Journalist Kimberley A. Strassel is one of the few mainstream journalists writing about the collaborative 2016 DOJ/FBI “Trump Operation” with a sense of what is to come.  Strassel likely understands where the story is going, and appears to have a solid grasp on the evidence trail, yet necessarily writes cautiously – the stakes are indeed quite high.

Today Strassel writes about the need for the Democrats to rehabilitate the Steele Dossier because the alternative origin, the truthful origin to the counterintelligence operation over the campaign of candidate Donald Trump, is a stunning political risk.

Two weeks ago the New York Times narrative said the Steele Dossier was nothing, irrelevant, and had nothing to do with the FBI beginning “Operation Trump”.  Today, mysteriously, Democrats embrace the Steele Dossier as they justify the DOJ/FBI counterintelligence and surveillance operation over an opposing political candidate.

The motive is transparent. If Democrats do not embrace the Steele Dossier as a national security origin for the entire DOJ/FBI operation, the real motive is subject to exposure.  That real motive is political. That real motive cannot be justified. That real motive presents a legal risk that must be avoided.

However, while Strassel’s outlook is almost guaranteed to be correct, there’s an angle that Democrats have likely not considered; and/or they will not easily be prepared for.

Let me put it this way, in the form of a question:

The Steele Dossier is the “least bad” option to justify the origin of the DOJ/FBI “Trump Operation”.  However, what if the Steele Dossier is the finished product of the DOJ/FBI “Trump Operation”,  not the beginning of an investigation?

What I mean by that is… our research indicates the “dossier” information is likely a fabricated story woven from loosely connected factual evidence derived from DOJ/FBI unlawful FISA-702 query use, and not vice-versa.

That is to say… The information within the dossier came from early 2016 FISA-702 abuses by contractors working for the FBI. It appears from the fact pattern that elements from the FISA-702 queries generated intelligence bytes that were later laundered by Christopher Steele and became elements within his completed intelligence ‘dossier’.

The “Dossier” did not precede the FBI’s FISA-702(16)(17) surveillance applications to the FISA Court; the Dossier was actually constructed from previous unauthorized FISA-702 queries.  A self-fulfilling intelligence prophecy per se’.

As a consequence if the Democrats embrace the Dossier, and congress exposes the origin of the material within the Dossier, the Democrats end up embracing the conspiracy within the origin of the Dossier.

Funny that.

I wonder if they’ve thought that through?

Let me take a prudent moment to clear some things up for those who are following this story closely.

First, the MSM is about two-weeks behind understanding the researched evidence you have read in our ongoing analysis of this story-line. They are currently debating “FISA Warrants”, without even beginning to fathom that FISA-702 queries don’t require FISA Warrants.

Additionally, the FISA Court doesn’t give FISA-702 “Warrants”, they give FISA-702 search or surveillance approvals.

Secondly, the conservative media are still scared of this story.  The ramifications are almost too large to fathom.  A sitting president (Obama) knowingly involved in the weaponization of the FBI and DOJ to target a political opponent?  That’s a story that scares the hell out of the financial media.  One of the reasons it scares them is they are still suffering from the long-term side effects of “Battered Birther Syndrome“.

Those who are willing to engage in this story are petrified of being called a “Conspiracy Theorist” (etc. and writ large).   In a weird way now you know why this little political research website is called “The Last Refuge”.  We discuss the evidence and downstream facts that others are frightened to mention.  No big deal. Those tender voices read here to figure out where the story is going….  we leave the trail… they follow.

When the financial media arrive at the destination, they shout “look what we found”. Meanwhile we’re chilling on the perimeter up ahead, resharpening the machetes, watching them celebrate their discovery in the rear view.  No biggie. I digress…. moving on.

Let’s explain FISA because the media is taking too long to understand complex facts within the story.

We’ll break down the term: “ FISA-702(16)(17) ” into the elements that will help you make sense of this story in the future.

• FISA – Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
• 702 – An American caught up in the process of Foreign Surveillance
• (16) – A search query based on “TO” and/or “FROM”
• (17) – A search query based on “ABOUT”

Again, to repeat, there are differing FISA rules for use of the NSA or FBI database depending on the originating intelligence compartment.

