out. Hardly anyone lived there. The Land was administrated by absentee Turkish landlords. It had became a non-productive province and the Turks didnt care one fig about it. They had more lucrative and productive lands to administer. Starting in the 1500s thru the 1900s, Jews from Europe returned in waves to the LOI. They found a small non-Jewish population scattered here and there throughout the Land. These people were of various nationalities. None of them called themsleves "Palestinians". There was no such entity. The Land was still ARABIZED and the returning Jews were loyal to the Turkish masters. They did everything possible to restore the Land because they loved in a way that no gentile inhabitants had. They cleared much of the swampland and planted trees and made the Land fertile again. The Turks gave them no thanks. The gentile inhabitants had never done anything like that. They had been content to just let the Land go to hell.

As the Land became productive under the hands of the returning Jews, it became more viable and economically productive. The presence of the Jews and their productivity created jobs. Gentile Arabs from the surrounding lands began to pour into LOI to finf work. The Turks encouraged this because they didn't want the Land to become "too Jewish." Beginning in the 19th century, the Turks encouraged Moslems from various countries to come to the LOI, promoising them free land if they did. Many Moslems took up the offer, many of them from BOSNIA came and settled there. THESE WERE EUROPEAN MOSLEMS THAT TOOK ON LOCAL ARAB COLORING AND ASSIMILATED INTO THE NON-JEWISH POPULATION, THEREBY BECOMING "ARABS".

The Turks then began the policy of restricting the Jews to certain areas of the Land, giving the more favored area to Moslems. Much of this area consisted of the present day Judea and Samaria, the so-called "West Bank of Palestine". After the First World War, when the British conquered the Turks, they took the LOI away from the Turks and made it a British "protectorate". They continued to call the Land "Palestine" and called EVERY INHABITANT IN IT, BOTH JEW AND GENTILE, "PALESTINIANS". That name was an English invention just as the "ARAB" inhabitants of the Land had been a TURKISH INVENTION. In those 2 centuries, 19th and 20th, NO ONE WAS DISPLACED EXCEPT JEWS!!!

The British then proceded to do what they have done everywhere they have gone, divide and conquer. They promised both the Jews and the non-Jews that the Land would be given to their communities, but because they were very interested in oil and had a basically anti-Jewish attitude, they favored the "Arabs". The first thing they did was stop all Jewish immigration into the country while they allowed and encouraged gentile immigration. Nationalism was on the rise. The non-Jewish Arabized population of the LOI wanted a national identity and they were content to take the name and identity imposed upon them by the Turks and the British, namely "Palestinians". The Jews did not need to take that identity. They had their own G-d given identity.

The leadership of the "Palestinian" nationalist movement needed a rallying focus, so they used the commonality of religion. Islam became the focus of "Palestinianism". In 1929, a pogrom was organized in Hebron. Every member of the Jewish community there was murdered, man, woman, child. The British knew who the instigators were. They did nothing to apprehand them. In 1936, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem called for another pogrom against the various Jewish communities of the LOI. By that time, the Jews of the LOI had obtained weapons for their own self defense. They fought back. The British moved through all the Jewish areas and confiscated all weapons they found in the hands of Jews. They left the weapons of the Arabs alone.

It was a known fact that the British did not like the Jews because the Jews refused to act like good colonial third world natives. They considered themselves the equals of the British. The British could not stand it. They were used to treating all colonials as second class citizens. The Jews said to them, "We are not natives. We are as good as you." The British did not like that at all. They could depend on the Arabs to act like good little dark skinned boys. That made them comfortable. AND the surrounding Arab countries had OIL!!! Why irritate them by irritating their co-religionists in the LOI?

In order to placate the Arabs, the British told the Jews that they were NOT going to hand over the "whole land of Palestine" to them, only the "west bank of Palestine." Do you know how the "Palestinian leadership rewarded the British?" They signed a deal with the Nazi Germans to advance the German cause in the Middle East. War between Germany and Britain was immanent and everyone knew it. The Germans promised the Arabs that if they would ally themselves with Germany, they (the Germans) would solve the "Jewish problem" for the Arabs at the war's conclusion. The Jews remained loyal to the British government. It didn't matter one whit. In order to gain back the Arab sympathies on the eve of war, the British assured the Arabs that no further Jewish immigration into the Land would be allowed. Ships carrying Jews from Europe tried to enter "Palestine". The British refused them entry and forced them to return to a Europe where the gas chambers awaited them.

WW II broke out. The Arab sympathy was with Germany. They prayed for a German victory. Anwar Sadat, later to become President of Egypt, became a German spy and anti-British terrorist. The Grand Mufti was to be put under arrest by the British but he escaped andfled to Germany, spending the duration of the war there. During the war itself, Jews tried to enter "Palestine" to escape from the Nazis. The British turned them away. After the war, the British continued their policy of not letting Jews enter even though many DISPLACED European Jews had no where else to go.

At this time, the UN wanted the British to give up their mandate on "Palestine". The British further renegged and told the Jews that only part of the "West Bank" would be theirs. They would have to share the area with the non-Jewish residents. The Jews agreed. The Arabs did not. THEY WANTED THE WHOLE LAND FOR THEMSELVES.

