Connect with us

News

‘Tickling the Wire’: Counter-Intel Expert Says Special Counsel May Have New Info on Trump

Published

on

Frank Figliuzzi, former FBI assistant director for counter-intelligence, highlighted the recent report that special counsel Jack Smith is looking into financial information for Donald Trump’s international businesses in seven countries, and said it’s possible Smith has additional info about information sharing.

Speaking to MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace on Tuesday, Figliuzzi explained that the statements from Trump in the CNN town hall were more admissions, in a line of confessions, that he took the documents he should not have.

“But that crucial period after that sobering subpoena is slapped on you is that I have a choice,” explained Figliuzzi. “I’ll either comply with the law, or I’m not. And everything he’s done after that has involved non-compliance with the law, and, in fact, thumbing his nose at the law. And as recently as the CNN town hall meeting, he actually said, ‘I took those documents. I had every right to. And if I did show them to somebody, and I can’t remember if I did or not, I had every right to.’ This is defiance that goes towards criminal intention. It is there. And, by the way, if the reports are accurate, this case is all but done.”

Figliuzzi’s reference was to the Wall Street Journal reporting that Smith is finishing up his probe and all interviews have been done.

Wallace walked through the timeline of how much Trump handed over and when. She pointed to the New York Times reporting of the foreign Trump businesses and recalled that it was part of the documents case at the DOJ.

“Do we assume that people we maybe haven’t heard about, going in to talk to Jack Smith and his investigators, are part of the fabric of this part of the probe — foreign business dealings and Trump classified documents?” she asked.

He explained the depth of the collection of intelligence that would surround the Trump documents case.

“We know Trump doesn’t use email, but he is a prolific user of the phones, right?” explained Figliuzzi. “And so, guaranteed there have been subpoenas for phone carriers for his phone records throughout this period and watching his response to a visit from the head of the National Security Secretary, DOJ, then here come FBI agents, and there’s a subpoena. And you’re watching this, they call it ‘tickling the wire.’ See what responses — who is he calling? Who’s calling each other?”

He said that it isn’t about the protected privilege content of lawyers’ conversations, but it outlines who else he’s speaking with.

“So, you can develop sources,” Figliuzzi continued. “So, when there is great confidence that they have the goods on him, it is because they are targeting people who know for a fact what is going on. Now, let’s fast forward and tie that into this subpoena for whether or not the Trump Organization was doing any business with one or more, or seven nations. There is an interesting piece in the Washington Post that actually puts a post on it. And it is last month. If that is true, that is intriguing because it may imply that this is a pro forma routine thing. Let’s make sure there’s no surprises because the defense will say, ‘Look, you have no evidence that committed espionage, right? That he actually disseminated national security information to a foreign country?’ Well, we better look.”

The alternative is that one could be reading the story and think that some intelligence may have recently “maybe from those phone calls, maybe from those from sources, where we think, no, we better look at Saudi, or China, or Turkey. I don’t know. But it would go toward motive,” he closed. “And it would be explosive if he would have actually shown documents, and what if those documents involved those very countries that are on the list? It’s even more concerning. And now you’re looking at maybe real-life espionage. We don’t know.”

See the full conversation with Figliuzzi below or at the link here.

 

Image via Shutterstock

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Smash-and-Grab’: Trump Torched for ‘Corrupt’ $230 Million Payout Push

Published

on

President Donald Trump is under fire after a New York Times bombshell revealed he wants $230 million from the Justice Department over two investigations targeting him during his campaign.

The Times explained that there is “no parallel in American history, as Mr. Trump, a presidential candidate, was pursued by federal law enforcement and eventually won the election, taking over the very government that must now review his claims.” The paper of record also called it “the starkest example yet of potential ethical conflicts created by installing the president’s former lawyers atop the Justice Department.”

Critics are blasting the president.

“It’s hard to think of an action more purely corrupt than a …. president ordering the executive branch to pay him hundreds of millions of dollars,” wrote David French, a New York Times opinion columnist. “I cannot wait to read the MAGA defenses of this (and there will be many). They’ll display Soviet levels of sycophancy.”

READ MORE: Not a ‘Gut-Wrenching’ Problem: Ron Johnson Shrugs Off Millions Losing Subsidies

Attorney Andrew Weinstein, a former Obama and Biden appointee, noted that “$230 million could feed every homeless veteran in America for more than 3 years.”

Jesse Lee, a former Obama and Biden official, remarked, “What a g– crook.”

Marlow Stern, who teaches at the Columbia Journalism School and is a former Rolling Stone senior editor, asked, “now he’s extorting… the u.s. justice department?”

Mother Jones reporter Dan Friedman quoted the Trump White House Press Secretary: “’I think it’s frankly ridiculous that anyone in this room would even suggest that President Trump is doing anything for his own benefit,’ Karoline Leavitt said in May. ‘He left a life of luxury and a life of running a very successful real estate empire for public service.'”

Political historian Brian Rosenwald commented, “Like come the f– on, this is the most blatant corruption in American history. He’s just stealing from us the taxpayers.”

Derek Martin, founder and president of Pathfinder Research, wrote: “Trump is demanding taxpayers write him a check for $230 million while Republicans tell us they can’t afford to help ordinary Americans pay for health insurance. Cartoonishly evil.”

