A few days ago we shared a story from Sara Carter, a frequent guest on Sean Hannity, who surfaced immediately AFTER the inauguration of President Trump and is often utilized to drive explosive headlines that lead to lengthy conversation but go ‘no-where’.
CTH has spent years monitoring the interactions and interplay between the media and the various layers within what’s called “The DC Deep State”. Almost immediately a very familiar pattern was noted in Carter’s reporting. Her recent headline was:
“EXCLUSIVE: A top FBI lawyer is allegedly under an investigation for leaking classified information to the media.”
FBI General Counsel James A. Baker is purportedly under a Department of Justice criminal investigation for allegedly leaking classified national security information to the media, according to multiple government officials close to the probe who spoke with Circa on the condition of anonymity.
With the very familiar approach/pattern immediately pegging the needle – When we shared the story, we included the disclaimer:
Consider this report with a measured amount of cynicism. Based on all historic references this could easily be just another example of well presented flak and countermeasures meant to protect the swamp, protect the Deep State, and feed a **distracting narrative.
**The controlled source of the report, Circa, amplifies the possibility this could be simply a distraction intended to deflect criticism from the non-activity of the current DOJ head Jeff Sessions. Remember, those who live in the swamp, and those whose financial livelihoods are determined by the activity in/around/discussing the swamp, have a vested interest to defend the swamp status quo. There are trillions of dollars at stake. (link)
You see, there is a pattern, a very predictable shaping pattern with a great deal of media and stories that surround scandals in politics. The ‘controlled opposition’ pattern is never broken and the outcome of stories that check off each sequential part of that pattern are always the same.
Without going into detail on the specific elements of those patterns, for the sake of this short explainer the important part is to notice the follow-up article from Sara Carter.
Remember, Carter makes a bold claim – she appears on Sean Hannity to expand on that claim – then, with everyone interested and multiple outlets distributing that original claim, she follows up with further investigation of that original presentation.
Check out her follow-up. (emphasis mine):
[Headline] FBI lawyer allegedly under investigation for purportedly leaking about Yahoo, Inc. program
The FBI’s top lawyer is allegedly under investigation for purportedly leaking classified material featured in a Reuters report last year that disclosed a top-secret U.S. surveillance program built by Yahoo Inc, according to several government officials with knowledge of the investigation.
[…] James A. Baker, the general counsel for the FBI, is allegedly under a criminal investigation for an apparent connection to the story published in October 2016, according to several government officials.
The Reuters report exposed the top secret security program built by Yahoo Inc. in 2015, that has not been disclosed by the U.S. government. The program, which was built at the request of the U.S. government, allowed intelligence officials to scan what is known as “upstream data” using specific characters or phrase words, according to Reuters. Upstream data is information from a device such as phone or a computer to a server.
Reuters stated that Yahoo Inc. complied with a classified demand by the U.S. government, “scanning hundreds of millions of Yahoo Mail accounts at the behest of the National Security Agency or FBI, said three former employees and a fourth person apprised of the events.”
FBI spokeswoman Carol Cratty said the bureau would not comment on Baker and did not confirm or deny the alleged criminal investigation. Attempts by Circa to reach Baker, who is reportedly a close confidant of former FBI Director James Comey, through the bureau were not successful.
DOJ officials would not comment on Circa’s inquiry but said, Attorney General Jeff Sessions will be making a announcement next week about the department’s “stepped up efforts on leak investigations.”
A senior government official, with close knowledge of the intelligence community, alleges Baker opposed the Yahoo Inc. software program and has in his position at the FBI held up Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants.
The warrants allow the intelligence community to monitor person’s communications overseas and must be approved through the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).
“Under Baker, many FISA warrants languished for both counterterrorism and counterintelligence investigations,” the source said. (read more)
Can you see what’s going on here?
Can you spot the “controlled opposition” shift?
According to this follow-up, the leaker, James Baker, is a good-guy who didn’t like (wasn’t comfortable) with all of the surveillance tools and over use of FISA warrants etc.
The article even infers that Baker was reluctant to submit FISA warrants: “Under Baker, many FISA warrants languished” blah, blah blah… Yeah, sure. Right.
Can you spot the pivot?
Notice how two days ago the story was delivered to imply that James Baker was part of the problem, he was a “leaker”. This implication fuels the anxiety held by the popular crowd that entities attempting to undermine the President are “leaking”; ergo Baker one of the bad actors etc.
However, through a slight-of-hand and subtle distribution of information, Baker is shifted from “bad-guy-leaker”, to “Snowden-like-honorable”.
See how that is done?
Simultaneous to this, Ms. Sara Carter says Attorney General Jeff Sessions is going to give a speech on “leak investigations” etc.
See where this is going?
Can you see how the interests of the Deep State, in this case the “Surveillance State”, are positioned to protect itself?
See the familiarity? Does it sound just like Comey’s excuse?
The key takeaway here is the aspect where the story is intentionally presented one way and then followed-up to deliver a very specific narrative that in the aggregate protects the Deep State from investigation and public-demanded corrective action.
Go back and look at both articles again, read with your intellectually honest frame of reference, and you’ll note that nothing presented in article #2 (honorable leaker angle), was not known when article #1 (bad leaker story) was written.
When did you first learn of Sara Carter? Then consider Sara Carter is being “fed”.
This is the self-preservation method of ‘flak and countermeasures’ we continually speak of.
- Jeff Sessions wins with a leak investigation.
- James Baker wins with this shaping of the motive for his leaks.
- FBI wins with honorable purposes intact.
- Deep State wins with continuance of status-quo.
- The American electorate loses
Notice how the “muh Russia” media headlines just slowly disappear like the smoke from flak and countermeasures… Months of proclaiming Trump must be colluding with Russia just disappears and no-one asks who should be held to account for the lies etc.? No-one ever gets in the face of the media and demands justification etc.?
“Stepped up efforts”?
Oh, they’ll just move on.
Ah yes…. moving on.
But notice nothing changes.
Almost as if that was by design.