Off The Cuff Declassified exposes DOJ Inspector General Horowitz’s findings on Mueller’s tainted probe—FISA warrants linked to the DNC-funded Steele dossier, anti-Trump texts from Strzok and Page, and 50,000 messages undermining objectivity. It contrasts Trump’s 2018 border policies with Obama’s 2014 detentions, debunking claims of 2,300 separations while revealing MS-13 gang exploitation of child migrant status. Conservative women like Nielsen and Bondi face DSA-led harassment, yet media silence persists, exposing a partisan double standard that risks eroding public trust in institutions. [Automatically generated summary]
Today on off the cup declassified, the left's fake news narrative on immigration is crumbly.
I'm going to tell you what many missed in DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's testimony to Congress.
Is Mueller's entire investigation, a Fourth Amendment crisis and violation?
We'll analyze.
And the left's vitriolic war on conservative women continues.
President Donald Trump is fighting back against the fake news on immigration being pushed by Democrats and left-wing media.
And he had an unlikely and inadvertent ally in Jed Johnson, Obama's former Homeland Security Chief, the former Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security under Barack Obama.
I'm going to get to all that in just a minute.
But Trump finally, finally had enough.
Now, I'm reading from a Daily Mail story.
They did a very good job summarizing all of this.
But Trump has finally taken the gloves off and he's tweeting.
And I love when the president tweets.
And he says, Drudge Report, referring to a story on the Drudge Report.
Obama kept them in cages, wrapped them in foil.
We do a much better job while at the same time maintaining a much stronger border.
Mainstream fake media hates this story.
Read it again.
It's very sad that Nancy Pelosi and her sidekick, crying Chuck Schumer, want to protect illegal immigrants far more than the citizens of our country.
United States cannot stand for this.
We want safety and security at our borders.
Now, the images that the president was talking about showed, you've probably seen the images by now.
They show what looked like a warehouse with some very basic like foam pads, not even really mattresses on the floor and these illegals in these cages, cells where they should have been because they're illegal, wrapped in those foil space blankets.
And it was very, it was very bright in there.
Many of them were young kids.
Now, look, I've said time and again, nobody is out there gloating about young children being held in any kind of facility.
No one is.
No one is.
But this is a tough issue.
Now, from the Daily Mail story, that's actually printing some honesty.
In 2014, Obama responded to a huge rush of unaccompanied child migrants from Central America by establishing large centers to hold the youngsters while they were being processed.
And it goes to say, those are the images to which Trump is referring in his tweets.
Now, he's trying to show the difference in condition.
Obama really did have these kids in pretty abysmal conditions.
And these are little kids.
I don't blame the kids.
It's heartbreaking.
I blame their parents because not all of these people are seeking asylum.
And not all of the people seeking asylum are legitimate.
The vast majority are not.
The vast majority of these asylum seekers are, well, illegals trying to use the claim of asylum to get into the United States illegitimately.
We know all this, but I'm glad to see the president finally, finally fighting back.
Now, they're supposedly, according to far left, corrupt, woman with her own problems.
Or I say allegedly corrupt because of the Awan brothers scandal.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a woman with her own problems.
And there's another story here in the Miami Herald.
There's babies separated from parents are in immigrant shelters near Miami, lawmaker says.
Now, that lawmaker is, of course, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
And it says at least 10 babies and toddlers taken away from their parents after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border are being housed in, quote, tender age shelters in Miami-Dade.
U.S. rep, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz told the Miami Herald on Saturday.
Now, Miami Herald doesn't go into the Owan scandal, doesn't go into all of W. Wasserman Schultz's problems.
Miami Herald is now using Debbie Wasserman Schultz as some kind of hero, some kind of crusader for these babies.
Now, they're saying that these kids, who range in age from newborns to five-year-olds, are being sheltered at his house, children's home in Miami Gardens, and Catholic Charities, Children's Village in Cutler Bay, formerly known as Boys Town.
I've driven by the latter facility.
I've never driven by the former, but both of these facilities apparently are certified to house, shelter, feed, care for little kids.
Far better, far better than the conditions they would otherwise be in coming across the border.
Now, Debbie Wasserman Schultz is saying that she was given a document by federal officials, and she's making all kinds of claims.
But a guy named Mark Weber, who it says spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services, could not immediately confirm the figures provided by Wasserman Schultz.
He later described tender age shelters as facilities for kids 12 and under.
And he said, quote, these are specialized facilities licensed by the state that are fully capable of taking care of very young children.
Very young children, of course, separated by at the border because their parents broke federal law.
