Did Mueller Lie to Congress

[WEEKLY UPDATE]

DOJ RECORDS: MUELLER TEAM REPEATEDLY, ‘ACCIDENTALLY’ WIPED PHONES

[[link removed]]


Perhaps you will recall Rudy Giuliani suggesting
[[link removed]]
nearly two years ago that Robert Mueller’s gang should be
investigated for destroying evidence, in particular text messages.

Now we have more proof that these witch hunters did not want anyone
looking into their activities.

We have received 87 pages
[[link removed]]
of records from the Justice Department that show senior members of
Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel’s Office repeatedly and
“accidentally” wiped phones assigned to them.

We received the records in response to our September 2019 FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the Justice Department and FBI over December 17, 2018, FOIA
requests (_Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No.
1:19-cv-02693)) for:

* All records related to the hardware, software and contents of
mobile phones issued to FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page for
their use while they served on the investigative team of Special
Counsel Robert Mueller.
* All records of communication (whether on government or non-.gov
email accounts and whether using real names or aliases), with FBI
officials relating to the hardware, software and contents of mobile
phones issued to FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page for their
use while they served on the investigative team of Special Counsel
Robert Mueller.

In a table
[[link removed]]
that appears to be a tabulation of Special Counsel’s Office reviews
of phones used by Robert Mueller’s team for records-preservation
purposes, 27 phones were reported wiped clean of all data prior to the
review having taken place:

* 20 phones were reported wiped of data due to “accidental wipe”
(usually from entering the password too many times);
* 2 phones were reported wiped after placed in airplane mode from
which they could not be unlocked because password was forgotten,
including the phones of Andrew Weissmann (2 phones) and two deputies
of Mueller, Kyle Freeny and Rush Atkinson.
* 1 phone was wiped clean without explanation.
* There are no records of Robert Mueller’s phone’s ever being
reviewed.

The review
[[link removed]]
of Lisa Page’s phone reads as follows: “Phone not found, phone
found and with DOJ OIG, but according to AMZ on 9/19/18 conversation,
the phone was restored to factory settings. Per email from DOJ OIG
contact [redacted] on 10/17/18, the phone was restored to factory
settings when they received it.”

The review
[[link removed]]
of Strzok’s phone reads as follows: “No substantive texts, notes
or reminders.”

In December 2018, the DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General issued a
report
[[link removed]]
regarding the recovery of “thousands of text messages.” The IG
“initiated this investigation upon being notified of a gap in text
message data collection for the period December 15, 2016, through May
17, 2017, from Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) mobile devices
assigned to FBI employees Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.” Because of
the content of many of the text messages between Strzok and Page, the
IG also asked Mueller’s office for the DOJ-issued iPhones that had
been assigned to Strzok and Page. The phone assigned to Strzok had
been “reset to factory settings” and “reconfigured for the new
user to whom the device was issued.” Page’s iPhone had been reset
but had not been reassigned. The IG also said that as the date of its
report, the FBI wasn’t reliably collecting text messages of all its
employees.

The newly released records include a log
[[link removed]]
of all mobile phones issued to the Mueller team that reveals a total
of 25 names, including Robert Mueller himself, along with Strzok, Page
and Andrew Weissmann. Eight of the 25 names are redacted under
FOIA’s “personal privacy” exemptions.

Forms and emails at the time Lisa Page was leaving the Special
Counsel’s Office reveal
[[link removed]]
all she had to do was fill out the government forms and return all
equipment issued to her but did not need to go through security and
ethics debriefs. In an email from Special Counsel administrative
official “LFW” to colleague “SLL,” with subject line,
“Employee Exit Form and Certification Checklist,” LFW says: “She
has a laptop (which may already be in [redacted] area), a DOJ cell
phone & charger, and, perhaps a PIV badge. Since she is not actually
leaving employment, the security and ethics debriefs will not have to
happen.”

A redacted person in the Special Counsel’s Office (SCO) identified
as “PPS1” emails
[[link removed]]
Peter Strzok separation forms on August 9, 2018, with subject line,
“SCO Exit Certification Checklist.pdf; ATT00001.htm” for him to
fill out before he left the Special Counsel team. A record
[[link removed]]
of the completed forms dated August 11 reveals Strzok had not returned
“All non-record material removed from electronic and paper files;
location of official paper and electronic records identified; and
reference material.