If a search is conducted from an intelligence agency of the U.S. government whose objective is to ensure “National Security” there are different FISA rules than a search from an intelligence agency not engaged in “National Security”.

The DOJ has a National Security Division.  Their compartment rules on FISA searches and reviews are different from the DOJ Civil Rights Division.  There are 30 DOJ divisions.

The FBI (a department within the DOJ) has a Counterintelligence Division that focuses on terrorism threats etc.  A FISA search from within the Counterintelligence Division has different rules than a FISA search from the Science and Technology Division.

When a FISA-702 search is conducted based on the need for “national security” no approval from the FISA court is needed.  Search away.  If the FISA search is because of a “vital national security interest” the resulting search data can be opened without seeking permission from the FISA court.

♦A “FISA-702(16)” Search Result – would be a search result of the FBI (counter terrorism) database or NSA database that returns an American person as a result of a “To” or “From” (16) type data search.

EXAMPLE: Querying phone data (phone number)  TO: Mohammed BadGuy or FROM: Mohammed BadGuy  – might return a list of phone numbers that also contains an American persons phone number.  That American person is protected by the fourth amendment.  To look at the “upstream” connections of the American Person to other people, likely Americans, the search operator would need to ask permission of the FISA Court to review the upstream results.

[NOTE: *Exception* – the search was vital to national security. If so, the upstream phone numbers could be reviewed without asking FISA permission.]

♦A “FISA-702(17)” Search Result – would be a search result of the FBI (counter terrorism) database or NSA database that returns an American person (702) as a result of an “ABOUT” (17) type data search.

EXAMPLE: Querying everything in email ABOUT: Mohammed BadGuy – might return communication of an American who wrote a letter about Mohammed BadGuy or maybe he told a friend in a text to check out a media story about Mohammed BadGuy.  To look at the email or text of the American, the search operator would need to ask permission of the FISA Court to see the email/text content.

[NOTE:  *Exception* – the search was vital to national security?. If So, the email and text could be looked at without asking permission]

It was the 2016 FISA-702(17) “About Queries”, returns from searches, that were identified in 2016, by NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers, as being conducted by the intelligence community (FBI), by “contractors” and “individuals”, for reasons that were unauthorized; had nothing to do with National Security; and did not request FISA Court Approval.

Mike Rogers discovered FBI contractors doing FISA-702 “About Searches” that resulted in returns providing information on Americans.  Those results were passed on to people outside government.

Pg 83. “FBI gave raw Section 702–acquired information to a private entity that was not a federal agency and whose personnel were not sufficiently supervised by a federal agency for compliance minimization procedures.”

(2017 FISA Court Opinion – 99 Page Brief)

Someone inside the FBI was giving FISA-702 search results on U.S. individuals to a private entity that had nothing to do with government.   Those 702 (American Citizen) results were not “minimized” and exposed the private data of the American citizen(s).

In addition, NSA Director Mike Rogers, who is also in charge of Cyber Command, discovered people within the intelligence community were doing “searches” of the NSA and FBI database that were returning information that had nothing to do with “Foreign Individuals”.

Rogers requested a full FISA-702 Compliance Review.

As an outcome of that review, the DOJ/FBI compliance officer noted FISA violations. Again, the FISA Court (page 84):

We do not know how many FISA-702 violations took place prior to NSA Mike Rogers initiating the full FISA-702 review in April 2016.  Nor do we know who the insider FBI individuals were; or what results were passed on; or what was done with the results.

However, given the nature of what was taking place at the time (March, April, May, 2016) it appears likely this was part of the DOJ/FBI/Fusion-GPS collision to gather information on the candidacy of Donald Trump.

CTH received a tip that Fusion GPS (either ‘individuals’ or the company) were one of the “contractors” mentioned, additionally the “private entity” could also be inside the Fusion GPS network.  Another “contractor” could possibly be CrowdStrike.  From all appearances there were multiple people involved.

