With the latest information revealing that FBI Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ/FBI Attorney Lisa Page were specifically leaking to their media sources to shape the underlying story of their political efforts, everything presented by the recipients of those leaks should now be questioned.
Page and Strzok were the “sources” for stories written by Devlin Barrett of the Washington Post.
As such, obviously the network of Page and Strzok’s professional colleagues, would also be considered part of a grouping of people who would benefit from specific leaks intended to shape the stories.
One of those initial stories was a December 2nd, 2017, WaPo outline describing Page and Strzok against the backdrop of the DOJ Inspector General Horowitz investigation.
The Washington Post presented the story of Lisa Page and Peter Strzok having an affair to the world.
That presentation became the underlying assumption for all reporting that followed (despite the lack of supporting evidence). That WaPo story (narrative), “The affair” was written by Devlin Barrett, who we now know was in direct contact with Page and Strzok.
As with all new information, all assumptions –driven by that WaPo original story– should be carefully reconsidered.
As an example: were Peter Strzok and Lisa Page actually having an affair? Or, was the “affair” simply an effective narrative, entirely constructed to describe the scope of their communication and cover-up a larger and far more looming truth, a bigger conspiracy?
Amid a vastly growing release of text messages, there’s nothing to indicate a relationship between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok based on anything except collaboration to politicize their jobs to the benefit of Hillary Clinton and against all her political opposition.
For several years CTH has been pointing out how the larger U.S. intelligence community has a pattern of leaking specific information to specific outlets.
Information from Justice Department leaks and the Intelligence Community (writ large), generally appear in the Washington Post, New York Times, NBC, and -depending on content- the Wall Street Journal. Information from State Department leaks generally flow to CNN, CBS and ABC.
Each of the initiating media reports of the leaks are then cited by their peer group: ‘media reports on media reports’. It is a pattern that has become transparently visible for those who follow politics and media.
Additionally, and perhaps more disturbingly, against the backdrop of officials within the FBI and DOJ having an agenda to protect their internal allies, it is also important to note that some leak efforts might actually be using the media to protect their team.
As an example, a Justice Department official may know one of their aligned colleagues might be scheduled for questioning by congressional oversight. The insider, perhaps from a different sub-department within the DOJ, would have knowledge of the information provided to congress -and- desire to prepare their colleague by leaking the content of the information they have provided.
Recently, and specifically because of the explosive nature of the larger construct of the conspiracy within the Justice Department targeting of candidate Donald Trump, we noted the possibility of this happening. –SEE HERE– This stemmed from the original January 8th, 2018, Hill report of Page and Strzok as likely ‘leakers‘.
[…] What that individual series of text messages from Lisa Page highlights is how far she was willing to go to shape DOJ/FBI investigative action to the benefit of her favorite political candidate.
Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were not only willing to manipulate their official investigative duty to the benefit of Hillary Clinton, but they were also willing to leak information to the media in an effort to shape the narrative around their investigative duties.
Both Page and Strzok are scheduled to testify to the House Intelligence Committee *VERY* soon. Like, within a matter of days.
Given the revelation(s) within the text messaging today, and the evidence therein that proves the politicization of their offices, it is highly likely *NOW* they will plead the fifth and refuse to answer questions.
Which immediately makes me wonder about the motive behind whomever gave that text messaging information to John Solomon and Sara Carter.
Were those specific text messages, which clearly prove Lisa Page was leaking to the media, INTENTIONALLY given to Solomon and Carter because someone on “The Hill” was trying to warn Page about known evidence against her?
I don’t expect that Sara Carter would reveal her sourcing on this. However, I would WARN HER, *strongly* that there’s a serious possibility she is being used by her SOURCE to dilute damage against the “small group” co-conspirators.
Those who have followed CTH closely will note my historic suspicions toward a strong likelihood that Sean Hannity’s favorite journalists are being handled by DC control agents who know how manipulate media people. (link)
This does not mean that all media are doing the bidding of the corrupt officials knowingly. Some might be relaying information thinking they are just breaking exclusive news, without actually considering they are helping corrupt insiders to get dangerous information to their ideological allies in a scheme to assist them. [Not everyone has the benefit of HAM radios]
However, for the reassessment of all Devlin Barrett’s narrative engineering (reporting), we can be certain he is more than a willing ally to the corrupt group of FBI and DOJ insiders.
How do we know this?
Well, one of the brutally obvious stories was national security journalist Devlin Barrett writing a story specifically using “sources” to explain the context of the Page/Strzok message about untraceable phones:
By Devlin Barrett – Two senior FBI officials who texted each other about President Trump and Hillary Clinton relied on work phones to try to hide their romance from a spouse and made the bureau’s probe of Clinton’s private email server their cover story for being in such close contact, according to people familiar with the matter.
The two officials, senior FBI lawyer Lisa Page and senior counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok, are the subjects of an internal investigation that has roiled the FBI and emboldened its Republican critics who have accused the bureau of political bias. Had Page and Strzok used personal phones instead, people close to case say, it’s unlikely their text messages would have come to the FBI’s attention.
The texts, a trove of which were released by the Justice Department this week, have raised questions about the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state and special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe of whether any Trump associates coordinated with Russian officials to interfere with the presidential election. Page and Strzok, who have declined to comment, were involved in both. (read more)
In this example, and thinking about the approach of a willing media journalist helping his FBI and DOJ allies, there’s a really odd dynamic to use the subject of the article as the likely source of information on the subject of the article.
“According to people familiar with the matter”, is likely to be Peter Strzok and Lisa Page themselves.
That’s perhaps the most obvious example of narrative engineering ever. Again, “sources say” now appears to be reporter Devlin Barrett writing an article based on direct information from Lisa Page and Peter Strzok who were the subjects of the story.
Obviously they would have a vested legal interest in shaping/spinning that story in a very specific direction, and it appears Devlin Barrett was more than willing to assist.
Knowing that DOJ/FBI Attorney Lisa Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok were key sources for Barrett’s stories at the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post all assumptions based on this reporting should be questioned.
Again, President Trump was prescient when he tweeted: