Last night House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes threatened to impeach FBI Director Christopher Wray and Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, if not granted access to review the two-page intelligence community origination document that kicked-off the 2016 FBI counterintelligence operation against candidate Donald Trump.
Today Rosenstein and Wray allowed Chairman Nunes and Trey Gowdy to review the origination document, also known as the “electronic communication” (EC). House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes issued the following statement today:
“After numerous unfulfilled requests for an Electronic Communication (EC) related to the opening of the FBI’s Russia counterintelligence probe, Chairman Trey Gowdy and I met this afternoon with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. During the meeting, we were finally given access to a version of the EC that contained the information necessary to advance the Committee’s ongoing investigation of the Department of Justice and FBI. Although the subpoenas issued by this Committee in August 2017 remain in effect, I’d like to thank Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein for his cooperation today.” (link)
The two-page electronic communication (EC) is essentially the intelligence report from CIA Director John Brennan, that started the FBI Counterintelligence Operation against the campaign of Donald Trump.
From The Hill: […] According to a Justice Department official, the remaining redactions in the document are “narrowly tailored to protect the name of a foreign country and the name of a foreign agent.” Specifics have been replaced with identifiers like “foreign official” and “foreign government,” the official said.
“These words must remain redacted after determining that revealing the words could harm the national security of the American people by undermining the trust we have with this foreign nation,” the official continued, adding that they appear “only a limited number of times, and do no obstruct the underlying meaning of the document.” (link)
However, thanks to leaks from John Brennan (CIA) and James Clapper (ODNI) to the New York Times we already know the ridiculous content of the redactions. The “foreign nation” was Australia, and the “foreign agent” was Alexander Downer.
WASHINGTON — During a night of heavy drinking at an upscale London bar in May 2016, George Papadopoulos, a young foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, made a startling revelation to Australia’s top diplomat in Britain: Russia had political dirt on Hillary Clinton.
About three weeks earlier, Mr. Papadopoulos had been told that Moscow had thousands of emails that would embarrass Mrs. Clinton, apparently stolen in an effort to try to damage her campaign.
Exactly how much Mr. Papadopoulos said that night at the Kensington Wine Rooms with the Australian, Alexander Downer, is unclear. But two months later, when leaked Democratic emails began appearing online, Australian officials passed the information about Mr. Papadopoulos to their American counterparts, according to four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians’ role.
The hacking and the revelation that a member of the Trump campaign may have had inside information about it were driving factors that led the F.B.I. to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Trump’s associates conspired.
If Mr. Papadopoulos, who pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. and is now a cooperating witness, was the improbable match that set off a blaze that has consumed the first year of the Trump administration, his saga is also a tale of the Trump campaign in miniature. He was brash, boastful and underqualified, yet he exceeded expectations. And, like the campaign itself, he proved to be a tantalizing target for a Russian influence operation.
The information that Mr. Papadopoulos gave to the Australians answers one of the lingering mysteries of the past year: What so alarmed American officials to provoke the F.B.I. to open a counterintelligence investigationinto the Trump campaign months before the presidential election?
It was not, as Mr. Trump and other politicians have alleged, a dossier compiled by a former British spy hired by a rival campaign. Instead, it was firsthand information from one of America’s closest intelligence allies. (link)
The New York Times leak was specifically structured around the CIA “electronic communication”. However, the story within the origination document is abject nonsense.
♦If Papadopoulos having a conversation in a London bar in May 2016 was the origination of the FBI counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign. Then why did the FBI wait until January 15th 2017 to talk to Papadopoulos for the first time?
♦Further, if a Papadopolous conversation in May 2016 was the origin, the source material, of the FBI counterintelligence operation, then why was the FBI denied a FISA application in June/July 2016?
The far more realistic review says George Papadopoulos talking in May 2016, is likely about this open and public information from April 2016 about Guccifer hacking Hillary Clinton email [LINK].
The intelligence community “EC” was an excuse to start an FBI counterintelligence operation against the candidacy of Donald Trump. The true intent of the counterintel-op was to provide a cover-story for the DOJand FBI “small group” political opposition research and surveillance that was already ongoing.
We’ve previously debunked this Origination Story HERE