The surrounding Arab countries ] told the non-Jewish residents of the Land that when the British left, their armies would come in and drive the Jews into the Sea. The non-Jewish population was encouraged to evacuate the Land in order to open the way for the Arab armies to operate. Many of them did just that, hoping to come back immanently to a land JUDENREIN. The Bitish left in May, 1948. Israel declared itself a state in the truncated area that the British had left them. Five Arab countries attacked Israel. The Jordanian army moved into the area of the "West Bank" that was to become the "Palestinian" state, and instantly annexed it to Jordan. No one protested. Jordan ruled the "Palestinian" state for 19 years. No one protested and said that the "Palestinians" were displaced and had to have their own country.

For 19 years the Jordanians treated their West Bank people like second class citizens. They were denied 3 basic rights. They were not allowed to open factories in the west bank, they were not allowed to build universities on the west bank, no west bank "Arab" was allowed to have a driver's license. No one protested. The Jordanians denied Jews access to their holy places in Jerusalem. No one protested. The Jordanians took tomb stones from Jewish cemetaries and turned them into lutrines. No one protested.

In May, 1967, Egypt and Syria got together and declared war on Israel, threatening to drive the Jews into the Sea. No one protested. King Hussein of Jordan called upon his "Arabs" in the west bank to get knives and kill every Jew that they found. The Israelis warned the Jordanians that if they entered the war, Israel would take the west bank away fomr them. Jordan entered the war and lost the west bank that it had illegally annexed 19 years earlier. The Israelis found evidence of inhumane treatment of people in the West Bank by the Jordanians. No one protested. Everybody was busy protesting against the Israeli "aggressor" and the "poor displaced Palestinians".

Some people have all the propaganda luck. The bleeding heart liberal media went anti-Israel to sell more newspapers. The Soviet Union took up the "Palestinian" cause to win the Arabs over to their side in the cold war. From 1967 until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Israel acted as the best ally of the United States, handing over the latest in captured Soviet weaponry to America, asking nothing in return. Israel was repaied by the anti-semitic State Dept of the USA by being pressured to give back territory to the "poor Palestinians". Meanwhile one thing remains to be told. In 1948, when Israel bacame a state, there were Arabs living there. The Israelis granted them full citizenship. No Arab was asked to leave Israel.

That same year, Arab countries, including Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Algeria, Lybia, and others KICKED OUT THEIR JEWISH CITIZENS AND MADE THEM LEAVE ALL THEIR EARTHLY BELONGINGS BEHIND! No one protested.

You call yourself a Christian and you grieve for the poor displaced Palestinians? You are just one more gentile hoodwinked by the Arab propaganda mill, abetted by the anti-Israel media who want to sell newspapers, and the Oil company whores who think oil is more important than justice. Cry your crocodile tears, sister. Don't expect any sympathy from me. The fact that you allow your sympathy for the poor mistreated "non-jews" of the Middle East to over-ride your concern for Biblical prophecy tells me a lot about the so-called Christians in this country who claim to be Bible believers. You are Bible believers so long as it is not good for the Jews. And the hell with real justice and G-d's word.

ADDENDUM - Incidently, there never was a national or geographical entity called "Palestine" in the historical sense that we usually ascribe to nations or geography. "Palestine" was the designation given to the Land Of Israel by the Romans when they incorporated it into their Empire as a province. They named it after the Philistines, the traditional enemies of Israel, in order to humiliate their new Jewish subjects. Since the Arabs living in the Land Of Israel insist that they are the descendants of the ancient Caananites, why don't they refer to themselves as Caananites rather than Philistines? Arab humor: Take my hostage, please!

SHARE FACTS

Robert Mueller as a "Special Prosecutor" failed his Task in the Obstruction Case!

As Special “Prosecutor” Mueller and his gang of thugs are not in a position to “conclusively [determine] that no criminal conduct occurred” because they are operating as a “prosecutor”.
“Making conclusive determinations of innocence or Guilt is never the task of the federal prosecutor,” in American  Jurisprudence. If that were not the case the Federal Prosecutors could have found Bill Clinton guilty.

 “What “prosecutors” are supposed to do is complete an investigation and then either ask the grand jury to return an indictment or decline to charge the case. They do not get to incriminate someone without being able to bring charges. The only places that works are in African  and South American Banana Republics and in Dictatorships posing as Democracies! NOT IN AMERICA.

 “In the American justice system, innocence is presumed; there is never any need for prosecutors to ‘conclusively determine’ it. Nor is there any place for such a determination. What the Mueller Monkey Brigade did was to look for the Bananas in the Prosecution.
Mueller is a sham and a Disgrace to the Marine Corps whose motto “semper Fidelis” was spat upon and abused and dragged through the mud by this aged crooked has been who himself was turned by ideology or was too cowardly a Marine to stand up and take incoming fire from the Left Soaked rag tag band of Obama and Clinton Cronies and cheerleaders who were all singing for their future supper!

Mueller is a disgrace for declining to reach a conclusion as a good prescutor should have on obstruction of justice, having failed to do so shows his cowardice or his political leaning… or just maybe he was always a DIRTY COP from the time he was the Obama Clinton Uranium Mule being paid for his part in the dirty deal and then being blackmailed going forward!  Yes failing to do so violates the investigation’s obligation to make a prosecutorial decision. Shame on Mueller and his assholes!


Now lets go back in time. 

This is the text of the Authorization as a "Special Prosecutor"
 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3726408-Rosenstein-letter-appointing-Mueller-special.html

By virtue of the authority vested in me as Acting Attorney General, including 28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, and 515, in order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as follows:
(a) Robert S. Mueller III is appointed to serve as Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice.
(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including;

(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and

(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and

(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. §600.4(a).

(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.
(d) Sections 600.4 through 600.10 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are applicable to the Special Counsel.

5/17/19 Date

Rod J. Rosenstein Acting Attorney General

   CFR 600.4(a)  States

Code of Federal Regulations
  Title 28 - Judicial AdministrationVolume: 2Date: 2018-07-01Original Date: 2018-07-01Title: Section § 600.4 - Jurisdiction.Context:
     Title 28 - Judicial Administration. CHAPTER VI - OFFICES OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. PART 600 - GENERAL POWERS OF SPECIAL COUNSEL.
 
    § 600.4
    Jurisdiction.
    (a) Original jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General. The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall also include the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.
    (b) Additional jurisdiction. If in the course of his or her investigation the Special Counsel concludes that additional jurisdiction beyond that specified in his or her original jurisdiction is necessary in order to fully investigate and resolve the matters assigned, or to investigate new matters that come to light in the course of his or her investigation, he or she shall consult with the Attorney General, who will determine whether to include the additional matters within the Special Counsel's jurisdiction or assign them elsewhere.
    (c) Civil and administrative jurisdiction. If in the course of his or her investigation the Special Counsel determines that administrative remedies, civil sanctions or other governmental action outside the criminal justice system might be appropriate, he or she shall consult with the Attorney General with respect to the appropriate component to take any necessary action. A Special Counsel shall not have civil or administrative authority unless specifically granted such jurisdiction by the Attorney General.

In the highligted parts there is the inference that if Mueller and his Dog Catchers fin any "Other Evidence" they should take it where it leads.

Paul Manafort was entrapped in this investigation and he gave up The Podesta Brothers. They include Tony Podesta the go between for Hillary and Obama. He was in violation of the FERA Act. He was NOT Prosecuted. because he was too close to Obama!

LOOK PEOPLE THE WHOLE SCHEME WAS SET UP TO MAKE SURE THAT OBAMA AND HILLARY DO NOT GET CAUGHT FOR STEALING HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
#Followthemoney   That is what this whole thing is all about. Everyone in the upper echelon of the Obama Admin has been paid and then continued to hide the Crime or were black mailed into going along!

FOLLOW THE MONEY!

IN THE END IT WAS ALL ABOUT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS!: Hillary Clinton and John Podesta's Troubling Ties to Russia

THE REAL RUSSIA COLLUSION WAS ALL FOR THE  MONEY. 

Yes I have said over and over again.. FOLLOW THE MONEY!

Hillary And Obama through their common go between John Podesta!

And don't for a moment believe that the OBAMA GANG DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THIS ! THEY DID! THEY GOT A CUT FROM THE DEAL.

Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute and the author of “Clinton Cash,” explained on Fox News Tuesday how a Russia connection to the Clinton campaign and Obama presidency is much bigger and more troubling than anything Democrats have accused Team Trump of.

During his appearance on “Fox & Friends,” Schweizer alleged that Clinton campaign chair John Podesta probably violated federal law when he failed to disclose his stock holdings in a Kremlin-funded company.

“In 2011, John Podesta joins the board of this very small energy company called Joule Energy based out of Massachusetts," Schweizer said. "About two months after he joins the board, a Russian entity called Rusnano puts a billion rubles -- which is about 35 million dollars -- into John Podesta’s company. Now, what is Rusnano? Rusnano is not a private company, Steve. It is a fund directly funded by the Kremlin. In fact, the Russian science minister called Rusnano Putin’s child. So you have the Russian government investing in one of John Podesta’s businesses in 2011, while he is an advisor to Hillary Clinton at the State Department.”

"Does anyone in Trump's circle rise to the level where there's this kind of money involved?" asked host Steve Doocy.

Schweizer answered that he hadn't seen anything like that ever.

 "Nobody that has an advisory role in the White House has had this money exchange.  Podesta owned stock shares with "Putin's Child" and failed to disclose it. Every deal that was done by the Clintons had the implicit blessings of the Obama Gang.. who checked out every deal and made sure they got a cut from every deal that was transacted by any one of his cabinet and Officers in his Administration. Biden, Kerry, Clinton, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Lynch, Holder, Rice, Powers and so many others were all taking money.. and giving a cut to the common pool controlled by Obama's Accountant Valerie Jarrett. Where is this money you ask? Its in bitcoin in Dubai which holds it in secret for the cabal.

“So then in 2013, he goes to the White House, to be a special counselor to Barack Obama, and that requires that you, you know, have financial disclosures every year," he explained. "In his financial disclosure form in 2013, he not only fails to disclose these 75,000 shares of stock that he has in Joule Energy, which is funded in part by the Russian government. He also fails to disclose that he is on one of the three corporate boards that this entity has. It’s got this very complex ownership structure. He discloses he is on the company in Massachusetts, that is he on the board of a company in the Netherlands, but he fails to disclose that he is also on the executive board of the holding company. That’s a clear violation of the disclosure rules that I think needs to be looked at.”

