ProgDems, FBI, DOJ, Deep State, and Media Are in Panic Mode as the Depth of Their Betrayal of America Sinks In

THE REAL NEWS TODAY -- BESIDE THE EAGLES SUPER BOWL WIN AND THE STOCK MARKETS' JITTERS -- IS THAT GEORGE SOROS HAS SPOKEN. Finally and in public. The shadow who floats behind the Progressive-Globalist plot to eliminate the US as the world's leader has actually made a pronouncement -- it was at the Davos World Economic Forum, that gathering of elites who once a year pat themselves on the back for knowing better than than us Deplorables what the world needs. • • • SOROS SAYS TRUMP WON'T BE AROUND IN 2020. My first reaction was to ask if the Secret Service is already on his trail. Soros, like everybody else, cannot threaten the President of the United States and walk -- ok Madonna and Kathy Griffiths did it, but they're low information Hollywood celebrities whose combined IQ rises to about 60, and we take pity on fools and children. Soros is a different animal altogether. Patriotic Viral News reported Sunday that : "Wisdom and wealth do not necessarily go hand in hand. For proof of this, look no further than George Soros -- a multi-billionaire who has used his money to fund one disastrous policy and candidate after another, tearing at the very fabric of our great nation in the process. From funding Antifa to paying violent, obnoxious protestors to show up at Trump’s rallies, Soros has shown no discretion in what he is willing to use his funds to accomplish. Now, this tired old man is at it again, calling the Trump administration a 'danger to the world' and predicting that Trump may not still be President in 2020 and certainly won’t be President once the 2020 election is complete." Maybe Soros’ was just blustering -- tired old loser men do that well -- or maybe he is part of something sinister. But, said PVN, "you can’t take threats against the President lightly." • And with Soros saying that all his billions of political money are now going into the US, we ought to be watching his moves and words very carefully. • • • DEVIN NUNES PROVES THAT THE US CONSTITUTION IS NOT COMPLETELY BROKEN. American Thinker's Monica Showalter wrote on Sunday that : "Impartial justice is paramount to having a system worth living in. That Nunes was able to break through the sludge of ages with the summary in his Memo really does make him one for the history books. With the facts the Nunes Memo established, the door is now open to finding out even more of what we need to know. " Here is what Showlater sees as the questions ahead, now that Nunes has opened the floodgates of the Swamp : "Which judge authorized the FISA warrant and would he have changed his decision had he known the withheld facts or was he as partisan and rigged as his FBI petitioners? Should we be concerned about the fairness and impartiality of judges in FISA investigations, or do we need another law to scrap the whole thing? What was the role of Columbia Professor Daniel Richman in the James Comey Memos he leaked to the press and was the aim to appoint Bob Mueller as special counsel? A look at those Comey Memos and some congressional grilling of Richman ought to uncover whether the entire special counsel appointment was really about suspicions Russian collusion at all or had something different in mind. How was Mueller picked? Was the FBI completely motivated by leftist partisan efforts to unseat Trump as president, or did it have other Deep State aims such as opposing Trump's interest in rapprochement with Russia as a threat to its rice bowl of counterintelligence investigations? Should indictments from the Mueller investigation be thrown out of court for prosecutorial misbehavior uncovered with the Nunes Memo, same as any dirty-cop or dirty-prosecutor misbehavior? Which journalists got paid by Steele Dossier paymaster Fusion GPS and are there laws that need to be altered on account of that behavior." Showalter says all these questions are now onthe table because of the Nunes Memo and the platform it lays for further inquiry : "Devin Nunes, a congressmember derided by the left for the crime of, heavens, being a 'dairy farmer' achieved this by digging and digging, working to break the logjam and expose the problem through all the testimonies taken and research conducted as the catcalls went on." And, Whowalter reminds us of an important fundamental in the US Constitution's separation of powers : "Why does Congress do these investigations? They're not done because they can bust anybody, they don't have those powers, though they might spur lawmen to take action. These investigations are done so that facts can be established to create the criteria for making laws. Nunes's role here worked exactly as it should have, and the obvious follow-on reforms are now really possible." • • • FUSION GPS IS ON THE HOT SEAT NOW. In a Monday article American Thinker's Gary Gindler goes after Fusion GPS : "On Friday morning, President Trump declassified the Memo prepared by the Intelligence Committee of the House. This document was originally marked 'Top Secret.' Of course, there is nothing new for the inquisitive reader in this Memo. Everything that is described there has long been widely discussed in America. But none of the participants in these discussions have ever had any evidence. Now this evidence, gathered during the closed sessions of the Intelligence Committee, has become public. As a result, we know that the chain of events associated with the case of Trump's 'criminal collusion with Putin' looks like this : Trump's political opponents during the primaries hired the firm Fusion GPS, which specializes in opposition research, to dig up some dirt on Trump // After Trump won the primaries, Fusion GPS lost the customer, but just for a short while // The new customers of the dirt on Trump become the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC // The new customers requested dirt on Trump from Fusion GPS, not only in the American domain but also in the international arena // To add international dimension, Fusion GPS hired a subcontractor -- former resident of British intelligence in Moscow Christopher Steele, known for his open anti-Trump beliefs // Christopher Steele hired some former agents of the Russian intelligence services (against whom he once fought during the Cold War) // The agents of Russian intelligence services concoct a dirty file on Trump (linguistic analysis confirmed that this Dossier was written in 'Russian English' with minimal editing by native English speakers) // It is still unclear as to what extent these Russian agents were the 'former' agents of the Russian intelligence services (that is, to what extent this Dossier is fiction, and to what extent is it the deliberate work of the KGB/FSB disinformation effort) // Trump's Dossier, compiled by the Russians, gets to the FBI through the Assistant Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, who received it from his wife. At that time, she was working for Fusion GPS and was a part of the anti-Trump research team // The FBI used this Dossier as one of the key arguments in the secret intelligence court FISC to obtain a warrant to wiretap the Trump campaign. " • In other words, says Gindler : "the Obama administration used a Dossier concocted by Russian agents to legitimize its surveillance of their political opposition. According to the Memo, FBI leaders knew precisely where the Dossier came from, but in the application to the FISC, they presented the Dossier as a proven fact, and not as opposition research. It was not just a mere bureaucratic mistake -- the FBI used the Dossier in such a way not once, but at least four times. As a result, the Trump campaign was under surveillance by the FBI before the elections, after the elections, and even after the inauguration of President Trump." • Gindler lists the "Buyers" of the Dossier : "Also, it became clear from the Memo how the sale of this dirty product was conducted. Christopher Steele organized a 'leak' of information from the Dossier to the media. The article published in Yahoo News added some missing details, so it appeared like independent confirmation of the Russian Dossier. In other words, the FBI submitted false information to the FISC about the authenticity of the Trump Dossier. And as a 'confirmation,' they used an open publication organized by the authors of the Dossier themselves." • Gindler puts it on the line : "Corruption in the highest echelons of power of the Obama administration is now no secret to anyone." The publication of the Memo, says Gindler, removes the veil only over one episode of the war that US intelligence agencies are waging against the sitting President. Soon, other Memos will follow, including the expected report of the Inspector General about power abuses at the FBI....The explosion of the Memo over the Washington Swamp is only the first blast. It’s not going to be a long wait for more bombshell revelations in this matter." • • • THE PROGDEMS GO BALLISTIC. Clarice Feldman has written a sterling article in American Thinker about the " 'Constitutional Crisis' the Fourth Estate Birthed." I urge you to read it in its entirety at < http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/02/the_constitutional_crisis_the_fourth_estate_birthed.html#ixzz56FWh9bRD >. • Feldman states several truths that need to be driven home again and again as the Nunes-led exposée of the Progressive and Deep State Swamp goes on. • Feldman writes about the media's cover-up role : "As the 'Russian Collusion' story disintegrates, it takes with it any reason to rely on the Fourth Estate, which in large part assisted in Obama administration wrongdoing. It has proven to be a handmaiden of those who concocted a big lie to bring down a political opponent....the FBI and DOJ officials [were] involved in lying to the FISC and unmasking what they learned -- but their hangers-on in the press...are trapped as well." Feldman quotes journalist Kimberley Strassel : " '1) I've covered politics a long time. I've never -- never -- seen anything approaching the desperations Ds have to keep this Memo quiet. And as we know that worry about law enforcement (Snowden/Manning) is not their biggest worry, this Memo must be damning to the core. 2) Have been in journalism all my life. Have never -- never -- seen the press corps fight so hard against transparency. Same media that after election wondered if it was out of touch with avg Americans, now ignoring the legit worries so many have about govt. accountability. 3) Every journo should be asked if they'd be fighting this hard against disclosure if it was a Bush DOJ/FBI accused of wiretapping abuses. Of course not. They'd be leading the charge to put it all out. 4th estate is supposed to enlighten the people. Not cover for govt. officials.' " • Others are pointed out by Feldman : "Notable among them was Mark Penn, a long-time Clinton pollster. He notes the shocking calls by the NY Times and Washington Post for prior restraint -- blocking the release of the Memo House Intelligence Chairman Nunes prepared based on what witnesses told the committee and official documentation about the spying on the Trump campaign. The hypocrisy of their efforts is astonishing -- these are some of the same people who argued successfully that the public was entitled to see (and then to publish) the 'Pentagon Papers.' Penn observes, as we must, that the Dossier is nonsense, and has been discredited -- not as the press is wont to say, 'unverified.'