Judge Reveals Scalia Wiretap Bombshell … Media Dead Silent

Image result for Judge Reveals Scalia Wiretap Bombshell … Media Dead Silent

The nation is automatically in complete amazement whenever Judge Andrew Napolitano decides to present himself with a public announcement.

Much consideration and many questions have come into account after his live interview with FOX news. Judge Scalia is no longer with us, however, Judge Napolitano and Judge Scalia were very close friends.

Recently, Napolitano felt he has the responsibility to reveal important information about his friend on live television. Judge Napolitano stated clearly,

“Judge Scalia told him that he was under surveillance of the Obama’s administration. Scalia didn’t like that and probably other members from the Supreme Court had been under surveillance by the intelligence agencies under Obama.”

According to conservativetribune,

Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano just made a stunning claim about the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and President Barack Obama.

In a segment this week on the Fox News Business Network’s “Mornings With Maria,” Napolitano said he was told by Scalia that Scalia thought the Supreme Court was under surveillance by the administration of former President Barack Obama.

Justice Scalia told me he often thought the court was being surveilled, and he told me that probably four or five years ago,” Napolitano said in the clip shown below.


That’s huge for a couple of reasons.

First of all, if that claim is true, it’s a gross overreach of the executive branch into the judicial branch, to say the least. But much, much more than that, think of the massive rulings that were made over the course of the Obama presidency:

Two crucial Obamacare rulings. Gay marriage legalized nationwide — one of the most controversial rulings in recent memory. And if Obama’s White House really did have the Supreme Court under surveillance, Obama could have been inappropriately informed about all of it.

And, as the judge pointed out in the segment, “the use of intelligence data for political purposes is a felony.”

Let’s not forget that President Donald Trump had also made similar accusations against the Obama administration not long ago.

It’s a strange coincidence for several prominent politicians — including Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who has recently made formal requests for information on his own possible surveillance by the Obama administration — to be claiming the same injury against a man not really known for his uprightness and honesty.

Could there be some truth to this?

At the Conservative Tribune, we’ve discussed Obama’s fascination, shall we way, with surveillance before — this is just further confirmation.

But by all means, mainstream media, go nuts about whatever conversation was had between Trump and the Russians last week.


Judge Puts Mueller in Hot Seat. Bombshells Are Likely Incoming

Image result for Judge Puts Mueller in Hot Seat. Bombshells Are Likely Incoming

A new report suggests that “bombshells are likely ahead” in the Michael Flynn case as the judge puts Mueller in the hot seat.

TheGatewayPundit reported: With each passing day, more evidence suggests the indictment of former National Security Adviser Ret. Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was a dubious one. In what would be an insurmountable blow to special counsel Robert Mueller’s unchecked Russia probe, former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell says if there is a man who can bring justice for Flynn, it’s Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.

As the Daily Caller reported last week, Sullivan “issued a “Brady” order requiring Mueller to provide Flynn all information that is favorable to the defense whether with respect to guilt or punishment.”

According to Margot Cleveland of The Federalist, the order suggests “bombshell are likely ahead.”

The Federalist reports:

With a protective order in place, Flynn’s attorneys should start receiving the required disclosures from the special counsel’s office. There is reason to believe these will include some bombshells.

First, we know from the recently released GOP House Intelligence Committee memo and the Grassley-Graham criminal referral of Christopher Steele, the FBI and DOJ withheld significant (and material, in my view) information in seeking a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to conduct surveillance on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page. There is cause to believe the FISA court was connected to the criminal charge filed against Flynn because Contreras, who recused less than a week after accepting Flynn’s guilty plea, “is one of just three FISA court judges who sits in the District of Columbia, where it is likely the Trump-Russia FISA warrants were sought.”