These ‘passed-along’ FISA-702 search results appear to be the seeds which were fertilized by Glenn Simpson, Mary Jacobs, Nellie Ohr; “unmasked” by Obama administration officials; and enhanced/laundered by Christopher Steele – to end with a “Steele Dossier” returned to the FBI via Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok, DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr, and DOJ/FBI lawyer Lisa Page, for their “insurance policy”.

The DOJ and FBI then took the dossier, full circle, back to the FISA Court to gain 702 surveillance authority and approval (media says ‘warrant’), upon the Trump Campaign (October 2016), and President-Elect (after November 8th, 2016).

There’s a Twitter Thread on The SUBJECT HERE

In October 2016, immediately after the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for a valid FISC application, the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job.  Carlin’s exit came as the NSD and Admiral Rogers informed the FISC that frequent unauthorized FISA-702 searches had been conducted. Read Here.

All research indicates the intelligence information the DOJ and FBI collected via their FISA-702 queries, combined with the intelligence Fusion GPS created in their earlier use of contractor access to FISA-702(17) “about queries”, was the intelligence data delivered to Christopher Steele for use in creating “The Russian Dossier”.

RESOURCES:  – The BIG UGLY

• The DOJ and FBI working with Fusion GPS HERE
• Confirmation DOJ and FBI used FISC Authority for Surveillance HERE.
• Behind the political Battle – What it all means – HERE
• Devin Nunes Gets Information From DOJ/FBI – SEE HERE
• Congress Begins indicating a Leak Investigation – HERE
• DOJ Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr Gets another Demotion HERE
• How the DOJ and FBI were “Weaponized” – HERE
• Grassley and Graham call FBI/DOJ Bluff HERE
• NSA Director Mike Rogers and the FISA Scheme Explained HERE
• The Russian Conspiracy was “The Insurance Policy” HERE
• Fusion GPS runs for Cover HERE
• Lindsey Graham discussed the Steele Dossier and FISA Warrant HERE
• The Scale of the DOJ and FBI Corruption – Outlined HERE
• The DOJ FISA Corruption Outlined HERE
• Devin Nunes subpoenas McCain staffer David Kramer HERE
• New context to understand Evelyn Farkas Comments – Discussed HERE
• How will media respond? – Discussed HERE
• A Counterintelligence Timeline – WH and FBI – HERE
• FBI Asst. Deputy, Andrew “Andy” McCabe announces intent to retire – HERE
• FBI Legal Counsel, James Baker, identified as leaker to media – HERE
• FBI Legal Counsel, James Baker, removed from responsibility – HERE
• Steele Dossier Origination Now Directly Leads To Obama White House – HERE
• FBI Asst. Director “Andy” McCabe has convenient memory lapse – HERE
• Rand Paul Discusses Evidence of Conspiracy HERE
• Summary of Scheme and Letter from Trump Transition Team HERE
• Congress Confirms the Investigative Approach for The Big Ugly HERE
• Understanding the Background Motives of Inspector General Horowitz HERE
• Democrats Realize the BIG Ugly Is Coming HERE
• Understanding the Important Role of Bill Priestap HERE
• Inspector General Horowitz Explains how he caught Peter Strzok and Lisa Page HERE
• Understanding the Pattern of Information Releases HERE
• Jim Jordan Questions Rod Rosenstein HERE
• More releases of information about Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe HERE
• Why Was FISA Court Judge Recused – Discussion HERE
• Jaw-Dropping Info. on Demoted DOJ Deputy Bruce G Ohr’s wife, Nellie H. Ohr HERE
• Discovery – Nellie Ohr worked for Fusion GPS on Trump Opposition Research Project
• Intel Chairman Devin Nunes Outlines FBI FISA Warrant Abuse HERE
• The FBI/DOJ Leak Hunting Task Force Everyone Forgot – Outlined HERE
• Jim Jordan Discusses the Fraud Behind the FBI FISA Warrant HERE
• Black Hat Hunting II – Becomes Obvious – False Media Leaks To Catch Leakers HERE
• The BIG UGLY – The Big Picture and What it Means HERE
• Judge Rudolph Contreras Recuses Himself – FISA Discoveries HERE
• “The Predicate” – The Importance of the Origin of The FISA WARRANTS HERE
• Black Hat Hunting I – First Appearance of Coordinated Plan HERE
• Deputy Head of Counterintelligence FBI Agent Peter Strzok – Outlined HERE
  
