By Mary Fanning and Alan Jones | May 29, 2019
Former FBI General Counsel James A. Baker is the second current or former senior FBI official to have misled Congress about the FBI’s receipt of evidence from CIA/NSA whistleblower Dennis Montgomery that Montgomery maintains proves President Obama’s intelligence chiefs, CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, illegally surveilled Donald Trump with “THE HAMMER” (HAMR) super-surveillance system.
Former FBI counsel Baker, who was interviewed by a joint committee of the U.S. House of Representatives just weeks before the 2018 midterm election, stated during day one of his interview, conducted on October 3, 2018, that the FBI and the DOJ did not “infiltrate or surveil” the Trump campaign for “political purposes.”
Baker simultaneously denied on day one that Obama administration officials made “demands or requests” of the FBI and the DOJ to “infiltrate or surveil” the Trump campaign.
At the beginning of Baker’s day two testimony, conducted on October 18, 2018, Baker interrupted Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH) stating he wanted to amend the record of his day one testimony, thereby sidestepping a potential perjury charge.
Between day one of his interview two weeks earlier and day two, Baker suddenly “remembered” that U.S. government contractor Dennis Montgomery had turned over to the FBI evidence in 2015 in the form of digital storage devices that, Montgomery asserted, proved that the U.S. government illegally surveilled American citizens and government officials.
Baker stated on day two:
Can I just — I’m turning to the Bureau to describe this. So his client was an individual named Dennis Montgomery, who I believe, to the best of my recollection, he said that he had been a U.S. Government contractor and, in the course of that work, had come across evidence of unlawful surveillance by the government of Americans — and including government officials — and wanted to give that information to the Bureau, which eventually did take place.
Baker either lied or misspoke about which year Montgomery turned over evidence to the FBI, when he told the joint committee that Montgomery provided the evidence to the FBI in 2016, when in fact Montgomery had turned over the evidence in 2015, one full year earlier, before the 2016 presidential election.
Baker carefully stated: “To the best of my recollection, it’s in the late summer, early fall 2016.” Baker misstated the year the FBI took possession of Montgomery’s evidence during day two of his interview. By carefully reciting that it was to the “best of his recollection” Baker neatly sidestepped a potential perjury charge.
Baker’s two-day interview, carried out on October 3 and October 18, 2018, was “part of a joint investigation by the House Committee on the Judiciary and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform into decisions made and not made by the DOJ and the FBI regarding the 2016 Presidential election.”
Former FBI General Counsel Baker buried evidence provided to his office in 2015 by CIA/NSA whistleblower Dennis Montgomery. Montgomery turned over 47 hardrives of evidence of domestic surveillance that prove the Obama administration illegally surveilled innocent Americans including Donald Trump for years.
The FBI first granted limited immunity in August 2015, and then greater immunity in December of 2015 once Montgomery’s domestic surveillance information had been verified.
FBI General Counsel James Baker himself and DOJ Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis struck Montgomery’s limited immunity agreements and then his greater immunity agreement, once the FBI had verified Montgomery’s information.
Baker was intimately involved in Montgomery’s whistleblower case.
MONTGOMERY, ‘THE HAMMER’ SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM WHISTLEBLOWER, BECAME THE DEEP STATE’S ENEMY NUMBER ONE AFTER EXPOSING THE TRUTH
Baker Buried The Evidence Of Illegal Surveillance Of Trump Before The Presidential Election And Again Before The 2018 Midterm Election
Montgomery revealed, during a radio interview with his attorney Larry Klayman, and in court documents, that he turned over 47 hard drives on August 19, 2015, to the FBI’s Miami Field Office in Miramar, Florida.
The FBI provided Montgomery with a detailed itemized receipt for the hard drives, dated August 19, 2015.
In 2015, with the help of U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth, onetime head of the FISA court, Montgomery obtained two limited immunity agreements, for testimony and production, through Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis and FBI General Counsel James Baker.
Baker somehow did not, during his day one interview, recall, or lied about, sending FBI special agents to Miami to collect the hard drives from Montgomery.