Now, one of the priests, I'm sorry, a woman named Mary Ross Agosta.
She's the spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of Miami.
She said, quote, I cannot, now they run the Boys Town.
They run another facility, the one down in Cutler Bay, which is Cutler Bay is on the east side of Miami-Dade County.
It runs along Biscayne Bay south.
And you get pretty, Cutler Bay is pretty far south before you hit areas like Homestead, eventually winding up in the upper Florida Keys.
So it's down there.
It's pretty far down there.
It's actually a very, very nice area, very safe area.
Parts of the area are very, very affluent.
So it's not like these kids are being sent to some kind of detention center in a bad neighborhood.
There are mega mansions down there near Cutler Bay.
Professional athletes live there.
This is a nice, nice part of Miami-Dade County, middle-class parts as well, but some very, very affluent areas there, very low crime, pretty safe.
And so if you were going to send children somewhere, this is a place you had to send them.
This is a place where they'd be very safe if you sent them.
She said, Mary Ross Agasta, spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of Miami, I cannot confirm the exact age of the children, but I do know that we do have children who are younger than what we normally have.
We normally take in children who are past the age of 10.
I do know that we have children from the border who are younger than that, quite a bit younger than 10.
She also says this facility is capable of handling 81 children.
That's the capacity.
She doesn't know how many recently came in.
Now, this facility was originally opened over five decades ago to house kids coming in from Cuba.
So it was built from the ground up for child immigrants without their parents.
Again, if you're going to send a kid somewhere to be safe while we try to get things in order here in terms of immigration, their status, their parents, this is a place you'd want to send them.
Again, no shelter is a better option for a child than being with their parents, unless the parents are abusive or harmful in some way.
But the parents chose to break federal immigration law here in the U.S.
So this is a good, good way to handle a terrible, terrible situation.
Now, of course, no matter what Debbie Wasserman-Schultz saw, no matter what she saw, she was going to find a reason to politicize it, to criticize Trump administration.
And as expected, the far left Miami Herald is going to help her along.
So they write.
Following Wasserman Schultz's tour of the Homeland Temporary Shelter for Unaccompanied Children on Saturday, homestead, temporary shelter for unaccompanied children on Saturday, Wasserman Schultz, just this past Saturday, Saturday, a few days ago,
Wasserman Schultz criticized the Trump administration's lack of clear instruction on how to reunify more than 2,300 children separated from their parents at the U.S. border since Trump's zero tolerance policy was enacted in April by U.S. Attorney Jeff Sessions.
Now, now, how does she know that?
That is classic far-left political lip service.
Let's read it again.
He said the administration lacks clear instruction on how to reunify the more than 2,300 children separated from their parents at the U.S. border since Trump's zero tolerance policy was enacted in April by U.S. Attorney Jeff Sessions.
How does she know that?
She's in the minority party.
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has a ton of her own legal issues right now.
A ton.
I think she should be indicted for what she let the Awan brothers do.
I believe they've always been under the thumb of Pakistani intelligence, the ISI.
I believe that she gave them access to congressional computers that compromised national security.
But she's not sitting in meetings, the Department of Homeland Security.
She's not read in on this.
She doesn't know any of the things she's doing.
Now, Wasserman Schultz is also saying that the three Miami-Dade shelters appear to be the only ones in Florida currently housing migrant children separated from their families.
As of Friday, there were 1,179 migrant children aged 13 to 17 at the Homestead, Florida Shelter.
That's down on the southern end of Miami-Dade County homestead.
792 boys, 387 girls, including 70 who had been separated from their families at the U.S.-Mexican border.
Let's think about that.
Not the Story that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is telling.
And that number came from the program director at the shelter, a woman named Leslie Wood.
But Debbie Wasserman Schultz is saying that all these kids are separated from their families, and the Trump administration lacks clear direction to reunify them.
The director of the shelter where their kids actually are, the person in the know, is saying no.
Of the 1,179 migrant kids aged 13 to 17 at my shelter, only 70 were separated from their families at the border because their parents either weren't trusted to be able to take care of them, the kid was in danger, the parent committed another crime, or authorities couldn't prove it was the parent or legal guardian.
70.
So 1,100, 1,109 kids at that shelter, out of the 1,179, the 1,109 were already alone.
They were unaccompanied minors at the border.
70 of that number.
70.
Not even, it's about 5% of the 1,100.
70.
So just around 95% were not separated from their families at the border.
Wow.
Does that throw a wrench in the Democrats' gears?
A big wrench in the Democrats' gears.
Wow.