• Discovering Initial Seeds of DOJ-OIG Investigative Plan – Outlined HERE
• President Trump Reacts to Evidence of FBI Mgmt Bias Against Him HERE
• Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes Threatens FBI with Contempt HERE
• First IG Release of FBI Team Bias on Robert Mueller Squad HERE

IG Stimulated Releases of Information:

♦Release #1 was the FBI Agent Strzok and Attorney Lisa Page story; and the repercussions from discovering their politically motivated bias in the 2015/2016 Clinton email investigation and 2016/2017 Russian Election investigation.

♦Release #2 outlined the depth of FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page’s specific history in the 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton to include the changing of the wording [“grossly negligent” to “extremely careless”] of the probe outcome delivered by FBI Director James Comey.

♦Release #3 was the information about DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr being in contact with Fusion GPS at the same time as the FISA application was submitted and granted by the FISA court; which authorized surveillance and wiretapping of candidate Donald Trump; that release also attached Bruce Ohr and Agent Strzok directly to the Steele Dossier.

♦Release #4 was information that Deputy Bruce Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, was an actual contract employee of Fusion GPS, and was hired by F-GPS specifically to work on opposition research against candidate Donald Trump. Both Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr are attached to the origin of the Christopher Steele Russian Dossier.

♦Release #5 was the specific communication between FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page. The 10,000 text messages that included evidence of them both meeting with Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to discuss the “insurance policy” against candidate Donald Trump in August of 2016.

Well, well, well… here’s a surprise.  Office of Inspector General has apparently begun giving Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte the 1.2 million pages of evidence from the year-long inspector general investigation into FBI and DOJ politicization:

As previously discussed, Inspector General Michael Horowitz had promised to deliver around 1.2 million pages of documents from his investigation to Chairman Bob Goodlatte on/around January 15th, 2018.

The DOJ Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs is Stephen Boyd; he’s a Trump appointment and replaced the politically corrupt Peter Kadzik (John Podesta’s pal).  Boyd is the liaison between the DOJ and Congress responsible for complying with oversight requests from the Judicary Committee.  Looks like Stephen Boyd delivered early.

More from DaveNYviii today:

TrumpSoldier‏ @DaveNYviii

1) Inspector General Friday Night Surprise!

4:43 PM – 12 Jan 2018

 

Dan Bongino is asking the right question on Twitter:

Pages #83 through #96 of the FISA Court Opinion provide the context for this question.

The fastest way to answer the question is to ask the guy at the epicenter of the FISA-702 queries.  W.H. “Bill” Priestap, the FBI Director of Counterintelligence.  Mr. Priestap could easily answer that question…. and he’s on the Nunes witness list for questioning this month… but will he answer?

Earlier today President Trump tweeted that he personally directed “the fix” to the FISA-702 unmasking process:

He did exactly that.

NSA Director Admiral Rogers took specific action to stop FISA-702(17) “About Queries” and posted the NSA notification in April 2017.  SEE HERE

The FISA-702(17) “About Query” process was exactly what was used to collect information about the campaign of President Trump.

[…] Under Section 702, NSA collects internet communications in two ways: “downstream” (previously referred to as PRISM) and “upstream.”

Under downstream collection, NSA acquires communications “to or from” a Section 702 selector (such as an email address). Under upstream collection, NSA acquires communications “to, from, or about” a Section 702 selector.

An example of an “about” email communication is one that includes the targeted email address in the text or body of the email, even though the email is between two persons who are not themselves targets.

The independent Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board described these collection methods in an exhaustive report published in 2014.

After considerable evaluation of the program and available technology, NSA has decided that its Section 702 foreign intelligence surveillance activities will no longer include any upstream internet communications that are solely “about” a foreign intelligence target.

Instead, this surveillance will now be limited to only those communications that are directly “to” or “from” a foreign intelligence target.

These changes are designed to retain the upstream collection that provides the greatest value to national security while reducing the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the Agency’s foreign intelligence targets.  (read more)