Was other evidence withheld, either from the FISA court or from Flynn’s attorneys in negotiating a plea? Again, there is reason to believe so, given the players involved and the facts already uncovered. […]

Mueller must now provide Flynn all exculpatory evidence: Significantly, if the information is favorable to Flynn but the special counsel’s office believes it is immaterial, government attorneys must nonetheless provide the evidence to Sullivan to allow him to make the call. In other words, Mueller’s team cannot unilaterally decide what evidence matters, as the Department of Justice did in applying to the FISA court for a surveillance warrant on Page while withholding the key fact that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee paid for information crucial to the application.

Read full story @ (Link: www.thegatewaypundit.com)
Please share and comment


Busted. There Are 11 FISA Judges, Guess How Many Obama Appointed…

Obama is as crooked as Hillary!

Of the 11 FISA court appointed judges, 10 of them were appointed by Obama, including the corrupt Rudolph Contreras that granted the FISA warrant after another judge rejected it. He is also the same judge who had to recuse himself days after the Michael Flynn plea.

This is yet another inconvenient fact that the media and Democrats don’t want to discuss. The entire FISA court basically was full of Obama appointees. The one Trump apoointee to the FISA court also replaced an Obama appointee named Susan Webber Wright who’s term expired May of 2016. Keep an eye on the story about Rudolph Contreas though. That’s the big story that everyone seems to be missing from this memo release. Corruption at the judge level is even more frightening than corrupt DOJ and FBI hacks.

Gateway Pundit reports:

The Obama team’s actions with the FISA Court were not just corrupt – they were criminal! Now his appointed judges are in the news for suspect deep state actions.

The FISA Court was put in place in 1978 when Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The Court sits in Washington D.C., and is composed of eleven federal district court judges who are designated by the
Chief Justice of the United States. Each judge serves for a maximum of seven years and their terms are staggered to ensure continuity on the Court. In addition, the entire FISA court in late 2016 was stacked with Obama appointees. The entire court as of March 2017 was Obama appointees.

Now Obama appointed Judges to the FISA Court are in the news because of their suspect actions –

1. On Friday the House Intelligence Committee released its FISA memo that described the corrupt actions taken by Obama’s FBI and DOJ to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. Obama’s DOJ and FBI used a document created from information by Hillary Clinton campaign and DNC funding to obtain multiple FISA Court warrants. The political anti-Trump sources of the information were not provided to the court when requesting the warrant and top DOJ and FBI officials were the ones partaking in these actions. As a result, Congressional leaders are calling for prosecution of FBI and DOJ officials involved in the criminal actions and FOX News’ Gregg Jarrett stated that the criminal acts by Obama’s scoundrels involved in the FISA crimes could qualify for sentences of up to 10 years in prison.

It’s time to determine who signed off on the above warrants. Judges typically sit on the Court for one week at a time, on a rotating basis. Which judge signed off on the warrants with such flimsy information provided? The judge or judges who signed off on these warrants need to be investigated. Also, why have none of these judges announced that they are prosecuting the individuals who provided the fake information? This is their duty!

2. One Obama FISA appointee was also involved in General Flynn’s criminal case. We know this because he recused himself from the Flynn case. Obama FISA Court appointee and U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras recused himself from former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s criminal case in December. It’s yet unknown the reason for why Contreras recused himself. Why did he recuse himself and did he also sign off on any of the FISA warrants given to Obama cronies?

3. On Friday another Obama appointed FISA Court judge, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg sidedwith the Department of Justice after multiple news organizations, including CNN and USA Today, sued for the public release of Comey’s memos after their Freedom of Information Act requests were denied. (read more). The fact that any judge would currently side with this corrupt Department of Justice is suspect. What is in the memos and why is this being hidden from the public?

SHARE this all over Facebook and social media so people realize what’s really going on in the halls of the ultra-secretive FISA court!

Source: Pacific Pundit,conservativepost.com

Judge Behind FISA Warrant Deep Ties To Obama Just Revealed! Dems Attempt To Shield Obama FAILS!

The one glaring name that has thus far been purposely excluded from this tapestry of corruption and malfeasance is without a doubt the puppet master himself…“BARACK OBAMA.”