There are another 125 children separated at the border in the house, the shelter up in Miami Gardens area of Florida, and another 70 at the children's village home.
So of the about 1,500 to 2,000 kids being sheltered in the Miami-Dade area.
Now, this says 2,300 children separated from their parents at the border, but we have no confirmation on that.
But just in the Miami area, let's say there are 1,500 kids separated from their families, 1,500 kids being sheltered.
Only 265 of those were separated at the border.
Only about 265 of 1,500 to 1,700.
That really throws a wrench in the left's narrative, but there's more.
Here's a story from Breitbart.
Nine times MS-13 gang members, and this is documented.
These are the ones who were caught.
Nine times MS-13 gang members posed as minors or used kids who entered the U.S. illegally.
Number one, MS-13 gang member smuggles himself and a child into the U.S. May 2nd, 2018.
My mother's birthday.
Not 2018, but May 2nd.
Border Patrol apprehended an adult male who was traveling with a one-year-old son.
He is a known MS-13 gang member who was previously removed from the country in 2012.
The next line is critically important.
The minor child was released to his uncle.
The kids have another legal guardian here in the U.S.
They don't get put into a shelter.
They go with family.
Number two, MS-13 gang member who posed as an unaccompanied minor accused of murder.
December 7th, 2013, Border Patrol apprehended an unaccompanied alien child.
He was given a notice to appear and released into the United States.
On September 2016, the subject was one of the 11 MS-13 gang members involved in the killing of teenage girls in Long Island, New York.
Brought you that story, and you saw the families of those girls sitting with President Trump at his immigration and MS-13 roundtable in Long Island last month.
Believing What We Want To00:04:13
Number three, MS-13 gang member uses her woman child to try to enter the U.S. illegally.
May 8th, May 1st, rather, 27, 2018, Border Patrol apprehended a known female MS-13 gang member who was traveling with her minor daughter.
After being processed, both mother and child were released under their own recognizance after 18 days in the U.S., a known MS-13 gang member.
MS-13 gang member illegally enters U.S. as an unaccompanied minor.
September 3rd, 2014, same story.
Unaccompanied alien child, known MS-13 gang member.
He was also listed on the state of Texas's 10 Most Wanted Fugitives list compiled by the Texas Department of Public Safety.
He was located and arrested in Virginia and is currently awaiting trial for the murder of two people in Houston, Texas.
MS-13 gang member brings child to the border, gets released.
May 9th, 2018.
Female MS-13 gang member traveling with her minor daughter, they were released after just under a month.
And the list goes on.
Previously, deported illegal alien rapist used immigration loophole to try to enter the U.S.
He brought his seven-year-old daughter along.
Several more about MS-13 gang members bringing their kids to the border and being released.
But no, we're not separating every family indiscriminately.
We're just not doing it.
Now, you would think, if you only listen to the media and the Democrats, that Trump is doing something unprecedented.
Big Bad Evil Donald Trump is in an unprecedented fashion removing kids from their parents, creating orphans, basically, right?
But no.
Story from MediaHite.
Fox News Sunday, yesterday morning, Obama's Homeland Security Secretary, Jed Johnson, on Chris Wallace's show on Fox News, freely admitted.
Here's the title.
Obama DHS sec Jed Johnson freely admits that detained children, family, they detain children and families.
He said, we believed it was necessary.
Now, the ACLU blasted Obama for this.
Mainstream media doesn't want to hear it.
Jed Johnson, Obama's Homeland Security Secretary, said this, quote, without a doubt, the images and the reality from 2014, just like 2018, are not pretty.
We expanded it.
I freely admit it was controversial.
We believed it was necessary at the time.
I still believe it is necessary to remain a certain capability for families.
Wow.
Johnson also addressed another phrase that has come up many times in the last week saying directly we can't have catch and release and stating that under his Department of Homeland Security, the Obama administration, quote, deported or repatriated over a million people.
So when Obama did it, it was fine.
There was a media blackout.
Trump does it.
He's an evil Nazi.
Same policies, same numbers.
Same facilities, same kinds of detention, same family separations.
When one party does it, it's okay.
When the other party does it, it's not.
And that is the very definition of fake news.
Reporting something you didn't report on previously and making believe the prior incidents didn't happen because they were perpetrated by those who share your political beliefs.
America's lost all trust in the media.
And like I said, I didn't mind when Obama did it.
I don't mind when Trump did it.
Warrant of Contamination00:15:32
What does it?
Law enforcement is law enforcement.
Obama's Department of Homeland Security enforced the law, Trump's is.
Both were right.
None were wrong.