On September 13, 2018, there begins a series of emails
[[link removed]]
running through December 27 seeking to find and review Lisa Page’s
mobile phone. On October 17, 2018, at 7:44 am, a redacted records
officer in the Special Counsel’s office emails
[[link removed]]
someone named Alicia: “Hope you’re well. I was hoping you could
confirm for me that when you all received Lisa Page’s phone that it
had been restored to the factory settings and therefore all data was
wiped from the device.” A redacted sender responds: “Yes that’s
correct, the device had been reset to factory settings.”

On October 22, 2018, at 12:33 pm, a redacted senior special agent in
the Justice Department Cyber Investigations Office emails
[[link removed]]
a redacted recipient after learning Lisa Page’s phone had been wiped
of all content: “I need to give you a call for a few follow up
questions regarding the Strzok/Page phone matter. I have included a
snapshot of the narrative included in our memorandum of our meeting on
January 26, 2018.”

The following report
[[link removed]]
was attached to the email:

[Redacted] provided the following information regarding this matter.
On September 6, 2017, she reviewed Peter Strzok’s phone before
turning it over to IT staff for it to be wiped and reissued. She did
not find substantive texts, notes, or reminders. She cannot remember
if there were no texts on the device or if they were innocuous, but
thinks there were none. She explained that if there is such content on
the device, she would take screen shots and email them to herself for
review and preservation. [Redacted] provided a copy of the spreadsheet
she keeps reflecting out-processing iPhone data review. This
spreadsheet has been included as Attachment 2. Strzok out-processed on
August 10, 2017.

After reviewing Strzok’s phone, she turned it in to either
[Redacted] or [Redacted] to wipe and repurpose the phone.

[Redacted] said that she did not receive Page’s phone for review.

On September 20, 2018, Aaron Zebley asks
[[link removed]]
Beth McGarry, “If possible, can I get the dates on which cell phones
were assigned to Pete Strzok and Lisa Page? I think the latter is May
28. Thanks.” McGarry forwards the request to Chris Greer asking,
“Can you pull this info?” Greer replies, “I am working on it. I
asked the team to contact Verizon to see if they can tell us when the
phones were provisioned. I verified they both logged into their
laptops on May 31, 2017 and I assume the phones were the same day, but
am trying to verify.” Further on, Greer adds, “Our airwatch logs
may only go back 1 year, so if true, they won’t help. Still waiting
to hear if Verizon can help.”

On December 27, 2018, there begins a series of emails
[[link removed]]
discussing Rudy Giuliani’s remarks to reporters that the Special
Counsel’s Office should be investigated for “destruction of
evidence,” in which Zebley writes:

FYI: The determination that Pete Strzok’s phone had no SCO-era text
messages was made by the IG in the course of its investigation of text
messages. Also, the IG report notes on pp 1-21 that the OIG asked us
for Pete’s phone six months after his assignments had ended and, on
the bottom of page 10, the report reads:

Upon review of a draft of this report, the Office of the Deputy
Attorney General told the OIG that the Department routinely resets
mobile devices to factory settings when the device is returned from a
user to enable that device to be issued to another user in the future.


On September 21, 2018, at 11:48 am, Zebley (AMZ) in the Special
Counsel’s Office sends information for a draft report
[[link removed]]
to redacted recipient who confirms it as accurate:

As part of an office records retention procedure, an SCO Records
Officer reviewed text message on Strzok’s DOJ issued iPhone after he
returned it to the SCO and determined it contained no substantive text
messages.

[Redacted]

Strozk completed his Exit Clearance Certification and returned his DOJ
issued iPhone in early August 2017.

As part of an office records retention procedure, an SCO Records
Officer reviewed text message on Strzok’s DOJ issued iPhone after it
was returned. [fn] The SCO Records Officer noted in her records log
about Strzok’s phone: “No substantive texts, notes or
reminders.” [Redacted]

[Redacted]

Zebley adds a “new sentence” which is also affirmed: “The SCO
Records Officer does not recall there being any texts on Strzok’s
phone, and she made an identical log entry for another phone reviewed
on the same day that she specifically recalls having no text
messages.”