The mounting evidence of White House involvement which had eluded investigators is now beginning to reach inside the Oval Office, of what is without a doubt becoming the biggest abuse of power scandal within the history of this great nation.

A new revelation just uncovered regarding the crucial FISA warrant granted in 2016 based on a phony Clinton funded dossier was granted and “signed-off” by an OBAMA appointed judge.

The astounding news that FISA Judge Rudolph Contreras (an Obama appointee), was the judge who issued a surveillance warrant on private citizen Carter Page based on a bogus Yahoo News article, that was actually created by British spy Christopher Steele who masterminded the phony dossier in the first place.

Not even the comedic genius of British actor Peter Sellers portrayal of the bubbling Chief Inspector Clouseau in the Pink Panther film series could have envisioned such a ridiculously absurd plot.

And yet here we are once again, with FISA Judge Rudolph Contreras becoming a major player appointed to rule on yet another case, General Fynn, no doubt another unique coincidence.

The unraveling revelation that an OBAMA appointed FISA judge granted warrants on a political hit piece paid for by the Clinton campaign and used that information as the bases to spy on the Trump team is astounding, moreover by a foreign entity within a political campaign is yet another law which has been violated.

Thus far the silence from both the OBAMA camp and the mainstream media is deafening, perhaps thinking that ignoring the widening scandal and not reporting on the drip, drip, drip of incriminating evidence will somehow run its course.

However, this isn’t merely corruption of politician’s simply accepting bribes to enrich themselves or engaging in some nefarious personal actions. This is an ABUSE OF POWER, to actually change and interfere with our most sacred institution, that of a free and open election.

Do you believe that former President Obama will finally be compelled before Congress to testify under oath regarding his involvement with the 2016 election?

Source: Patriot Beat, everydayconservative.com


Judge Reveals Antonin Scalia Wiretap Bombshell … Media Dead Silent

Judge Andrew Napolitano decided to spoke publicly about his friendship with Judge Scalia who unfortunately is no longer with us.


He gave an interview for Fox News and felt the responsibility to reveal important information for his friend.

This one is shocking, and the claim he made about Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and President Barack Obama is crossing the line.

According to USA Politics Today:

Judge Napolitano stated: “Judge Scalia told him that he was under surveillance of the Obama’s administration. Scalia didn’t like that and probably other members from the Supreme Court had been under surveillance by the intelligence agencies under Obama.”

“Justice Scalia told me he often thought the court was being surveilled, and he told me that probably four or five years ago,” Napolitano said in the clip shown below.

These statements lead to overreach of the executive branch into the judicial branch if they appear to be true. However, if we think of the two crucial Obamacare rulings or one of the most controversial rulings, the gay-marriage and it’s legalization, the things are more cruel.

The judge pointed out in the segment, “the use of intelligence data for political purposes is a felony.” However, president Trump made similar allegations recently against Obama. It’s weird coincidence that Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul recently made formal requests for information on his own possible surveillance by the Obama administration.

What do you think about what judge Napolitano stated? That illegal surveillance must have been prevented, who knows how many other people were included in these scheme. These Democrat crime schemes must stop, someone must face the consequences from their actions. We can’t wait to see Obama beg for freedom, but once he enters his prison cell, all of us will be satisfied. What do you think about this?



Scroll down to the comment section and tell us what you think.

Source: www.donaldtrumpforusa.com

POLL: Should A Muslim Who Supports Sharia Law Be Allowed To Be A US Judge?

A religious nonprofit in the Dallas area offers Muslims the option of Sharia law to settle family and business disputes.

On its website the Islamic Tribunal states that, “The courts of the United States of America are costly and consist of ineffective lawyers. Discontent with the legal system leads many Muslims in America to postpone justice in this world and opt for an audience on the Day of Judgment.”

A religious nonprofit in the Dallas area offers Muslims the option of Sharia law to settle family and business disputes.

On its website the Islamic Tribunal states that, “The courts of the United States of America are costly and consist of ineffective lawyers. Discontent with the legal system leads many Muslims in America to postpone justice in this world and opt for an audience on the Day of Judgment.”