He added, “What makes the Podesta case clear is there was a transfer of money and there was a transfer of a lot of money that stood to make John Podesta a lot of money and it was distibuted through him to the Obama gang of crooks. That is unique and that’s extremely troubling because at the time that transfer is taking place he is advising Hillary Clinton at the State Department. We know that from the Podesta emails that he is helping her make personnel decisions, speech decisions, policy decisions. He is meeting with her monthly. It’s a transfer of money from a foreign governments and passed through to the Obama Accounts through Valerie Jarrett, at the time that he is advising America’s chief diplomat, Hillary Clinton.”

Unlike the revelations so far concerning Russian ties in the Trump camp which all turned out to be BOGUS, the Clinton deals involved hundreds of millions of dollars and enormous favors that benefited Russian interests and the OBAMA CABINET Members.

Bill and Hillary Clinton received large sums of money directly and indirectly from Russian officials while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. Bill Clinton was paid a cool $500,000 (well above his normal fee) for a speech in Moscow in 2010. Who footed the bill? An investment firm in Moscow called Renaissance Capital, which boasts deep ties to Russian intelligence. The Clinton Foundation itself took money from Russian officials and Putin-connected oligarchs. They also took donations from:

• Viktor Vekselberg, a Putin confidant who gave through his company, Renova Group
  -
• Andrey Vavilov, a former Russian government official who was Chairman of SuperOx, a research company that was part of the “nuclear Cluster” at the Russian government’s Skolkovo research facility
  -
• Elena Baturina, the wife of the former Mayor of Moscow, who apparently gave them money through JSC Inteco, an entity that she controls

Then there is the glaring fact that the Clinton Foundation also scored $145 million in donations from nine shareholders in a Canadian uranium company called Uranium One that was sold to the Russian government in 2010. The deal required the approval of several federal government agencies, including Hillary Clinton’s State Department. The deal allowed Rosatom, the Russian State Nuclear Agency, to buy assets that amounted to 20 percent of American uranium. Rosatom, by the way controls the Russian nuclear arsenal.

Equally troubling: some of those donations were hidden and not disclosed by the Clintons. President Obama required the Clinton Foundation to disclose all contributions as a condition of Hillary Clinton becoming Secretary of State. But that did not happen. The only reason the hidden donations ever came to light is because we uncovered them by combing through Canadian tax records.  

ANYONE WHO REALLY BELIEVES THAT OBAMA AND HIS PRYING EYES SPY ON EVERYBODY ADMINISTRATION DID NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ALL THIS IS SIMPLY AN IDEOLOGUE COVERING FORE THEIR MASTERS OR THEY ARE JUST STUPID LOW IQ STUPID IDIOTS!

Everyone got what they wanted in this deal: the uranium investors made a nice profit; the Russians acquired a strategic asset; and the Clinton Foundation bagged a lot of money.

Oddly enough, the mainstream media isn't interested in looking into any of this because they're too busy focusing like a laser beam on minor crumbs they think can feed their anti-Trump Russia conspiracy theories.

And don't for a moment believe that the OBAMA GANG DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THIS ! THEY DID! THEY GOT A CUT FROM THE DEAL.

WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND DUTY TO ARREST MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO VIOLATE THEIR OATH OF OFFICE

CONGRESSIONAL 

Violation of Oath of Office 

and 

Walker v Members of Congress

TIME TO REMOVE THESE ILLEGAL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

 

In refusing to obey the law of the Constitution and call an Article V Convention when required to do so, the members of Congress not only violated federal income tax law but their oath of office as well. The Constitution requires that all members of Congress must take an oath of office to support the Constitution before assuming office. In order to comply with the Constitution, Congress has enacted federal laws to execute and enforce this constitutional requirement.

Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office. 5 U.S.C. 3333 requires members of Congress sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law, 5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to �advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government�. The fourth federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

The definition of �advocate� is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. One provision of Executive Order 10450 specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311� for any person taking the oath of office to advocate �the alteration ... of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.� Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. It can only be �altered� by constitutional amendment. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331which alters the form of government other by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

Congress has never altered the Article V Convention clause by constitutional amendment. Hence, the original language written in the law by the Framers and its original intent remains undisturbed and intact. That law specifies a convention call is peremptory on Congress when the states have applied for a convention call and uses the word �shall� to state this. The states have applied. When members of Congress disobey the law of the Constitution and refuse to issue a call for an Article V Convention when peremptorily required to do so by that law, they have asserted a veto power when none exists nor was ever intended to exist in that law. This veto alters the form of our government by removing one of the methods of amendment proposal the law of the Constitution creates. Such alteration without amendment is a criminal violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 and 18 U.S.C. 1918.

In addition, the members of Congress committed a second criminal violation of their oaths of office regarding an Article V Convention call. 5 U.S.C. 7311 clearly specifies it is a criminal violation for any member of Congress to advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government. The definition of the word �advocate� is to: �defend by argument before a tribunal or the public: support or recommend publicly.�

The single intent of the federal lawsuit Walker v Members of Congress (a public record) was to compel Congress to obey the law of the Constitution and call an Article V Convention as peremptorily required by that law, the original intent of which has never altered by constitutional amendment. The lawsuit was brought because Congress has refused to obey the law of the Constitution. Such refusal obviously establishes the objective of the members of Congress to overthrow our form of government by establishing they (the members of Congress) can disobey the law of the Constitution and thus overthrow our constitutional form of government.