On January 26, 2018, at 5:39 pm, JMD’s Christopher Greer emails
[[link removed]]
a redacted person in the Special Counsel Administrative Office,
asking: “Do you know where Lisa Page’s iPhone is? I know the SCO
policy was to reuse them and not hold, but wanted to check with you
first. The asset tag is T66438.” The administrator replies: “Yes,
I know it is missing. We discovered that first. It is not in UAPM
[Unified Asset & Property Management] and doesn’t appear to be
anywhere at PP1.

At 7:06 pm, Greer responds: “OIG wants to speak with me about it
Monday. Beth [McGarry, executive officer of Mueller’s special
counsel team] sent them my way. Should I redirect to you or move
forward with speaking with them?” The SOC administrator replies:
“Move forward with them. I was going to reach out to you about
searching RFK [Main Justice], but Beth asked me to hold off.”

On January 31, 2019, LFW sends an email
[[link removed]]
to SLL with subject line “Cell Phone Numbers,” writing: “One
last number that will need to be canceled, but not until after we
consult with OIG. Pete Strzok [redacted] number was never canceled
[redacted]. We have not yet received the phone back, either.”

The pandemic of ‘wiped’ phones among the Mueller team requires a
criminal investigation of this destruction of evidence and potential
obstruction of justice and other crimes. The DOJ and FBI hid these
records for nearly two years – which only adds to appearance of a
cover-up.


DID MUELLER LIE TO THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE?

Robert Mueller denied that President Trump interviewed him for
consideration as Director of the FBI just one day before he was
appointed to lead the Russia collusion investigation. New evidence
coming to light disputes this.

We have received 47 pages
[[link removed]]
of documents from the Department of Justice that include a May 17,
2017, email documenting that Robert Mueller informed the Attorney
General’s office he was withdrawing from consideration for director
of the FBI.

This recently released email raises new questions about Mueller’s
testimony
[[link removed]]
to the House Judiciary Committee on July 24, 2019, where he said a May
16, 2017 interview with President Donald Trump was “not about me
applying for the job” as FBI director.

The emails were produced in our February 2, 2019, FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the Department of Justice for all records of communications of
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein between May 8 and May 17, 2017
(_Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:19-cv-00481)).

In the May 17, 2017, email
[[link removed]]
Rosenstein writes to then-Assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt with
the subject line: “Mueller” and states: “Withdrew from
consideration for FBI director.”

Hunt responds: “[redacted] called this morning and also withdrew his
name from consideration.”

On the same day, Rosenstein appointed Mueller special counsel for the
Russia investigation.

On July 24, 2019, Mueller, testified about whether he was interviewed
for the FBI Director position in an exchange with Rep. Greg Steube
(R-FL):

STEUBE: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Mueller, over here. Mr. Mueller did
you indeed interview for the FBI director job one day before you were
appointed as Special Counsel?

MUELLER: My understanding I was not applying for that job, I was asked
to give my input on what it would take to do the job, which triggered
the interview you’re talking about.

STEUBE: So you don’t recall on May 16th, 2017 that you interviewed
with the president regarding the FBI director job?

MUELLER: I interviewed with the president and it was about…

STEUBE: Regarding the FBI director job?

MUELLER: …it was about the job and not about me applying for the
job.

STEUBE: So your statement here today is that you didn’t interview to
apply for the FBI director job?

MUELLER: That’s correct.

STEUBE: So it – did you tell the vice president that the FBI
director position would be the one job that you would come back to –
for?

MUELLER: I don’t recall that one.

STEUBE: You don’t recall that?

MUELLER: No.

President Trump said
[[link removed]]
that Mueller did indeed “apply and interview” for the FBI director
job and that claims otherwise presented a conflict of interest that
should have kept him out of the Russia investigation.