....mainstream journalism today tells us we should see the Dossier, even if it’s filled with junk, and read the Comey Memos, even if they have no verification -- and, yet, be prevented from reading the report of the House Intelligence Committee based on documents that it took the committee six months to pry out of the FBI and Justice Department. I believe in the First Amendment, and I thought that mainstream media did too. I did not see it as a doctrine of convenience that applied only to documents that buttress one side but then not applied if it might conceivably help the other side. The effect of this, he concludes, is to keep the public seriously in the dark about what shocking things have occurred -- something to remember when some of your friends and family seem to be on a different planet than you are : So it’s a fact that six senior leaders of the FBI or Justice Department have been either reassigned or fired based on facts that have come out largely from the work of this committee and of the inspector general of the Justice Department. Yet, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) is being branded almost as a lunatic. The hypocrisy here is not confined to newspaper editorial pages. We have seen a veritable news blockade on information coming out of these investigations on the front pages. In the last Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll, we read people a list of recent facts that have come out and almost all of them were unknown to the public, even when prompted. A majority did know that Comey had drafted the Memo on the Clinton investigation long before the investigation was over. But most people did not know who paid for the Dossier, and most had not heard about the text messages and their reference to an 'insurance policy' in case Trump was elected. After hearing this information, 75% said it was significant and 63% said the FBI needs to be investigated." • Feldman also takes on Adam Schiff, Dianne Feinstein, and Nancy Pelosi, who, says Feldman "among seemingly dozens of Democrats, not to mention half the mainstream media, had been warning us for days that the release of the Memo authored by Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee would place our national security at grave risk. 'Sources and methods' would be revealed. Now that we have seen the Memo, it's clear that was an absolutely bald-faced lie of the most obvious sort. Nothing in it impacts national security in the slightest. There's no mention whatsoever of any 'sources and methods.'....It seems this particular lie was a last line of defense -- for now -- against a coming potential Armageddon for their party. This Memo, bad as it is, is apparently only the first of many, a small percentage of what is to come. And the Democrats know it. Fear is operative. Maybe panic. An entire weltanschauung is under threat, jobs, friends, self-image, who knows what. If this goes on much longer and much more comes out, some Democrats -- not apparatchik Schiff, needless to say, but others -- might have to face reality and say something." • Feldman explains why the FBI / DOJ picked Carter Page as their FISA surveillance target : "The FBI apparently had him under observation since 2013 and it was clear he was neither a Russian agent nor any danger of becoming one. In fact, he was a businessman who frequently traveled to Russia and may even have been an FBI asset who in 2013 helped them nab a Russian agent Victor Podobny. Byron York offers up a rationale: “Put it all together, and Page was the easiest guy to go after. Plus, the wiretap would allow the FBI not just to listen to Page's phone calls but to read his emails, not only going forward from the date of the warrant, but going backward for as long as Page had kept them. If Page truly were the beating heart of a Trump-Russia conspiracy, then there would likely be email evidence the FBI could use.” Carter Page, the peripheral Trump campaign volunteer who was the target of the surveillance, according to Feldman : "was not represented in court. In fact, he didn't even know he was on 'trial.' A year and a half after he attracted the attentions of Deputy Director McCabe and his chums, Mr. Page has not been charged with a single crime, never mind (to be old-fashioned about these things) convicted of one. Indeed, the only reason he is even aware that he is/was under 24/7 surveillance by the panopticon state is because McCabe's FBI found it politic to leak that fact to the newspapers -- via the coy disclosure that he briefly came under FISA surveillance as 'Male-1' five years earlier." Feldman compares the media treatment of the innocent Carter Page to the media's treatment of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), whom the Department of Justice designated as "unindicted co-conspirators" in a major terrorism-funding case, but which designation is apparently no obstacle to their continued respectability in the media, their invitations to speak at small-town libraries, churches and schools, and even their influence on Robert Mueller's FBI. • The Memo states that DOJ / FBI did not "inform the tribunal of all material facts" but seriously misled the judge on fundamental matters necessary to "enable the tribunal to make an informed decision." They misled him/her as to the nature of the document, its provenance, its credibility, the motivations of its author, and his financial ties to the Clinton camp. They did, however, argue that the Dossier had been independently "corroborated" by a September 2016 story in Yahoo News -- even though that Yahoo story came from the same guy who authored the Dossier : in effect, the Government got its surveillance warrant by arguing that its fake-news Dossier from Christopher Steele had been independently corroborated by a fake-news story from Christopher Steele. Feldman says : "Either the FBI is exceedingly stupid, which would be disturbing...Or the same tight group of FBI/DOJ officials knew very well what they were doing in presenting such drivel to the FISA court. They're really the two choices here : either 'the world's premier law enforcement agency' was manipulated by one freaky Brit spook, or 'the world's premier law enforcement agency' conspired with the freaky Brit spook to manipulate the judge. How serious was the misuse of the FISA procedure? So serious, to my mind, that Congress must interrogate the judges involved and find out how the Court allowed itself to be so misled. Perhaps the law needs to be revised." • Feldman takes on FBI Director Christopher Wray : "Trump overruled current-FBI director Wray’s objection to releasing the Memo. The WP framed this as “Trump defies Wray.” Um, who the hell works for whom? If there is defiance going on, it is Wray’s going public with his objections to the actions of his Constitutional superior. Wray should have raised his objections in private to Trump, and if overruled (as he was, in the event), kept his mouth shut in public, or resigned -- and then kept his mouth shut. To lobby publicly (and disingenuously, by raising national security concerns) in an attempt to pressure his superior into doing something is beyond the pale." • Feldman's indictment is brutally frank : "But one thing that this entire sordid episode has demonstrated is that the bureaucracy generally, and the intelligence and federal law enforcement agencies in particular, consider themselves an independent power, a co-equal -- superior actually -- branch of government, the Constitution be damned. Trump is deemed the usurper. Indeed, it is clear that many senior members of the FBI, DOJ, and the intelligence community considered it their right to intervene in the election in order to prevent Trump’s election, and failing that, to kneecap his presidency. And virtually all of the political class in the US is on their side. This is the real Constitutional crisis." • Read Feldman's article. It is outstanding and full of details that are not mentioned here. • • • THE WHEELS OF JUSTICE ARE FINALLY TURNING. Thomas Lifson, American Thinker's leader, gives examples of the ProgDem explosion of attack tactics. Lifson says the FBI and DOJ officials and their media allies "know well that the Nunes Memo is only the first step in exposing the illegal, unconstitutional, and regime-altering steps taken under President Barack Obama’s presidency to fix a presidential election, and failing that, to oust a duly elected president not to their liking....Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley is about to release his report on Steele, the FBI, and the Dossier. The Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General is about to release his report on the FBI and DOJ handling of the Clinton investigation. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has referred the allegations about the DOJ and FBI officials to the Inspector General for further investigation." • Lifson cites Donny Deutsch, "the advertising executive of some repute, and formerly enjoyed his own television show on MSNBC, but now is confined to serving as a commentator on that network. His response to the release of the Nunes Memo was to call for a revolution. Not a metaphorical revolution, but a take-to-the-streets revolution. I believe that this is called 'sedition.' ” • Congressman Eric Swalwell, who appeared Friday night on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News program, in what Lifson called "one of the most remarkable segments in cable news history. Not only did the United States Congressman refuse to answer the apt questions Carlson posed, and not only did he obnoxiously talk over Carlson when he attempted to ask him direct questions on topic, he actually accused the Fox News host of serving Vadimir Putin. The blogger Imperator Rex makes the point that this was not mere rudeness : 'The scumbag is sane and knows exactly what he is doing, which is whipping up a truly crazed base.' " • But even worse – chilling, actually -- than these two is the threat issued on CNN air by a Deep Stater, former CIA counterintelligence agent, Phil Mudd. Lifson quoted Gateway Pundit's transcript of the CNN segment : "Phil Mudd: The workforce is going to look and this and say, this is an attack on our ability to conduct an investigation with integrity....The FBI people, I’m going to tell you, 'are ticked' and they’re going to be saying, I guarantee you, 'You think you can push this off this?'