“We had to actually dispatch FBI agents to go to a — from a field office to go collect this material” Baker suddenly remembered during day two of his interview.
Baker’s sudden recollection before congress and the FBI receipt provided to Montgomery confirm that Montgomery turned over the computer hard drives to the FBI in 2015, well before the 2016 presidential election.
Montgomery claims that the evidence he provided to the FBI proves that Brennan and Clapper illegally spied on Donald Trump and that Baker and Comey buried that evidence at the FBI.
“THE HAMMER” (HAMR)
This was key because Montgomery was the designer and developer of a super-surveillance system, known as “THE HAMMER,” (HAMR) that was intended for foreign surveillance purposes only.
The WikiLeaks CIA Vault 7 document dump on March 7, 2017, confirmed the existence of “THE HAMMER” (HAMR).
According to military sources, “THE HAMMER” (HAMR) had multiple echelons of safeguards in place to ensure that the foreign super-surveillance system would never be used for illegal domestic surveillance operations against the American people.
Those military sources state that Montgomery’s work was effective. Montgomery’s foreign surveillance system not only worked, but it also saved American lives.
According to Montgomery, the Obama administration turned that super-surveillance system against the American people, including FISA court judges, U.S. Supreme Court justices, and Donald J. Trump, among many others.
The Obama administration used data harvested by the illegal super-surveillance system for “leverage” and “blackmail,” according to Montgomery.
William Binney, who served as NSA Technical Director of the World Geopolitical and Military Analysis Reporting Group before becoming a whistleblower, stated during a May 25, 2019 interview on the SGT Report:
THE HAMMER program, as far as I can see, was run by CIA. And the point was, that the NSA already had their massive collection on everybody anyway. That was called the Stellar Wind program and it had the tapping points for the upstream collection of everything on the fiber networks. Everything. So they didn’t have to do a hammer because they already had all of the data.
But, if CIA wanted to do it and have it separately and not be … because … anybody querying the NSA data goes through a system where they get reported. Where queries go right in there and they are registered. They know they made this query on this date and got this data. So NSA’s got that information.
But, if CIA wanted to do it but not let NSA or anybody else in the government know about it, they could set up a separate, secret program like HAMMER and do a subset of tapping in the critical points around Washington and decision-making centers and then take in that data and have it scanned and sessionized and locally examined by members of CIA only so that nobody knew they were doing it.
During day one of Baker’s interview, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) asked Baker “To your knowledge, did the FBI or DOJ ever investigate the Trump campaign, quote, ‘for political purposes?’”
“No” replied Baker.
“To your knowledge, did President Obama or anyone in his White House ever, quote, ‘demand or request’ that the DOJ or FBI, quote, ‘infiltrate or surveil’ the Trump campaign for, quote,‘political purposes?’” Raskin then asked Baker.
“No” Baker again replied.
It is notable that the line of questioning from Representative Raskin was very narrowly stated.
Representative Raskin’s use of the wording “political purposes” is key.
Raskin was creating the narrative that the surveillance of Trump was not being done for “political purposes.”
Raskin’s Soviet Legacy
It is also notable that Representative Raskin’s father Marcus Raskin (i) co-founded the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and (ii) reportedly had ties to Soviet spies including Alger Hiss.
IPS has been tied to Soviet intelligence, Fidel Castro, Bernie Sanders, the Clintons, and Obama administration officials.
In his book The KGB and Soviet Disinformation: An Insider’s View, Lawrence Martin-Bittman asserts that the IPS was a component of the Soviet Union’s intelligence network. Lawrence Martin-Bittman, formerly known as Ladislav Bittman, served as an Eastern Bloc intelligence officer specializing in disinformation for the Czechoslovak Intelligence Service.
Citizen Trump Under Surveillance
Donald Trump was under surveillance by the U.S. government and had been for years according to the “Whistleblower Tapes,” secretly-recorded audio released in 2015 by U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow.
Montgomery asserts that the CIA feared Trump. Both Donald Trump and his late father Fred Trump were known for their strong anti-communist sentiments.