So shame on Democrats and the mainstream media for telling two entirely different stories about the same policy carried out in an almost identical, if not an identical way.
Many conservatives, especially those of us who had experience in law enforcement or law or working in a prosecutor's office, were very upset when we saw the inspector general's report on the FBI and DOJ's behavior with regards to Trump-Russia collusion.
the Hillary email investigation, etc.
I've analyzed that left, right, and center.
Well, it's a great story from AmericanGreatness.com.
It's amgreatness.com.
It's a really good site with some very smart commentary.
And it's written by a woman named Julie Kelly entitled What You Missed from Michael Horowitz's Testimony.
And as I was reading this, I said the author makes some great points.
Now, what Ms. Kelly basically quotes, her argument is that Horowitz is investigating many more things right now, and that we should all take a breath because there may be some bombs dropping on Comey and McCabe and the entire cabal up there.
Now, a lot of what she wrote in the first part of the article are things we've analyzed, how Horowitz basically said, you know, I see all this wrongdoing, but I can't prove bias.
He writes something very interesting, though, about midway through.
Well, a third of the way through.
He writes, but one reason Horowitz might have punted in his recent report is because he knows the real bombshells are yet to come.
He is investigating the FISA warrant on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page, the cozy relationship between justice and FBI officials in the media, including perks for scoops, ex-FBI director James Comey's handling of classified information, and the potential doctoring of official documents.
And of course, that would be whether or not the 302s, we spoke about it last week, the FBI witness statements were tampered with.
And if so, by whom?
And that was the case.
People need to go to jail.
In fact, Horowitz told Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, a Republican, very vocal Republican, conservative guy, I'm a Jim Jordan fan, quote, we've got lots of investigations going on.
Now, the writer of this piece, Julie Kelly, and I happen to agree with her, says the most explosive revelations might very well be how the FBI, in concert with the DOJ, obtained that FISA warrant on Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.
Because, as she writes, quote, the FBI's application largely was based on the infamous Christopher Steele dossier, a compilation of political opposition research that was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign.
According to the House Intelligence Committee, quote, neither the initial application nor any of the renewals disclose or reference the role of the DNC, the Clinton campaign, or any party or campaign in funding Steele's efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.
Now, that's really problematic.
The FBI and the DOJ knew that the Steele dossier was a matter of opposition research.
It was a subjective document.
Something that could have mattered to a federal judge issuing that FISA warrant, a FISA court judge.
But the FBI and the DOJ never told the judge, this report is not our investigative work product.
This report was compiled and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign via her law firm, Perkins Coe.
That's a big, big, big, big deal.
That's a big, big deal.
The first FISA application was renewed three times where this gets important.
Homey signed three applications.
Andrew McCabe, who's now under criminal investigation, signed one.
Dally Yates, a renowned Trump hater, and current deputy AG Rod Rosenstein also signed at least one.
Wow.
Now, in his biannual report this last month, Horowitz acknowledged that his office is, quote, reviewing information that was known to the DOJ and the FBI at the time the applications were filed from or about an alleged FBI confidential source.
These are Horowitz's words.
Additionally, the OIG, Office of Inspector General, is reviewing the DOJ's and FBI's relationship and communications with the alleged source as they relate to the FISC, the FISC application, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
Wow.
Now, you have to believe the source of Steele.
Then we get into, then we get into the pages and the strokes and all of the text messages.
Now, here's where things get a little dicey.
So let me read you from the article again because the analysis is spot on.
Here's what gets really interesting.
We know that Peter Stroke and Lisa Page were sending 50,000 text messages back and forth between one another.
Judge Rudolph Contreras, who was a central figure in all this, is Peter Strokes' good friend.
They were neighbors, and Peter Stroke was in communication with this judge.
Why is that important?
Contreras was a FISA court judge.
He may very well have been the judge that approved the warrant.
We don't know.
He was also the judge on General Mike Flynn's case.
The case where Stroke was the lead investigator.
The case where we haven't heard from the other investigator, FBI special agent Joe Pienka, the guy that many reports suggest did not believe General Flynn lied.
This is also the case that Michael Horowitz is investigating as to whether or not on that case, the 302s, the witness reports, were changed, presumably by Peter Stroke or Andrew McCabe, maybe with or without James Comey's knowledge.
This is what we expect is going on from the evidence we have.
We don't know 100%.
We're not conclusively sure, but that's what it seems to be via Horowitz's testimony.
When you look at all the actors involved with these cases, now, of course, Contreras was recused for unknown reasons from the Michael Flynn case.