The word �peremptory� precludes any objection whatsoever by members of Congress to refuse to call an Article V Convention. This peremptory preclusion certainly includes joining a lawsuit to oppose obeying the law of the Constitution and it may be vetoed by members of Congress. That act not only violates the law of the Constitution but 5 U.S.C. 7311 as well. When the members of Congress joined to oppose Walker v Members of Congress their opposition became part of the court record and therefore a matter of public record. �Thus, regardless of whatever arguments for such opposition were presented by their legal counsel to justify their opposition, the criminal violation of the oath of office occurred because the members of Congress joined the lawsuit to publicly declare their opposition to obeying the law of the Constitution.

A Quick Summation Of The Walker Lawsuits

 

A summation absent any references of the two Walker lawsuits, Walker v. United States and Walker v. Members of Congress is as follows:

A federal district court in Seattle ruled in Walker v. United States (2000) that the Congress could disobey the law of the Constitution under the political question doctrine. The district court ruled the plaintiff had no standing to sue and therefore the court had no jurisdiction to issue a ruling in the suit. Nevertheless court issued its political question doctrine ruling, which had never been issued by any court previously regarding the convention call based on an advisory opinion issued by the Supreme Court. Advisory opinions have no force or weight of law. This advisory opinion also stated that any decisions based on its recommendations would also be advisory. Thus, the original intent of the Constitution, that Congress was peremptorily required to call a convention, remain untouched.

In Walker v. Members of Congress (2004), the members of Congress voluntarily and deliberately joined a federal lawsuit to oppose obeying the law of the Constitution. The attorney of record provided written proof in open public court that as a matter of public record that each member of Congress individually made this decision. It is against federal criminal law for any member of Congress to join a federal lawsuit to advocate such action or to advocate such a position.

The attorneys of record for the members of Congress based their actions in the Walker v. Members of Congress lawsuit on an advisory opinion issued by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court, in that advisory opinion, stated that decision, and any subsequent decisions related to the amendatory process, was given �wholly without constitutional authority� meaning the advisory opinion on which the attorneys of record based their actions had no force or weight of law whatsoever thus leaving the peremptory original intent of the Constitution intact.

As a result of these actions by the member of Congress� attorney of record, federal law required the Attorney General of the United States write for the public record, a report to Congress explaining the reasons why the law of the Constitution can be disobeyed by members of Congress, who made this decision and when it was made. The public report, by law, was required to be submitted to Congress before final arguments in the appeal process of Walker v. Members of Congress were concluded thus giving their attorneys the opportunity to �change their mind� if so instructed by their clients, the members of Congress. The members did not so instruct their attorney of record.

Walker v. Members of Congress was appealed to the Supreme Court. Federal law requires that all facts and law submitted in writs of certiorari by the plaintiff (appellant) to the Supreme Court must either be (1) waived, meaning the defendant (appellee) in the lawsuit admits as a matter of fact and law that the statements made by the plaintiff are true and correct or (2) opposed, in which case federal law requires the defendant give the reasons why the alleged facts and law are not true and correct.

The attorney of record for the members of Congress, the Solicitor General of the United States acting in his official capacity, waived challenging the facts and law presented by the plaintiff in the Walker v. Members of Congress writ of certiorari. The writ of certiorari is public record. The members of Congress (acting through their attorney of record) therefore admitted in open court for the public record that the following is true and correct as a matter of fact and law:

(1) that under Article V of the United States Constitution, Congress is required to call an Article V Convention if two-thirds of the state legislatures apply for one;

(2) that the Article V Convention call is based on a numeric count of applying states;

(3) that all 50 states have submitted 567 applications for such a convention;

(4) that an Article V Convention call is peremptory on Congress;

(5) that the political subject matter of an amendment application is irrelevant and does not effect Congress� obligation to call an Article V Convention;

(6) that the refusal of the members of Congress to obey the law of the Constitution and immediately call a convention is a violation of their oath of office as well as a violation of federal criminal law and;

(7) that by joining a lawsuit to advocate in open public court they can ignore, veto, disobey or otherwise thwart a convention call, the members of Congress violated federal criminal law.

  

�

 


SO IT IS TIME NOW TO MARCH ON WASHINGTON AND REMOVE EVERY ILLEGAL MEMBER OF CONGRESS. THEY ARE NOT THE MASTERS OF THE COUNTRY. WE ARE!

REFUTING the 10 points regarding the "Trump Obstruction" lies reported in the Robert Mueller FRAUD REPORT!

REFUTING THE 10 POINTS OF OBSTRUCTION LAID OUT BY THE MUELLER GANG OF LEFTY THUGS

Here are the specific list of Mueller’s ten absurd examples of “obstruction.”

1. ALLEGATION: The president told disgraced former F.B.I. Director James Comey he “hoped” Comey could see his way clear of letting go of former National Security Adviser Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who was under investigation, even after the White House fired him.

TRUTH: Trump had the constitutional authority to legally put a stop to this investigation and did not use it. Expressing one’s “hope” is not an act of obstruction, nor is it an order … it is the expression of one’s hope. What’s more, Trump is expressing this hope about someone else, not himself.

2. ALLEGATION: Trump wanted his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to not recuse himself from the Russia investigation.