“Fox and Friends” sat down with Judge Andrew Napolitano to figure out the legal ramifications involved here.

Napolitano reminded that these types of courts exist all over the United States for many different religions. The people that go before them are seeking a resolution of a dispute that is “integral to their religion,” he explained.

Napolitano said each party would have to agree in writing that they are consenting to whatever decision the tribunal makes.

For instance, a couple might choose to have the Sharia system settle a child custody dispute.

“As long as it’s voluntary and as long as it doesn’t violate federal, state or local law, people can submit to it,” said Napolitano.

He added that it’s sort of like when people go on TV before “Judge Judy.”

“When you appear before Judge Judy or when you appeared before Judge Nap on ‘Power of Attorney’ on Fox, seems like 100 years ago, you actually signed an agreement naming me or Judge Judy or whoever the judge was as the final arbiter of that decision, not appealable. And you’d be bound by that decision,” he explained.

Should A Muslim Who Supports Sharia Law Be Allowed To Be A US Judge?

Source: www.donaldtrumpforusa.com

Should Congress Remove Federal Judge That Blocked Trump’s Ban On Transgenders In Military?

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has decided to take military matters into her own hands, instead of leaving the military under the decisions and protections of our Commander-In-Chief, President Trump.

She in fact has gone so far as to effectively stop President Trump’s order that bans transgenders from entering into military service.

Doing so will protect taxpayers from the expenses of hormonal therapies and surgeries that current transgender military troops are demanding.
However, this liberal judge would rather see more taxpayer expense go toward this and further push the progressive agenda than allow President Trump to do his job.

So what do you think? Should Congress remove this legislate-from-the-bench judge and have President Trump replace her with someone more constitutionally minded?

Make your voice heard, America!




Source: www.conservative-club.com

POLL: Should the Federal Judge That Ruled That Americans Could NOT Criticize Islam Be Removed?

Federal Judge Michael A. Shipp signed off on a court order that does not allow New Jersey residents to criticize Islam.

 In Bernards Township, New Jersey, residents have been discussing whether or not a mosque should be built in their town. As a public hearing approaches to continue this discussion, the court order says: No commentary regarding Islam or Muslims will be permitted.”

So, basically, this judge has stripped the residents of Bernards Township of their First Amendment rights to free speech. Aren’t judges supposed to be working for Americans by helping to PRESERVE their constitutional rights?

What do you think? Should this federal judge be removed by Congress?

Source: www.usainfopolitic.com

Trump Gets The Last Laugh – Judge Who Struck Down His Muslim Travel Ban Has Been Busted

Kirsters Baish| Powerful men in Hollywood and Washington are now being held responsible for sexual harassment left and right. One prominent liberal jurist is now facing allegations of sexual harassment from all angles. This happens to be the same jurist who shot down President Trump’s Muslim travel ban, Judge Alex Kozinski. Kozinski is facing allegations that he subjected women to sexual comments and unwelcome sexual situations.

Heidi Bond, one of Kozinski’s former clerks who worked for him between 2006 and 2007, has made allegations that her former boss asked her to come to his chambers alone on numerous occasions. During these visits he showed her pornography that was not related to any case he was working on. He then asked Bond if she was turned on by the images. She recalls at least three times that Kozinski showed her porn in his chambers. She has written a first-person account of her experiences of working as a clerk for Kozinski.

The Washington Post reported:

Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, pictured in 2003. Six women — all former clerks or externs in the 9th Circuit — alleged to The Washington Post in recent weeks that Kozinski, now 67, subjected them to a range of inappropriate sexual conduct or comments.

A former clerk for Judge Alex Kozinski said the powerful and well-known jurist, who for many years served as chief judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, called her into his office several times and pulled up pornography on his computer, asking if she thought it was photoshopped or if it aroused her sexually.

Heidi Bond, who clerked for Kozinski from 2006 to 2007, said the porn was not related to any case. One set of images she remembered was of college-age students at a party where “some people were inexplicably naked while everyone else was clothed.” Another was a sort of digital flip book that allowed users to mix and match heads, torsos and legs to create an image of a naked woman.