Probably figure out why the judge was best buddies with the lead investigator who's got 50,000 of his own problem.
It's also interesting to note that since the new judge, Emmett Sullivan, came onto the case, Judge Sullivan, I've told you this on the show, is an absolute stickler, a stickler for the rules of evidence.
Especially, he gets especially upset when the government withholds exculpatory evidence.
It sure looks, and that's evidence beneficial to the defense.
It sure looks like the government withheld or played games with exculpatory evidence in General Flynn's case.
There's an investigation into whether or not they tampered, they tampered with evidence to make General Flynn look guilty when he wasn't.
This is bad stuff.
And Mueller now has twice delayed General Flynn's sentencing.
Now, supposed to be for the end of June at this point.
We'll see.
That's a week, this coming week.
This piece in American Greatness says, and I love this line: if someone were writing a screenplay about DC corruption, he could not do better than to invent this script.
Now, they go into everything.
Fusion GPS and the relationships between Bruce Orr, a senior figure at the Department of Justice, who was instrumental in driving the Trump-Russia investigation.
Well, of course, we now know his wife Nelly Orr was the Russia specialist over at Fusion GPS that worked with Christopher Steele on this dossier.
It's unbelievable.
Now, Horowitz made it clear, read from the article again.
He intends to keep investigating unauthorized leaks to the media.
Here's what Horowitz said: quote: Although FBI policy strictly limits the employees who are authorized to speak to the media, we, the OIG, found this policy appeared widely to be ignored during the period we reviewed.
We identified numerous FBI employees at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were, nevertheless, in frequent contact with reporters.
Wow.
Wow.
I mean, this is just, there was no control at the FBI under James Comey.
None.
And the way this piece closes is very interesting.
If Horowitz exposes the players and potential crimes related to the page warrant, only the page warrant.
Now I'm adding my words.
Only the page warrant.
What are the 302s being tampered with?
Nothing else.
We only, only find out that the FBI played games with the page warrant.
Well then, it's a game changer.
It is an absolute game changer.
It taints the entire investigation.
The entire investigation is now tainted.
There's no going back from that.
They write, this could potentially be one of the most egregious uses of federal investigatory power.
And I tell you that every day, right?
Against a private citizen in the department's history.
Any misconduct uncovered in the DOJ's effort to spy on Carter Page for political reasons, rather than national security reasons, also throws the credibility and necessity of Robert Mueller's probe into question.
I couldn't agree more.
There's an outstanding story in the Wall Street Journal on just that that I'm going to bring to you in my next segment.
So stay with me here on Declassified.
There's an outstanding piece in the Wall Street Journal entitled Mueller's Fruit of the Poisonous Tree.
And basically, the piece is arguing that even if Mueller is this legendary man of integrity, that I don't believe he is, it doesn't matter.
The FBI's mishandling of pretty much everything surrounding Trump and Hillary, Peter Stroke, Lisa Page, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, all these people, all these people that apparently weaponized the FBI against the Trump campaign on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
Well, they all tainted Mueller's investigation from the outset.
That is the thesis of the piece.
Now, the beginning of the piece starts off by going through all of the things I analyze on the show every day.
So I'm not going to do that for you.
You know, Stroke and Page text and the statements, Peter Stroke, no, we'll stop him.
And all of the, you know, the texts, when Lisa Page has Peter Stroke, tell me he won't become president.
And he says, no, we'll stop him.
And just the 50,000 text messages between them, Andrew McCabe's blatant bias, all of that.
Now, the concept of fruits of the poisonous tree is pretty simple.
You've heard it.
Most of you understand what it is.
For those that don't, it's very, very simple.
Tainted evidence cannot be used against you.
An investigation cannot be launched on tainted evidence.
For example, I'm a police officer.
I have no reason to pull you over, but I do.
I have no reason to search your vehicle, but I do, and I find a gun.
Your lawyer is going to say, officer, why did you pull him over?
He was speeding.
Well, actually, he wasn't because we have, officer, two cameras that caught his vehicle four blocks from one another.
Both have timestamps.
And when we time how long it took his vehicle to get from one camera to another, and you stopped him only a block away, he was traveling according to that timestamp.
And we do the simple math of the distance between those two buildings, well within the speed limit.
We also have another camera with sound from over here that says you never were given consent to search.
You had no probable cause to search.
So the gun and the drugs you found doesn't matter.
Those are fruits of the poisonous tree.
You violated this person's Fourth Amendment rights to unreasonable search and seizure.
Those pieces of evidence are now excluded.
That's what fruits of the poisonous tree mean.