...You better think again, Mr. President. You’ve been around for 13 months. We’ve been around since 1908. I know how this game is going to be played. We’re going to win." • That segment shocked me. Mudd is a serious commentator because he has lines into the Intel community that most do not. Was he giving he own opinion, or -- frighteningly -- was he delivering a message from the Deep State to warn President Trump of what is coming for him? Truly scary. • Separately, FOX News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett went on Sean Hannity's TV program Friday night after the release of the House Intelligence FISA Memo to report that Rod Rosenstein threatened the House Intelligence Committee members three weeks ago : "I can tell you a congressional source tells me that Rod Rosenstein in a meeting three weeks ago threatened Chairman Nunes and members of Congress he was going to subpoena their texts and messages because he was tired of dealing with the intel committee." Jarrett called it "threats and intimidation." And, on Saturday morning Jarrett tweeted that a second source now says Rod Rosenstein threatened Chairman Nunes and House Intelligence members if they did not stop their investigation : "A 2nd source has now confirmed to me that, in a meeting on January 10, Deputy A-G Rosenstein used the power of his office to threaten to subpoena the calls & texts of the Intel Committee to get it to stop it’s investigation of DOJ and FBI. Likely an Abuse of Power & Obstruction." Jarrett cited the crime Rosenstein may have committed : “ 'It is a crime for a government official to use his office to threaten anyone, including a member of Congress, for exercising a constitutionally protected right.' See 18 USC 242 and other similar abuse of power statutes.” Jarrett is calling for Rosenstein’s removal as Deputy Attorney General if his illegal abuse of power is true. • • • THE DEEP STATE IS REAL AND IT TRASHES THE CONSTITUTION'S PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUALS. The details of the Memo make a strong case that current and former officials committed crimes by misleading FISA court judges in seeking four surveillance warrants against Carter Page, a bit player in the Trump campaign. Michael Goodwin wrote in his Fox News article : "Steele was hired by the FBI, then fired when he shared his Dossier with the press and lied about it. He also confided to an agent that he loathed Trump and 'was passionate about him not being President.' Did the agent, Bruce Ohr, whose wife worked for the same firm as Steele, Fusion GPS, tell the judges that? Did Comey? The Memo says no. Without knowing that partisan link, the court was deprived of evidence that would have called into question the surveillance request. Indeed, the Memo claims that Andrew McCabe, the former deputy FBI director removed for his conduct during the separate Clinton investigation, testified that no warrant would have been sought 'without the Steele Dossier information.' Not incidentally, current FBI Director Christopher Wray and his team read the Memo before it was released, and did not dispute McCabe’s claim." • But, Goodwin says : "it is a mistake to view the Memo’s revelations through the lens of whether you like Trump, or what you think of Carter Page. The ultimate issues are no more limited to them than were other landmark moments in American history limited by the personal interests of the parties involved. The case in which Nazis were permitted to march in the Jewish neighborhood of Skokie, Ill., was not an approval of Nazis. The issue was whether repugnant speech has the same rights as popular speech. The Supreme Court effectively said it did in a 1977 ruling that strengthened First Amendment rights for all Americans. Similarly, the 'Miranda warning' that allows a suspect in police custody to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination stems from a case involving a hideously violent criminal. Ernesto Miranda ultimately was convicted of kidnapping and rape, yet all suspects, innocent and guilty, benefit from the 1966 Supreme Court ruling in his favor. Rulings like those weave the Founders’ ideals of equality into the fabric of contemporary life and make America the beacon of hope to the world." • Goodwin says something even larger is now at stake : "Trump is the great disrupter who has overthrown the established political order like no one in modern history, and many opponents have lost their bearings in resisting his presidency. In their rage and bigotry, they are willing to abandon fundamental principles. We only know this because he won the election; none of this shocking misconduct would have been revealed under a Hillary Clinton presidency. The claims in the Memo that FBI and Justice officials acted corruptly should concern all fair-minded Americans, regardless of political preference. Those claims force us to ask whether we are a nation of laws that apply equally to all. If not, we are no longer America. We are a banana republic where it’s acceptable for the government to use its police powers against political opponents." Goodwin says : "The choice we face is especially stark given that the case at hand potentially implicates other top aides to former President Barack Obama. Recall that Page and others linked to Trump were accused of having ties to Russia, then their names were leaked to the media in a bid to sway the election and then to topple the President. There may be other flimsy FISA applications covering other Trump associates we don’t yet know about. The Memo is a giant step in ­uncovering what appears to be an unprecedented conspiracy, but it is not the endgame. More documents, congressional hearings, investigations and criminal prosecutions are