TRUTH: So what? Trump selected Sessions to be his attorney general because he had faith in him in that role. Once Sessions recused himself, Trump — and don’t forget we are talking about a man innocent of the treason charges being investigated — was now at the mercy of the same Deep State that was already selectively and illegally leaking to frame him for treason.
Trump was not calling on Sessions to reverse his recusal and shut down the investigation. He wanted someone he trusted overseeing it. That is not obstruction, it’s common sense and the way you would expect an innocent man to act.

3. ALLEGATION: Trump fired Comey to obstruct the investigation.

TRUTH: Trump fired Comey on Rod Rosenstein’s recommendation. Trump fired Comey because Comey deliberately set him up with that briefing about the phony dossier (Comey’s briefing was the hook the fake news media used to make what became known as the pee pee dossier public). Trump fired Comey because Comey refused to report the truth — that the president was not under investigation and Trump felt (for legitimate reasons) as though he were being blackmailed. Trump fired Comey, as he told Lester Holt on NBC, because he knew Comey would drag his feet with the Russian investigation and Trump wanted to put the issue behind him.
The only way the firing of Comey could be construed as obstruction is if Comey’s replacement agreed to stop the investigation. That didn’t happen because Trump wanted the exact opposite: he wanted the matter resolved.

4. ALLEGATION: Trump was angry about the appointment of a special counsel and expressed a desire to fire people.

TRUTH: So what? Mueller is actually attempting to claim that Trump’s tweets about the “witch hunt” and his threats to fire people (that were never followed through on) constitute obstruction.
An innocent man raging against a plot to frame him is not, in any legal or moral sense, obstruction. What’s more, had Trump followed through with firing Mueller and Sessions, that would not have been obstruction because it was well within his legal authority to do so.

5. ALLEGATION: Trump asked his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to tell Sessions to announce that the investigation was very unfair to him, and that he had done nothing wrong.

TRUTH: So what? Asking your attorney general to tell the public the truth is not obstruction.

6. ALLEGATION: Trump was not publicly forthcoming about the Trump Tower Meeting.

TRUTH: Lying to the media or to the public is not obstruction of justice. All Trump did was spin the meeting in the most favorable light possible — which only proves he’s a politician. When Obama did this, the media gushed over his amazing talent at “slow-walking the truth.”
If lying to the public or to the media is obstruction of justice, the jails are gunna be awfully full.

7. ALLEGATION: Trump continued to pressure Sessions to unrecuse himself.

TRUTH: So what? Trying to put someone else in charge of an investigation is not obstruction. In fact, the Mueller Report notes that Trump told Sessions: “I’m not going to do anything or direct you to do anything. I just want to be treated fairly” — which tells you that Mueller including this in his childish listicle is his way of padding his non-case.

8. ALLEGATION: Trump didn’t want the public to know he had “directed McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed in June 2017 and that McGahn had threatened to resign rather than carry out the order. “

TRUTH: Again, lying to the press and to the public is not obstruction, and if Trump had truly wanted Mueller fired he could have legally done it. This entire narrative about Trump wanting people fired or wanting to put Sessions in charge of the investigation is breathtakingly desperate and dumb.

9. ALLEGATION: Trump praised former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Flynn when they held strong and criticized them when they rolled over.

TRUTH: It is not obstruction of justice to express an opinion and these opinions are perfectly in line with an innocent man being falsely accused of treason while the Deep State and media attempt to frame him.
What’s more, Trump was almost always publicly expressing these opinions. People do not commit crimes in front of 50 million Twitter followers.

10. ALLEGATION: Trump praised his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen when he held strong and criticized him after he rolled over.

TRUTH: As you can see, to pad his non-case to number ten, rather than include Cohen with Manafort and Flynn, Mueller makes Trump’s reaction to Cohen a separate item.
Sorry, but in America telling a friend to “stay strong” when he’s under investigation and then publicly calling him a “rat” when he falsely accuses you of crimes is not obstruction.

Robert Mueller knows what obstruction of justice is. What he’s hoping is that the public doesn’t know. He was also hoping that The Leftist Media in cahoots with Socialist Democrat Masters in Congress would push the narrative.

Bottom line: Just like his best pal Comey, Robert Mueller is a dirty cop who failed to frame Trump so on his way out the door he bitterly lashed out with lies, ad hominem, false accusations, and total blithering, blathering nonsense.

Robert Mueller is the Clinton Uranium Mule. I have a complete blog identifying what he did as FBI Director under Obama.

And who were the LAWYERS ON THE MUELLER TEAM ??

Here is the dirty List of them:
Eleven of the other 17 lawyers on special prosecutor Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation team have donated to Democrats, though, with multiple of them giving money to either the campaigns of Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, a review by Heavy of Federal Election Commission records shows (two of those lawyers only donated at state-level races). None of the lawyers on the Mueller team is listed as donating money to Trump’s campaign or to the presidential campaigns of any past Republicans, although one donated to Republicans in non-presidential races in addition to giving more money to Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and a string of Democrats.
Six other lawyers on the team do not have previous campaign donations, a review of records shows. The lawyers have other ties that might provide an indicator of their politics; some have clerked for liberal Supreme Court justices, for example. One appears to have written a column proclaiming he was a Democrat.