If a suspect is beaten and a confession is coerced out of them, or if evidence is fabricated and predicated upon a falsehood and that false evidence, those misleading bits of evidence and statements are used to obtain warrants, things of that nature.
That's the argument.
But it goes even deeper than that.
And I'm going to read you, this was a piece written by two attorneys who I think have done an incredible, incredible job.
Now, they write, so I'm giving you the basic overview of everything that preceded this paragraph in the article.
All of those things we've been hearing about and inundated with for months and months and months by us to the FBI to DOJ.
What does this have to do with Mr. Mueller, who was appointed in May 2017 after President Trump fired Mr. Comey?
Well, it says the inspector general concludes that the pervasive bias, quote, cast a cloud over the FBI investigations to which these employees were assigned.
In this case, meaning Peter Stroke and Lisa Page with a sprinkling of Comey and McCabe, including Crossfire, Operation Crossfire, which was the investigation into Trump Russia.
Mid-year exam was the investigation into Hillary Clinton.
And if Crossfire was politically motivated, then its culmination, the appointment of a special counsel, inherited the taint.
So if the investigation was dirty, Mueller is dirty and needs to be shut down.
Even if he himself didn't do anything, he inherited the inherent Fourth Amendment violation.
Due Process Violation00:10:16
All special counsel activities, investigations, plea deals, subpoenas, reports, indictments, convictions, are fruit of a poisonous tree, byproducts of a violation of due process.
That Mr. Mueller and his staff had nothing to do with Crossfire's origins offers no cure.
Matter that Mueller wasn't there for the FBI's allegedly rigging and stacking the deck against Trump doesn't matter.
Even if Mueller is a completely ethical and honest actor, which I don't believe he is, because if Robert Mueller is an ethical and honest actor, then he's the worst investigator in history.
He couldn't even vet his own team.
And if he handpicked biased people for his team, then he's not ethical or honest and he needs to go.
And if he couldn't vet his own team and he is ethical and honest, he's too incompetent to investigate something of this magnitude and he needs to go.
Mueller needs to go.
Now, here is where this article got very, very interesting, maybe.
They pull Supreme Court case law, which I find fascinating in this case.
They write, when the government deprives a person of life, liberty, or property, it is required to use fundamentally fair processes.
The Supreme Court has made it clear that when a government action, quote, shocks the conscience, end quote, it violates due process.
And if due process is violated, then everything resulting from due process, like I mentioned, is a fruit of the poisonous trait.
Such conduct includes investigative or prosecutorial efforts that appear under the totality of the circumstances to be motivated by corruption, bias, or entrapment.
Now, here is where the rubber really meets the road in this, in a way that I haven't read before, and it's exceptional.
They write, in U.S. v. Russell, United States v. Russell, 1973, these are all Supreme Court cases.
The justices observed, quote, we may someday be presented with a situation in which the conduct of law enforcement agents is so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial processes to obtain a conviction.
Well, they write, it didn't take long because the following year in Blackledge v. Perry, 1974, the court concluded that due process was offended by a prosecutor's, quote, realistic likelihood of vindictiveness, end quote, that tainted the, quote, very initiation of the proceedings.
Kind of like Peter Stroke and Lisa Page saying they're going to stop Trump, saying how much they hate Trump, how ignorant his supporters are.
Getting somewhere now, right?
In Young v. U.S. In Young v. U.S., 1987, the justices held that because prosecutors have, quote, the power to employ the full machinery of the state in scrutinizing any given individual, we have assurance that those who would wield this power will be guided solely by their sense of public responsibility for the attainment of justice, end quote.
Prosecutors must be, quote, disinterested, end quote, and make, quote, dispassionate assessments, end quote, free from any political bias.
Do you believe Peter Stroke and Lisa Page?
Do you believe Andrew McCabe, whose wife was a Democratic politician?
People that loved Hillary that thought she was going to win?
Do you believe they were free from bias?
So much more.
In Williams v. Pennsylvania, 2016, the court held that a state judges potential bias violated due process.
That judge had played a role a quarter century earlier in prosecuting a death row inmate, quarter century earlier, whose habeas corpus petition he was hearing.
The passage of time and the involvement of others do not vitiate, but they do not vitiate the pain, but heighten, quote, the need for objective rules, preventing the operation of bias that might be otherwise, that might otherwise be obscured.
A single, this is what the justices wrote, a single biased individual might still have an influence that, while not so visible, is nevertheless significant.
They were saying that the judge on the bench didn't matter.
Didn't matter that the judge was a prosecutor 25 years prior.
Didn't matter.