Bond isn’t the only woman who has come forward to accuse Kozinski of sexual harassment. All together, six women have made accusations against the judge. All of these women are former clerks or junior staffers who are known as externs in the 9th Circuit.

Kozinski released a statement in which he claimed,“I have been a judge for 35 years and during that time have had over 500 employees in my chambers. I treat all of my employees as family and work very closely with most of them. I would never intentionally do anything to offend anyone and it is regrettable that a handful have been offended by something I may have said or done.”

The judge released the statement after the Washington Post called and emailed with a spokesman, sending him a detailed list of allegations against Kozinski. The story was posted on the internet. Kozinski then told the Los Angeles Times “I don’t remember ever showing pornographic material to my clerks.”

When Bond was working for Kozinski, the judge was working on becoming chief judge for the 9th Circuit. This is the biggest federal appeals court circuit in the entire United States. The former clerk explained that she knew that she was to report to Kozinski’s office when her phone beeped two times.

Bond explained that if Kozinski had a question about photoshopping she would look at the minor details of the photos. If the judge questioned her as to whether or not the images made her aroused, she explained that she would respond, “No, this kind of stuff doesn’t do anything for me. Is there anything else you need?”

The former clerk explained, “I was in a state of emotional shock, and what I really wanted to do was be as small as possible and make as few movements as possible and to say as little as possible to get out.”

Kozinski has found himself in some serious trouble now that these disgusting allegations have come to light. It’s only a matter of time before the sick bastard gets what’s coming to him.

Source: unabashedconservative.com

Muslim Imam Claims He Has A Right To Preach ‘Kill Infidels’, Doesn’t Count On Conservative Judge

When you’re taking up residence in a new country, it’s a fabulous idea to do your best to integrate yourself into your new surroundings.

By doing so, there’s a good chance you’ll be welcomed with open arms by the surrounding community.

If you insist on not integrating yourself and attempt to cause as much carnage as possible? Not so much.

That pickle of a situation pops up all the time when those with extremist views feel the need to spout off their nonsense and get the world around them to change to the way they see things.

These out of touch folks get quite frustrated when things don’t go their way, and there’s no telling what they’ll do when push comes to shove.

In a perfect world, a reality check will be provided before they inflict some serious damage.

That’s what happened with this Muslim Imam, and he’s going to have some extra time to place things in perspective as a result.

Swiss Info shares the details.

A district court in canton Zurich has given a Muslim preacher, accused of promoting violence, an 18-month suspended prison sentence. It also ordered the 25-year-old Ethiopian to be deported and banned from re-entering Switzerland for 15 years.

The preacher was on trial for calling for the burning of Muslims who are not devout enough in their worship.

As the preacher sees things, everyone must see things the way that he does. Those that do not need to be dealt with swiftly.

Thankfully, he slipped up before causing even more problems – and he’s now paying the price.

Police arrested the cleric in October of last year, after receiving reports of the controversial sermon delivered at the An’Nur mosque in Winterthur, in north-eastern Switzerland.

A policeman and police van in front of the mosque

The man is also charged with distributing pictures of executions online and of violating labour regulations by working without a permit.

“His religious views represent a danger to the public,” the prosecution told the court. But the defendent’s lawyer painted a different picture, saying: “He was merely an unsuspecting asylum seeker who had only been in Switzerland for three months. He is no fanatical Muslim.”

Open border advocates seem incapable of grasping the fact that welcoming dangerous people into our midst without having any idea about who they are is somehow a good thing.

The absurdity of that line of thinking has been exposed a countless number of times, but that’s not stopping them from beating the drum.

That leads to a simple question: Why?

It’s unclear how much more evidence they need that lax immigration policies lead to some serious problems.

We’ll hold out hope that they’ll wake up and smell the coffee before it’s too late, but we’re not all that optimistic about that actually happening.

Source: Swiss Info,myrightamerica.com