On March 19, 2017, it became widely understood that illegal surveillance of Donald Trump had taken place for years under the direction of President Obama’s intelligence chiefs, CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Brennan and Clapper together operated “THE HAMMER” (HAMR) super-surveillance system.
As we previously reported, John Brennan voted for Communist Party USA (CPUSA) candidate Gus Hall in the 1976 presidential elections.
We also reported that Baker’s former boss, FBI Director James Comey, once told “New York Magazine ”I’d moved from Communist to whatever I am now. I’m not even sure how to characterize myself politically. Maybe at some point, I’ll have to figure it out.”
On Sunday, March 19, 2017, U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Thomas G. McInerney (Ret.) and U.S. Navy Four-Star Admiral James A. “Ace” Lyons (Ret.) brought our “Whistleblower Tapes” exclusive exposé to America’s airwaves on Dr. Dave Janda’s terrestrial radio show “Operation Freedom” on WAAM 1600.
WHISTLEBLOWER TAPES: TRUMP WIRETAPPED “A ZILLION TIMES” BY ‘THE HAMMER,’ BRENNAN’S AND CLAPPER’S SECRET COMPUTER SYSTEM
During that live broadcast, General McInerney read our March 17, 2017 feature investigation “Whistleblower Tapes: Trump Wiretapped “A Zillion Times” By ‘The Hammer,’ Brennan’s and Clapper’s Secret Computer System.”
Within minutes of General McInerney’s radio interview, there was blowback from the Deep State.
COUP D’ÉTAT: DOJ, FBI OFFICIALS ON MUELLER’S RUSSIA TEAM IN COVER UP OF MUELLER’S, CLAPPER’S, AND BRENNAN’S SURVEILLANCE ‘HAMMER’ THAT SPIED ON TRUMP, STRZOK-PAGE TEXT SHOWS
Twenty-six minutes after General McInerney discussed “THE HAMMER” (HAMR) on terrestrial radio, FBI Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division Peter Strzok and his supposed lover, FBI attorney Lisa Page exchanged a cryptic text message. Later that evening, they exchanged a second text message that specifically mentioned Dennis Montgomery.
“I’m not going to respond to the whole group. The Klayman/Montgomery stuff in the email Jim just sent is utter BS. Best to say nothing and brief later if necessary” read Strzok and Pages’s second text message following General McInerney’s Sunday, March 19th radio interview.
It remains unclear if Strzok and Page were referring to FBI Director Jim Comey or to Page’s direct boss FBI General Counsel Jim Baker.
The following morning, March 20, 2017, seventeen hours after General McInerney went on air to discuss THE HAMMER, FBI Director James Comey lied to Congress, insisting that the FBI had no evidence that Donald Trump had been under surveillance.
During that same appearance before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Director Comey launched the FBI’s Trump/Russia collusion investigation.
COMEY LAUNCHED TRUMP RUSSIA INVESTIGATION
DAY AFTER GENERAL EXPOSED ‘THE HAMMER’
Representative Raskin, by posing his questions to Baker so narrowly, cleverly referencing only surveillance for “political purposes,” was working to maintain the Deep State narrative that illegal surveillance of Donald Trump was in fact legal and only conducted for national security purposes.
The objectives of this “narrative” appear to be not only the avoidance of perjury charges against Jim Baker, but also the furtherance of the fictitious Operation Crossfire Hurricane agenda. Crossfire Hurricane smeared Donald Trump by falsely portraying him as an “agent” in league with Russia who was required to be under legal surveillance for national security reasons.
The Trump/Russia collusion investigation was subsequently proven to have been created out of the Hillary Clinton campaign by Clinton operatives working with the FBI.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia collusion investigation final report entirely cleared President Trump.
Notwithstanding the clear statements in the Mueller report that there was no collusion between the President or his campaign and Russia, The Washington Post reported on May 19, 2019 that “‘Baker said he viewed Mueller’s findings as showing ‘a pattern of corruption.’”
“‘Even if it’s not criminal, it should be unacceptable in America today” Baker said, according to the Washington Post Story.