His mere presence on the bench, his mere presence on the bench posed a threat to due process because he might still hold some of that bias as a prosecutor on the case.
They write, in addition to the numerous anti-Trump messages uncovered by the Inspector General, there is a strong circumstantial case, including personnel timing methods in the absence of evidence that Operation Crossfire was initiated for political, not national security reasons.
They write purposes.
They go on to write, it was initiated in defiance of a long-standing Justice Department presumption against investigating campaigns in an election year.
And while impartiality is always required, a 2012 memo from Obama's Justice Department by none other than Eric Holder himself emphasized impartiality.
Holder wrote, quote, impartiality is particularly important in an election year.
Politics must play no role in the decisions of federal decisions of federal prosecutors or investigators regarding any investigations.
Law enforcement officers and prosecutors may never select the timing of investigative steps or criminal charges for the purposes of affecting any election or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.
Now, strong evidence, they write, of a crime can overcome this policy, as was the case at the Bureau's investigation of Mrs. Clinton's private email server.
Hillary was under criminal investigation.
In other words, what they were saying is that even though Hillary was being investigated in an election year, the evidentiary value of what they had in front of them, they knew she had a private server.
They knew classified information was shared on that server.
We now know that they knew that foreign hostile actors, state actors, were able to breach to hack into that server.
All of that evidence of a crime outweighed the potential political perception opening an investigation in an election year.
But Operation Crossfire against the Trump campaign wasn't a criminal investigation.
No.
It was a counterintelligence investigation without any evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
In fact, when the FBI couldn't get any, they then hired informants to do what appears to look a lot like entrapment To entrap members of Team Trump, Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, General Flynn.
But none of them took the bait.
Carter Page hasn't been criminally charged with anything.
General Flynn on a bogus process crime for something that I believe he did not do.
George Papadopoulos doesn't appear he did anything other than misstate something to Mueller's people and they needed a scalp.
Papadopoulos met some people, bragged about having heard of Russian Oppo on Hillary, said he never saw it, and that was the extent of his conversation.
He missed some detail to Mueller's team.
They did to him what they did to General Flynn, which is basically take a guilty plea, give us a scalp, or we're going to bankrupt you and destroy your life.
This Mueller investigation is so wrong.
It's so bad.
It's bad for America.
It's bad for justice.
Terrible.
Now, they write in this journal, op-ed commentary.
Crossfire's progenitors thus ignored an obvious question.
If Russia promised unspecified dirt on Mrs. Clinton, but never delivered it, how would that amount to collusion with the Trump campaign?
If anything, such behavior suggests an attempt to entice and potentially embarrass Mr. Trump by dangling the prospect of compromising information and getting his age, his aides, to jump at it.
It's staggering that the FBI would initiate a counterintelligence investigation led by politically biased staff amid a presidential campaign.
And then we know that James Comey leaked memos to his friends, to his friend, who leaked them to the New York Times.
Fuck, this entire thing is rigged.
The entire thing is rigged.
Horowitz needs to do his job now.
Somebody needs to do their job, but I don't have confidence they will.
This is a great piece in the journal.
That's a lot.
But I'm sick of words.
President of the United States cannot trust anybody in the Department of Justice.
He needs to appoint a second special counsel today.
And the people that tried to undo a constitutional election need to be treated like the traitors they are.
found, arrested, prosecuted, and imprisoned.
Owner's Moral Conviction00:04:27
The war on conservative women continues.
Now, last week, it was Homeland Security Secretary Kirsten Nielsen not being able to enjoy dinner at a Mexican restaurant because she works for Trump and a bunch of Democratic socialists of America, one of whom works for the United States Department of Justice.
That's mind-blowing in and of itself, decided to, you know, harass her at the restaurant and call her all kinds of terrible names and then go out there and say, whenever you see people who work for Trump, they shouldn't be able to eat in peace or do anything in peace.
Well, that obviously extends to White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who's a very nice person, by the way.
And Sarah was having dinner with her family at a restaurant called the Red Hen in Lexington, Virginia, when, well, let me read you Sarah's tweet.
This is from Saturday.
Last night, I was told by the owner of Red Hen in Lexington, Virginia to leave because I work for POTUS, and I politely left.
Her actions say far more about her than me.
I always do my best to treat people, including those I disagree with, respectfully, and I will continue now.
I think Sarah Sanders and her family handled this admirably.
They quietly left.
They offered to pay for their meals, which hadn't even been served.
They were still being prepared in the kitchen.
The restaurant declined to take their money, which I think was the right thing.
And the staff started gloating.