The president tweeted
[[link removed]]
on July 24, 2019, the day of Mueller’s House testimony: “It has
been reported that Robert Mueller is saying that he did not apply and
interview for the job of FBI Director (and get turned down) the day
before he was wrongfully appointed Special Counsel. Hope he doesn’t
say that under oath in that we have numerous witnesses to the
interview, including the Vice President of the United States!”

The latest production of documents from the DOJ also includes a letter
[[link removed]]
dated May 19, 2017, from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to President
Trump in which the senator recommends Deputy Director Andrew McCabe
for the director’s position at the bureau.

Feinstein writes that McCabe “has demonstrated leadership and
excellence while engaged in some of the most high-profile and complex
cases.”

Feinstein goes on to conclude: “During my time on both the Senate
Intelligence Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee, I have been
impressed by Mr. McCabe and believe him to be a man of honor. He is
exactly the kind of person we need leading the FBI right now, and I
hope you give him strong consideration.”

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a report
[[link removed]]
in 2018 detailing
multiple instances in which McCabe “lacked candor” with FBI
Director James Comey, FBI investigators, and inspector general
investigators about his authorization to leak sensitive information to
the _Wall Street Journal_ that revealed the existence of an FBI
investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

On March 16, 2018, McCabe was fired
[[link removed]]
by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

After stonewalling on our FOIA requests for years, the FBI in late
July agreed
[[link removed]]
to
release McCabe’s text messages, though have yet to release any of
them.

The corrupted Justice Department and FBI inexcusably hid these and
other smoking gun records about Mueller and Rosenstein for nearly
three years. It is well past time for a serious independent
investigation of Mueller and his abusive special counsel operation.

In February 2020, we uncovered
[[link removed]]
Rosenstein’s communications with former Obama officials, such as
Eric Holder, as well as information sharing with the media in the days
immediately surrounding the inception of the Mueller investigation.

In October 2019, through this same lawsuit, we uncovered
Rosenstein’s communications
[[link removed]]
from this lawsuit that included a one-line email
[[link removed]]
Mueller stating: “The boss and his staff do not know about our
discussions,” as well as “off the record” emails with major
media outlets around the date of Mueller’s appointment.

In September 2019, through a separate lawsuit, we uncovered records
[[link removed]]
from the Department of Justice showing officials’ efforts in
responding to media inquiries about DOJ/FBI talks allegedly invoking
the 25th Amendment to “remove” President Donald Trump from office
and Rosenstein offering to wear a “wire” to record his
conversations with the president. Later that month, we uncovered a
two-page memo
[[link removed]],
dated May 16, 2017, by then-Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe
detailing how Rosenstein proposed wearing a wire into the Oval Office
“to collect additional evidence on the president’s true
intentions.” McCabe wrote that Rosenstein said he thought it was
possible because “he was not searched when he entered the White
House.”

We’ve laid bare the multiple conspiracies at Justice and the FBI and
it well past time that the DOJ or some other federal law enforcement
agency do something about it.

JUDICIAL WATCH COURT BATTLE FOR JOE BIDEN’S SENATE RECORDS AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE

What does Joe Biden not want the American people to see in his Senate
records hidden away at the University of Delaware? A sexual assault
complaint? Notes on conversations with Putin?

We intend to find out.

We just filed a new brief in our lawsuit for access to former Vice
President Joe Biden’s Senate records at the University of Delaware.
This court filing
[[link removed]]
comes in the lawsuit
[[link removed]]
we
filed with the Daily Caller News Foundation after a Delaware Attorney
General’s opinion denied us access to the records, which are housed
at the university’s library (_Daily Caller News Foundation v.
University of Delaware_
[[link removed]]
(No.
N20A-07-001)).

We filed this Delaware FOIA lawsuit in the Superior Court of the State
of Delaware on July 2, 2020. Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News
Foundation are being represented by Delaware lawyers Ted Kittila and
Bill Green of Halloran Farkas + Kittila LLP.

The lawsuit is challenging a state attorney general opinion that the
Biden records are not “public records” because, the opinion
concludes without evidence, no public funds are used to support the
Biden records project at the University of Delaware.