According to Montgomery and Klayman, Baker and Comey buried Montgomery’s whistleblower case and the revelation of illegal U.S. government surveillance targeting Donald Trump.
Brennan and Clapper are now working overtime in an attempt to push this same false narrative regarding their illegal surveillance of Donald Trump.
To avoid going to prison for illegal surveillance of Donald Trump, Brennan and Clapper are desperate to continue to paint Trump as a Russian intelligence agent instead of a mere American political opponent.
Operation Crossfire Hurricane, FBI Director Comey’s Trump Russia collusion investigation, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Trump Russia collusion investigation, were all part of the cover-up operation predicated on the stunning revelation of illegal surveillance by Obama and his henchmen, Brennan and Clapper with “THE HAMMER” (HAMR).
The powerful foreign surveillance tool, “THE HAMMER” (HAMR) was illegally turned against Donald Trump, the Trump campaign, seventeen Trump businesses, and the entire Trump family, according to Montgomery.
The real “pattern of corruption” is that Baker, with Obama administration officials, buried Whistleblower Montgomery’s information on illegal surveillance and on the use of the illegal domestic super-surveillance system “THE HAMMER” (HAMR).
Now it is time to reinstitute the rule of law and to bring the hammer of justice down on all the conspirators.
Copyright 2019 Mary Fanning and Alan Jones
PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT: DAY ONE OF JAMES BAKER’S INTERVIEW BEFORE MEMBERS OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, OCTOBER 3, 2018
House Judiciary Committee
House Government of Oversight Committee
REDACTED, COMMITTEE SENSITIVE
INDIVIDUALS IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Raskin — Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD)
Mr. Baker — James A. Baker, former FBI general counsel
Mr. Raskin. Okay. On May 20, 2018, President Trump tweeted,
and I quote, “I hereby demand, and will do so officially tomorrow, that
the Department of Justice look into whether or not the FBI, DOJ
infiltrated or surveilled the Trump campaign for political purposes
and if any such demands or requests were made by people within the Obama
Administration!” exclamation point, unquote.
At a political rally on May 29th, 2018, the President again stated
quote, “so how do you like the fact that they had people infiltrating
To your knowledge, did the FBI or DOJ ever investigate the Trump campaign, quote, “for political purposes?”
Mr. Baker. No.
Mr. Raskin. To your knowledge, did President Obama or anyone in
his White House ever, quote, “demand or request” that the DOJ or FBI,
quote, “infiltrate or surveil” the Trump campaign for, quote,
Mr. Baker. No.
Mr. Raskin. And how would you or the FBI leadership have handled
any requests of this nature to launch an inquiry for political purposes
or to infiltrate for political purposes?
Mr. Baker. We would have rejected it out of hand and would have
resigned, if compelled to do it.
Mr. Raskin. Okay. Good. I just have a few more questions here.
In March of 2017, Director Comey disclosed in public testimony
that the FBI had begun an investigation into, quote, “the Russian
Government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election,”
including, quote, “the nature of any links between individuals
associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian Government and
whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s
When you first learned about a tip that the Russian Government
could be coordinating with the Trump campaign, what was your reaction
to that? Were you concerned or alarmed by it?
Mr. Baker. I was alarmed by that, yes.
PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT: DAY TWO OF JAMES BAKER’S INTERVIEW BEFORE MEMBERS OF THE U.S. REPRESENTATIVES, OCTOBER 18, 2018
House Judiciary Committee
House Government of Oversight Committee
REDACTED, COMMITTEE SENSITIVE
INDIVIDUALS IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Jordan — Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH)
Mr. Baker — James A. Baker, former FBI general counsel
Mr. Breitenbach — Ryan Breitenbach, senior counsel for the majority staff on the House Judiciary Committee.
Mr. Jordan. Okay. I’ll do it again.
So, when we left off a few weeks ago, we were talking about a meeting you had with Andy McCabe and Lisa Page shortly after the meeting they had with Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein where Mr. Rosenstein indicated he was looking at the possibility of recording the President of the United States.
Tell me when that meeting that you had with — when was the meeting you had again with Ms. Page and Mr. McCabe?
Mr. Baker. Okay. First of all, if I can just say, at some point in time, there’s something I remembered from last time I’d like to — that I didn’t remember when we were sitting here together. I’d look to talk about that at some point and put that on the record. I don’t want to interrupt your flow of questions.
Mr. Jordan. Go do that. If there’s something you want to clarify from last time, do that upfront, and then we’ll go right back to my question.
Mr. Baker. Okay. Sure. It’s not directly related to this, and I’m happy to answer your question that you just asked me.
Mr. Jordan. Okay.
Mr. Baker. So I recalled after — just actually a few days ago — that another incident when a — this time an attorney on behalf of a client came to me and wanted — came specifically to me and wanted to make information available to the FBI in the form of electronic media that he wanted to get into the —
Mr. Jordan. Different case or same case?
Mr. Baker. Different case.
Mr. Jordan. Okay.
Mr. Baker. Well, a completely different case. Different attorney, different client, but insistent on meeting only with me or the Director. And then he did not have the material with him at the time. We had to actually dispatch FBI agents to go to a — from a field office to go collect this material. It was in the — to the best of my recollection, it was roughly in the late summer, fall of 2016 timeframe.
Mr. Jordan. Can you tell us the case?
Mr. Baker. It was Larry —
Mr. [REDACTED] Mr. Baker, please do answer the question, but if it’s in a — if it’s a matter that’s totally unrelated to what’s being discussed here, I’d ask you not to discuss any specific investigative details. Can you answer the question?
Mr. Baker. Can I give the name of the attorney?
Mr. [REDACTED] The name of the — absolutely. Yes, sir.
Mr. Baker. Okay. The name of the attorney was Larry Klayman, and he also brought one of his associates with him whose name I don’t recall at this point in time, and it was on behalf of a particular client. Anyway, that’s what I recalled. And we were talking about that last time, and I did not remember that incident. Now I do.
Mr. Jordan. Okay. Thank you. Let’s go back to Mr. McCabe, Ms. Page, and —
Mr. Breitenbach. I’m sorry, Mr. Jordan. Can I just follow up?
Mr. Jordan. Sure.
Mr. Breitenbach. With regard to Mr. Klayman coming to visit you, was it with regard at all to surveillance concerns that he had concerning the general fact pattern that we’re here to discuss today?
Mr. Baker. Well, it had to do with surveillance. It had to do with an allegation about unlawful surveillance, but it was — I believe it was different from any fact pattern that we talked about last time here.
Mr. Breitenbach. Unlawful surveillance of whom?
Mr. Baker. Of Americans, including government officials. Yeah. I can go — I mean —
Mr. Jordan. Who was his client?
Mr. Baker. Can I just — I’m turning to the Bureau to describe this. So his client was an individual named Dennis Montgomery, who I believe, to the best of my recollection, he said that he had been a U.S. Government contractor and, in the course of that work, had come across evidence of unlawful surveillance by the government of Americans — and including government officials — and wanted to give that information to the Bureau, which eventually did take place.
Mr. Jordan. And was this — I’m sorry. Go ahead.
Mr. Sommers. During what time period?
Mr. Jordan. Yeah. That’s what I was going to ask.
Mr. Baker. To the best of my recollection, it’s in the late summer, early fall 2016.
Mr. Sommers. And the surveillance, what time period was that?
Mr. Baker. I’m not entirely sure what the timeframe was. It was a significant — it was — one of the issues in the case was it was a large amount of data that he had that he wanted to provide, that these — these disks or other media had a lot of data on them about this, allegedly.
Mr. Sommers. Surveillance by whom?
Mr. Baker. By the U.S. Government itself of Americans, unlawfully.
Mr. Jordan. Interesting. All right. Thank you. All right. Let’s go back to the McCabe-Page-Rosenstein meeting. When did you talk to Lisa Page and Andy McCabe about the meeting they had with Mr. Rosenstein?