I just served Sarah Huckabee Sanders for a total of two minutes before my owner kicked her out along with seven of her other family members.
Some server wrote, a guy named Jake Foley Schultz.
This is so disgraceful.
Somebody else wrote, a director of the nonprofit green group, Clean Virginia, Brennan Gilmore, wrote, Press Secretary got kicked out of the Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, Virginia tonight.
Apparently, the owner didn't want to serve her and her party out of moral conviction.
Give me a break.
Give me a break.
These are tweets.
Now, the owner says they booted Sarah Huckabee Sanders out of moral conviction.
So this is what the owner told the Washington Post.
It started with a phone conversation she had with an employee who revealed that Sanders was dining at the Red Hen.
After her chef reportedly told her, quote, the staff is a little concerned.
Owner headed for the restaurant.
The owner said, quote, this Stephanie Wilkinson, I'm not a huge fan of confrontation.
I have a business and I want the business to thrive.
This feels like a moment in our democracy.
People have to make uncomfortable actions and decisions to uphold their morals.
She repeatedly, reportedly described the White House's Trump's White House as inhumane and unethical.
So the owner got there and said, I can ask her to leave.
Her staff said, yes.
And here's how she describes her interaction with Sam.
She told the Washington Post, she approached Sarah Sanders, introduced herself, and asked Sanders to come out to the patio to talk.
And quote, I was babbling a little, but I got my point across in a polite and direct fashion.
I explained that the restaurant has certain standards and that I feel it has to uphold, such as honesty and compassion and cooperation, before saying, I'd like to ask you to leave.
Sarah Sanders, a mom, having dinner with her family.
Moral grounds.
Moral grounds.
Give me a break.
Now, there's another restaurant called the Red Hen in D.C. that immediately took to Twitter to distance itself.
And they wrote, Good morning.
PressSec went to the unaffiliated Red Hen Lexington last night, not to our DC-based restaurant.
Because they were getting, they were getting a little backlash.
People are upset about this.
We were upset about it when we saw it happen to Secretary Nielsen.
But Sarah Sanders wasn't the only one who experienced it this week.
Just Saturday evening, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi was going into a documentary about Mr. Rogers, the guy on TV, the children's show from the 70s.
And she was confronted by protesters.
She had to receive a police escort.
This is from the South Florida Sun Sentinel.
Tampa Bay Times reported that Bondi received a police escort also Friday evening.
I'm sorry, not Saturday.
Glaring Double Standard00:02:29
When several members of Organized Florida confronted her after she left a Tampa theater after seeing, won't you be my neighbor about Mr. Rogers?
The demonstrators questioned Florida joining a lawsuit against Obamacare and Bondi's support of President Trump.
Now, they said to her, quote, what would Mr. Rogers think about you and your legacy in Florida taking away health insurance from people with pre-existing conditions, Pam Bondi?
Another person shouted, you're a horrible person.
Forget that she's the Attorney General of Florida.
Her job is to enforce law.
We were in a movie about anti-bullying and practicing peace and love.
This is from Pam Bondi.
This is her statement.
And tolerance and accepting of people for their differences.
That's what Mr. Rogers is all about.
We all believe in free speech, but there's a big difference there.
And then Bondi, they asked this woman, Choppa, who's the head of this organized Florida group.
Her name is something Choppa.
Let's see, Maria Jose Chiapa.
When the Tampa Bay Times asked Maria Jose Chiapa, the documentary star would have handled the situation the same, she replied, I'm not Mr. Rogers.
I don't know the poise or temperament.
No, you're a far-left unhinged activist.
Do you notice that the mainstream media is not talking about this war on women?
It's okay to harass conservative women.
It's okay to harass Republican women, even if they're not that conservative.
It's acceptable to harass Kirsten Nielsen, Secretary of Homeland Security.
Acceptable to kick Sarah Sanders and her children out of a restaurant.
It's acceptable to threaten the Attorney General of Florida, who's a woman, as she's walking to her vehicle, to the point where she needs a police escort after going to see a documentary.
Mainstream media is not in an uproar about that.
But if you dare say something somewhat controversial to a liberal on social media, your account's shut down.
You're excoriated in the mainstream media.
You're destroyed on television.
Standards are very different.
The double standard is now glaring, glaring.
And it's time for conservatives to start punching back.
I'm not a fan of acting like the left, of kicking left-wingers out of our restaurant.
But we are in Civil War 2.0.
We are in an ideological civil war.
The left hates us.
And it's going to be very, very interesting to see how the right retaliates.
And what I recommend is retaliate with your wallet and retaliate at the ballot box.