Jeff Hauser, who writes the Revolving Door Project on Substack, observed: “The dude is desecrating the White House and extorting the Treasury during a shutdown [after] several million Americans protested him. It’s kind of now or never for an opposition party to be provocative in attacking corruption. Trump is too busy enriching himself to govern.”

Media Matters’ Matthew Gertz wrote: “The president of the United States is attempting a smash-and-grab on the U.S. Treasury, and the people with the ability to say no are his former personal lawyers, this is insane.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Travesty’: Trump Reportedly Seeking ‘Bizarre’ $230 Million Payout From DOJ

Published

on

President Donald Trump reportedly appears to be demanding the U.S. Department of Justice pay him $230 million in compensation after multiple investigations during his presidential campaign.

“The situation has no parallel in American history, as Mr. Trump, a presidential candidate, was pursued by federal law enforcement and eventually won the election, taking over the very government that must now review his claims,” The New York Times, citing people familiar with the matter, reported.

Noting that President Trump has installed his former personal lawyers at the top of the DOJ, the Times called it “the starkest example yet of potential ethical conflicts.”

Trump, according to the Times, in 2023, submitted a claim that “seeks damages for a number of purported violations of his rights, including the F.B.I. and special counsel investigation into Russian election tampering and possible connections to the 2016 Trump campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.”

READ MORE: Not a ‘Gut-Wrenching’ Problem: Ron Johnson Shrugs Off Millions Losing Subsidies

Another complaint, filed the following year, “accuses the F.B.I. of violating Mr. Trump’s privacy by searching Mar-a-Lago, his club and residence in Florida, in 2022 for classified documents.”

Bennett L. Gershman, an ethics professor at Pace University, told the Times it was “a travesty.”

“The ethical conflict is just so basic and fundamental, you don’t need a law professor to explain it,” Gershmann said. “And then to have people in the Justice Department decide whether his claim should be successful or not, and these are the people who serve him deciding whether he wins or loses. It’s bizarre and almost too outlandish to believe.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

How Megachurches Use the Bible to Defend and Promote Wealth Inequality: Report

Published

on

Does religion drive Americans to support or oppose economic inequality? That’s a question explored by a Ph.D. candidate at The Ohio State University who recently examined ten years of a megachurch’s sermons in a published paper: “‘I Thank God We’re Rich’: Justifying Economic Inequality in an Evangelical Congregation.”

“To investigate how evangelical leaders confront the conflict between inequality and egalitarian passages of the Bible, I conducted a sermon analysis study of New River, a Midwestern suburban megachurch,” wrote Dawson P. R. Vosburg.

“New River’s approach to inequality was one of clear justification of the status quo, centered on the justification of wealth accumulation and the minimization of inequality’s moral importance,” Vosburg added.

The church’s pastors, he found, “justified economic inequality in several ways: proclaiming that God did not condemn ownership of vast wealth; minimizing domestic inequality in comparison to global inequality; selectively spiritualizing economic passages of the Bible; and saying that God owns everything and thus the status quo distribution is justified.”

READ MORE: Not a ‘Gut-Wrenching’ Problem: Ron Johnson Shrugs Off Millions Losing Subsidies

Hemant Mehta of The Friendly Atheist examined the paper. He writes that Vosburg found sermons “that discussed anything financial—by searching for terms like ‘rich,’ ‘tithe,’ ‘debt,’ ‘billionaire,’ etc.—and analyzed the results to see how this typical white evangelical megachurch minimized the wealth gap.” He also noted that Vosburg anonymized the name of the church.

Mehta looked at the four ways New River downplayed wealth inequality:

“They condemned ‘rich shaming’ anyone”
The pastor, Mehta found, “delivered an anecdote about a rich couple that left another church and came to his because they felt personally attacked when their previous pastor condemned wealth from the pulpit. (At their new home, of course, their tithes would go into New River’s coffers.)”

“They downplayed U.S. inequality by focusing on global inequality”
Essentially, pastors told congregants that compared to the world’s poor, they were doing quite well.

“They re-interpreted Bible verses about poverty—even the direct ones”
When it comes to preaching about the poor, Mehta wrote, the pastor was “not talking about financially poor people, he’s talking about spiritually impoverished people.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

Vosburg told Mehta that pastors stressed tithing “over 150 times across 16 separate sermons.”

“They said God owns everything, anyway”
Ultimately, Mehta explained, the pastor’s point was to not be mad “at people with private jets and yachts and multiple summer homes.”

“The takeaway from all this,” Mehta wrote, “is that conservative policies that benefit the ultra-wealthy at the expense of everyone else in society are going to be supported by congregations like this one that are being brainwashed into thinking God loves the rich and the poor deserve their lot in life.”

Mehta also blasted the New River pastor.

“Pastors like this one hollow out Christ’s teachings until all that’s left is a gilded throne for the wealthy. In their hands, Scripture is a weapon to shame the poor, a shield to protect billionaires, and a drug to keep their congregations quiet while the cancer of inequality grows around them.”

READ MORE: ‘Existential Threat’: U.S. on Path to Authoritarianism Warn Ex-Intelligence Officials

 

Image by Mor via Flickr and a Creative Commons License

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.