Here’s a list of the team members and their donations and voter affiliations:

Donated to Democrats

---

1. Adam Jed

No campaign donations come up on the FEC website for Adam Jed. However, he has donated to Democrats on the state level. Wisconsin campaign finance records show he gave $1,000 in 2017 to Josh Kaul, a Democrat running for state Attorney General. Kaul worked as a lawyer for Perkins Coie, the law firm that funneled money from the Hillary Clinton campaign to Christopher Steele, the former British spy who compiled the controversial and unverified Donald Trump dossier. He’s a registered Democrat, according to The Post.
Jed also donated $100 to the Democratic candidate for state’s attorney in Baltimore.
According to CNN, Jed “worked on several high-profile Supreme Court cases during the Obama administration,” including the case that overturned the Defense of Marriage Act and a case that “defended the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate in the Little Sisters of the Poor v. Sebelius case.”

---

2. Andrew Weissmann

Andrew Weissmann is a veteran government prosecutor known for his controversial role on the Enron task force and for going after mob figures in New York. He’s known for his abilities at flipping lower-level defendants on bigger targets (and even going after family members), but Weissmann is controversial in other circles as some consider him an overreaching prosecutor who is sometimes overturned by higher courts.He’s integrally involved in the Mueller team. On October 27, 2017, CNN reported, “top lawyers who are helping to lead the Mueller probe, including veteran prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, were seen entering the court room at the DC federal court where the grand jury meets to hear testimony in the Russia investigation.”Weissmann is a Barack Obama and Democratic campaign donor, according to federal records. “Weissmann, who led the Enron investigation, previously gave $2,300 to Obama’s first presidential campaign in 2008 and $2,000 to the Democratic National Committee in 2006, the same year Democrats won control of Congress. FEC records do not show any donations by Weissman in the 2016 election cycle,” CNN confirmed.

‌

Here are the Obama-related donations on the FEC website:

‌

The Washington Post reported that he’s a registered Democrat and noted, “Records seem to indicate a duplicate donation on the same day, though …Weissmann could confirm only one and would have to review records to assess whether the other might have been a recording error.”

Read More From Heavy

Andrew Weissmann: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

---

3. Jeannie Rhee

Jeannie Rhee.

Jeannie Rhee donated $5,400 to Hillary Clinton in 2015 and 2016, according to FEC records. The records show she gave $2,500 each to Obama for America and Obama Victory Fund 2012 in 2011. She’s a registered Democrat, The Post reports.

FEC

She also donated large amounts of money to Obama in 2008.

FEC

“Rhee also has contributed smaller amounts of money to the Democratic National Committee and other Democrats running for Congress,” Fox News reports. FEC records show she also gave $500 in 2013 to Udall for Congress. Mark Udall, a former Democratic senator from Colorado called Trump a “showboater with an ego bigger than the mountain” in 2016. She also donated money to Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat from Rhode Island.
Here are the Clinton donations from the FEC website:

‌

In 2011, she rejoined the Boston law firm WilmerHale “as a partner in the Litigation/Controversy Department and a member of the Investigations and Criminal Litigation Practice. Ms. Rhee will resume her practice focused on advising clients who are the subject of government investigations, including white-collar criminal investigations, False Claims Act allegations and securities enforcement matters.”
The WilmerHale press release said that Rhee had served “for two years as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel for the US Department of Justice, where she advised the Attorney General, the White House and senior agency officials on constitutional, statutory and regulatory issues regarding criminal law, criminal procedure, executive privilege, civil rights and national security.” She has also served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the U.S. Attorney’s office in the District of Columbia where she was involved in the “successful prosecution of officers of the Washington Teachers’ Union. Ms. Rhee also served as a legislative fellow in the office of former Senator Tom Daschle and as a counsel in the US Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy.”

---

4. Andrew Goldstein

Andrew Goldstein, a registered Democrat, came to Mueller’s team from the U.S. attorney’s office in New York, where he once served under Trump critic Preet Bharara. According to NBC News, “Goldstein was former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara’s top public corruption prosecutor and kept the same role under Acting U.S. Attorney Joon Kim. He’s known for multiple successful prosecutions of New York lawmakers on corruption charges. He’s also highly regarded in the Southern District and across Justice for those prosecutions, his thoroughness in investigations, and high level of success.”

‌

According to Fox News, “Goldstein contributed a combined $3,300 to Obama’s campaigns in 2008 and 2012.” You can see one of his donations above.

---

5. Greg Andres

Greg Andres.

FEC records show that Andres has donated money to Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate. Here’s the FEC document of the latest of those donations:

‌

According to Reuters, “Most recently a white-collar criminal defense lawyer with New York law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell, Andres, 50, served at the Justice Department from 2010 to 2012. He was deputy assistant attorney general in the criminal division, where he oversaw the fraud unit and managed the program that targeted illegal foreign bribery.” He’s a registered Democrat, according to The Post.

---

6. James Quarles

James Quarles.

FEC records show that James Quarles, a registered Democrat, has donated thousands of dollars to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. He has also donated money recently to other Democrats, including Friends of Chuck Schumer and two other Democrats. He has a lengthy donation history dating back years. He did donate to two Republicans over the years: According to FEC records, he gave $2,500 to Friends of Jason Chaffetz, the Utah Republican. He also gave money to then Senator George Allen, a Virginia Republican, in 2005. Most of his giving is to Democrats, however. According to The Washington Post, his donations to Democrats totaled more than $30,000 in 2016.

‌

He also gave thousands of dollars to Obama both in 2008 and 2012. Fox News noted, “Most recently, in October 2016, Quarles donated $2,700 to Clinton’s presidential campaign. Quarles also donated over $7,000 to Obama over the last decade.”