unavoidable. Hysterical Trump haters greeted the Memo’s release by declaring that we face a constitutional crisis. They are right — and they are creating it." • • • WHO ARE THE FISA JUDGES? LifeZette published an article on Monday about one FISA judge -- Judge James E. Boasberg -- who ruled Friday against making public former FBI Director James Comey’s seven memos describing his conversations with President Donald Trump. And by doing so, the judge protected -- at least for now -- a key potential witness in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of allegations of collusion between the president’s 2016 campaign and agents of the Russian government. LifeZette described Judge Boasberg -- he "is a member of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) -- the judicial body created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. A Yale and Oxford graduate, Boasberg is hardly known to the American public despite his having recently decided cases of immense political significance. Boasberg was appointed to the FISA panel by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, but the Comey memos ruling was in his capacity as a US District Court for the District of Columbia, which hears FOIA cases. President Barack Obama appointed Boasberg to the District Court in 2011. • Then-FBI Director Comey wrote the memos because, he told the Senate Intelligence Committee last year, he feared Trump “might lie about the nature of our meeting, so I thought it important to document.” Four of the memos contain classified information; three do not. Trump fired Comey on May 9, 2017. Comey’s memos could provide insight into Trump’s intent in removing the FBI chief. LifeZette states that :"Boasberg ruled against an ideologically diverse coalition of journalists and transparency advocacy groups who had filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for copies of the Comey memos. Boasberg agreed with Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys who argued that releasing the memos would compromise an ongoing criminal law enforcement investigation -- namely, the Mueller probe. Exemption 7 of the FOIA permits documents to be withheld under such circumstances." Judge Boasberg said in his opinion : "There is no doubt Mueller is using the Comey memos in some fashion because the special counsel has ‘gathered’ or ‘used’ each of the Comey memos for his investigation.” • LifeZette says the Comey memos decision isn’t Boasberg’s first handling of a controversial public disclosure case : "Earlier, he ruled against Judicial Watch, which is also among the plaintiffs in the Comey case, and kept photographs of the slain Osama bin Laden out of public view. In another case involving Judicial Watch, Boasberg ruled in the nonprofit’s favor, ordering the Department of State to release more than 14,000 emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server. And in a fourth recent case that drew intense public interest, Boasberg ruled against another nonprofit transparency advocate in the Electronic Privacy Information Center’s request that Trump’s federal tax returns since 2010 be made public. There is a fifth case of major significance that may involve Boasberg. When the DOJ and FBI asked the FISC to approve a warrant enabling comprehensive surveillance of Carter Page, a volunteer Trump advisor, in 2016, a FISC judge approved the request. Three subsequent government requests to continue the Page surveillance were also approved. Was Boasberg the judge in any of those four decisions? Because applications and decisions of the FISC court are by definition classified and thus exempt from disclosure, the answer to that question will probably never be known. • • • DEAR READERS, Sometimes it is hard to know who to watch or listen to for clues about what is going on in this constitutional crisis playing out in Congress, the Deep State corridors of the FBI and the DOJ, and the courts. But, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley has reviewed the Comey memos. That prompted him to write a January 3, 2018, letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Grassley, a straight-shooter Iowa Republican, demanded answers from the DOJ and FBI about Comey’s sharing at least some of the Memos with a friend, Columbia University Law School Professor Daniel Richman. Among Grassley’s questions are these three, the answers to which could determine the legal fates of multiple figures in the Russia scandal, including Comey : Have you initiated an investigation into the matter of whether Mr. Comey improperly disclosed classified information by providing these Memoranda to Professor Richman? If so, what is the status of the investigation? If not, why not? Has there been any review of whether the disclosure of the Memoranda by Mr. Comey was otherwise improper, such as whether it violated his employment agreement or any department rule or policy? If so, what is the status of the review? If not, why not? When did the FBI mark the four Memoranda as classified, and who made the classification decision?" • While Grassley is not commenting publicly about the Comey memos, what is in them prompted him to write the letter to DAG Rosenstein. The actions of Grassley, as Judiciary Committee chairman, are worth watching because he is at the center of the entire scandal and will undoubtedly be a key player in its outcome. • Tomorrow we'll continue to discuss the details spread along this road of Deep State corruption that has ProgDems shaking in their Swamp Creature shoes.