We responded in court that it is impossible for the Biden Senate
documents, which are housed in the University of Delaware’s Library,
to not be supported by public funds. We note that the University
admitted that “[t]he State of Delaware provides the University with
approximately $120 million each year through an appropriation in the
state budget,” but never shows how public funds are not used to
support the papers.

We further point out that “archival storage space and professional
staff members’ time are things of value that it can be inferred are
paid for with public funds,” and notes that the requests even listed
the, “University personnel who maintain the Senatorial Papers whose
salaries, it can be inferred, are paid with State funds.” We’re
requesting that the Court order the University to search for and
produce the requested records.

“Anyone running for public office, especially our highest office,
should expect public scrutiny of their record, especially of their
public record,” said Daily Caller News Foundation President Neil
Patel. “It’s amazing that Joe Biden’s public papers are still
sealed and nobody else in the press seems to care. We care and we are
going to fight to get these records opened up as they should be.”

I would add that Delaware is hiding, in violation of law, Joe
Biden’s Senate records. It is time for the University of Delaware to
stop protecting Joe Biden and follow Delaware law, which requires them
to provide public access to these public records.

We filed our FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
after the University denied our April 30, 2020, FOIA request for:

* All records regarding the proposed release of the records
pertaining to former Vice President Joe Biden’s tenure as a Senator
that have been housed at the University of Delaware Library since
2012. This request includes all related records of communication
between the University of Delaware and any other records created
pertaining to any meeting of the Board of Trustees during which the
proposed release of the records was discussed.
* All records of communication between any representative of the
University of Delaware and former Vice President Biden or any other
individual acting on his behalf between January 1, 2018 and the
present.

On April 30, the Daily Caller News Foundation submitted its FOIA
request to the University for:

* All agreements concerning the storage of more than 1,850 boxes of
archival records and 415 gigabytes of electronic records from Joe
Biden’s senate career from 1973 through 2009.
* Communications between the staff of the University of Delaware
Library and Joe Biden or his senatorial, vice-presidential or
political campaign staff, or for anyone representing any of those
entities between 2010 [April 30,2020] about Joe Biden’s senate
records.
* Any logs or sign-in sheets recording any individuals who have
visited the special-collections department where records from Joe
Biden’s senate career are stored between 2010 to the date of this
request.
* All records from Joe Biden’s Senate career that have been
submitted to the University of Delaware Library.

Tara Reade, who accused Biden of sexually assaulting her in 1993 when
she worked as a staff assistant to the then-senator, has said
[[link removed]]
that she believes a workplace discrimination and harassment complaint
she filed against Biden at the time may be in the records housed at
the University of Delaware. Biden also admitted to communicating with
Vladimir Putin
[[link removed]]
and other foreign leaders when he was a United State Senator.

WE MUST NEVER FORGET

I was on the tarmac set to take off from Dulles Airport to travel to
LA to tape an appearance on Bill Maher’s show nineteen years ago on
9/11/01. My plane never took off. Conservative activist and lawyer
Barbara Olson was also flying out of Dulles for Maher's show, but her
plane, AA #77, had just taken off and was hijacked and crashed into
the Pentagon. What a horrible day that was...

Judicial Watch sprung into action and through diligent and persistent
investigation uncovered revelation
[[link removed]]
after revelation
[[link removed]]
about the failures and cover-ups tied to the 9/11 conspiracy. In fact,
we still have lawsuits pending connected to the 9/11 terror attacks.

And let’s not forget today is the anniversary of the Benghazi
attack, which occurred on 9/11/12. Judicial Watch’s investigation of
this egregious scandal stands as the most important non-governmental
investigation in American history – as it resulted of the Benghazi
Select Committee and the uncovering of the Clinton email scandal.

We won’t forget and, with your support, Judicial Watch keep pushing
where we can on accountability on the attacks and on terrorism
generally.

Until next week …





[Contribute]
[[link removed]]


<a
href="[link removed]"
target="_blank"><img alt="WU01"
src="[link removed]"
style="width:100%; height:auto;" /></a>

[32x32x1]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x2]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172



© 2017 - 2020, All Rights Reserved
Manage Email Subscriptions
[[link removed]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]