‌

Quarles has quite a legal pedigree. He “started his career working on the Watergate Special Prosecution Force,” The Independent reported. Noted CNN, “James Quarles has spent the last several years at a private firm focusing on complex litigation matters and management, but it’s how his career started that might prove critical….Quarles worked on the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, for which he served as an assistant special prosecutor.”

---

7. Elizabeth Prelogar

Elizabeth Prelogar, a registered Democrat, gave $250 to Hillary Clinton in 2016, according to FEC records. She also gave $500 total to Obama for America and the Obama Victory Fund 2012. According to the National Law Journal, Prelogar “an assistant to the solicitor general, is working with deputy solicitor general Michael Dreeben in his part-time role in Mueller’s legal team.”

‌

The National Law Journal noted, “Prelogar, a former law clerk to Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan, is a Harvard Law School graduate and formerly worked in private practice at Hogan Lovells…Prelogar also appears to be fluent in Russian.” (She was also Miss Idaho 2004).

---

8. Brandon Van Grack

‌

Brandon Van Grack, a registered Democrat, gave small amounts to ActBlue, an effort to raise money for Democrats, and to a Democratic candidate for Congress in 2012. In 2008, he gave about $286 to Barack Obama.

‌

According to his LinkedIn page, Van Grack is a special assistant U.S. Attorney in the National Security and International Crime Unit. He also served as a counsel to the Assistant Attorney General, and “Provided strategic legal advice and counsel to the Department’s leadership on national security matters, including cyber crimes, export controls, economic sanctions, espionage, and theft of trade secrets.” He was a law clerk to federal judge Thomas Hogan and was in private practice at Baker Botts LLP.

---

9. Rush Atkinson

Rush Atkinson is a Hillary Clinton campaign donor. “Atkinson is an attorney on detail from the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section of the DOJ. Records show that Atkinson donated $200 to Clinton’s campaign in 2016,” Fox News reported. The Post reports he’s a registered Democrat.

---

10. Kyle Freeny

CBS News named Kyle Freeny as one of the members of Mueller’s team. “Freeny is serving on detail from the DOJ’s Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section,” reported CBS. He’s a registered Democrat, according to The Post.
FEC records show that Kyle Freeny of the DOJ donated $250 to Hillary for America in 2016.

‌

In 2012, Freeny gave $300 to Obama. In 2008, Freeny also gave $250 to Obama, FEC records show.

---

11. Aaron Zelinsky

There are no federal campaign donations listed for Aaron Zelinsky. Daily Caller reports that Zelinsky “donated $100 in 2014 to the Branford Democratic Town Committee in Connecticut and $100 to a Democratic state lawmaker in 2016.” He’s a registered Democrat, the Post reports.
The Daily Caller reported that Zelinsky wrote this column proclaiming to be a Democrat, and Politifact noted the column in a story on Mueller’s team but did not confirm it. The 2016 article starts, “I’m a Democrat, but here’s some free advice to Republicans: starting right now, get off the ‘traditional marriage’ bus as fast as you can. If today’s election showed anything, it’s that the demographic tide is turning against you. Big time.”
The author biography listed by The Huffington Post with that column matches details in Zelinsky, the Mueller lawyer’s, biography as reported by New Haven Independent when he joined the Mueller team.
According to the New Haven newspaper, he clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justices John Paul Stevens and Anthony Kennedy. He was praised as a “professional, non-partisan, straight shooter,” in that story.

---

No Campaign Donations

1. Zainab Ahmad

According to The Daily Caller, Zainab Ahmad “appears to have registered as a Republican at the age of 18, but has since changed her registration status to unaffiliated.”
A review of FEC records shows no campaign donations for Ahmad. She has worked on several terrorism cases in the past for the government, including that of al-Qaeda terrorist Najibullah Zazi, who “pleaded guilty in 2010 to terrorism charges relating to a plot to bomb the New York City subways on the 9/11 anniversary,” CNN reported.

---

2. Ryan Dickey

The Post says he’s a registered Democrat. FEC records show no campaign donations by Ryan Dickey. According to CNN, Ryan Dickey “was previously an assistant US attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia and also worked in the Justice Department’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section.”
He is “a federal prosecutor responsible for investigating several high-profile cybercrime cases,” The Washington Times reported.

---

3. Michael Dreeben

Michael Dreeben has no campaign donations in his background (although some media outlets initially falsely reported a donation as his that was made by a person with the same name). He’s a registered Democrat, according to The Post. “Dreeben is one of only eight lawyers ever to have argued more than 100 cases before the Supreme Court,” The Weekly Standard reports.

---

4. Scott Meisler

No campaign donations and no voter registration affiliation come up for Scott Meisler. Reuters described Meisler as “an appellate attorney with the Justice Department’s criminal division.”

---

5. Brian M. Richardson

Richardson is a former clerk for Justice Stephen Breyer. Due to the commonality of his name, it’s not clear from FEC records whether Bryan Richardson has made any donations. The Post says he has no voter affiliation.

---

6. Aaron Zebley

There are no campaign donations or voter affiliation listed for Aaron Zebley. According to Fox News, Zebley “is a former partner at WilmerHale, who previously served with Mueller at the FBI as chief of staff. Zebley served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia.”