Why Fire Dana Boente?…


Do you now understand how the Mueller team, the 17 hired members of the legal resistance operation, were running the DOJ from May 2017 through April 2019? If no, go back through the archives and catch up. If so, invest yourself and read on…

There was an ongoing cover-up operation with its origin going back to June, July and August of 2018 led by the Mueller team, Deputy AG Rosenstein, AAG John C Demers and FBI chief legal counsel Dana Boente.  That cover-up continues through today; though there are indications of accountability. Not strong enough in my opinion; but they do exist.

What is John Durham’s hold up?

Well, first we need to focus on the players…

Start by reminding yourself of a series of documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 17, 2020. [SEE HERE] Within the release there is a rather alarming letter from the DOJ to the FISA Court dated July 2018. [Link to Letter]

BACKGROUND – After the FISA Court reviewed the December 9, 2019, inspector general report, the FISC ordered the DOJ-NSD to declassify and release documents related to the Carter Page FISA application. In January the FISA court ordered the DOJ and FBI to release certain materials making them public for the first time.

That FISA court order is what led to the Bill Barr DOJ submitting documents to the Senate Judiciary Committee. That court order is what led to the judiciary committee (Senator Lindsey Graham) releasing those documents.   The 2020 FISA court was forcing sunlight on the DOJ and FBI.  AG Bill Barr is not adverse to this sunlight; but everyone else, including the players from 2017-2019 who were running Main Justice, are.

In the cover letter for this specific release to the Senate Judiciary and Senate Intelligence committees, the Bill Barr DOJ cites the January 7, 2020, FISA court order:

Keep in mind that prior to this release only the FISA court had seen this letter from the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), as transmitted by the Mueller resistance unit.

As we walk through the alarming content of this 2018 letter I think you’ll identify the motive behind the FISC order to release it.

First, the letter in question was sent by the DOJ-NSD to the FISA Court on July 12, 2018. It is critical to keep the date of the letter in mind as we review the content. Remember, the Mueller resistance unit was in control.

Aside from the date the important part of the first page is the motive for sending it. The DOJ (Mueller resistance unit) is telling the court in July 2018: based on what they know the FISA application still contains “sufficient predication for the Court to have found probable cause” to approve the Carter Page FISA application. The DOJ (Team Mueller) is defending the Carter Page FISA application as still valid.

However, it is within the justification of the application that alarm bells are found. On page six the letter identifies the primary participants behind the FISA redactions:

As you can see: Christopher Steele is noted as “Source #1”. Glenn Simpson of Fusion-GPS is noted as “identified U.S. person” or “business associate”; and Perkins Coie is the “U.S-based law firm.”

Now things get very interesting.

On page #8 when discussing Christopher Steele’s sub-source, the DOJ notes the FBI found him to be truthful and cooperative.

This is an incredibly misleading statement to the FISA court because what the letter doesn’t say is that 18-months earlier the sub-source, also known in the IG report as the “primary sub-source”, informed the FBI that the material attributed to him in the dossier was essentially junk.

Let’s look at how the IG report frames the primary sub-source, and specifically notice the FBI contact and questioning took place in January 2017 (we now know that date to be January 12, 2017):

Those interviews with Steele’s primary sub-source took place in January, March and May of 2017; and clearly the sub-source debunked the content of the dossier itself.

Those interviews were 18-months, 16-months and 14-months ahead of the July 2018 Mueller Team letter to the FISC.

The Mueller Team (DOJ-NSD) says the sub-source was “truthful and cooperative” but the DOJ doesn’t tell the court the content of the truthfulness and cooperation. Why?

Keep in mind this letter to the court was written by AAG John Demers in July 2018.

Jeff Sessions was Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein was Deputy AG; Christopher Wray was/is FBI Director, David Bowditch was/is Deputy, and Dana Boente was/is FBI chief-legal-counsel; the Mueller resistance unit controlled the DOJ and everything that touched upon a total any of at least TEN ongoing DOJ investigations.

Why would the Mueller Team (DOJ-NSD) not be forthcoming with the FISA court about the primary sub-source?  This level of disingenuous withholding of information speaks to an institutional motive. Mueller team is in control.

By July 2018 the DOJ clearly knew the dossier was full of fabrications, yet Mueller’s resistance unit withheld that information from the court and said the predicate was still valid. Why?

It doesn’t take a deep-weeds-walker to identify the DOJ motive.

In July 2018 Robert Mueller’s investigation was at its apex, the resistance unit is in charge, Bob Mueller was a “dear friend” of current AG Bill Barr. Mueller was a figure-head, a face in name only, selected to give credibility to an internal occupation of the DOJ by a resistance unit adverse to the interests of justice.

This letter justifying the FISA application, and claiming the current information would still be a valid predicate therein, speaks to the 2018 Mueller Team needing to retain the validity of the FISA warrant…. My researched suspicion, now confirmed, was that the DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller had already extracted from their fraudulent FISA authority.

That’s the motive for sending a fraudulent letter to the FISA court.

In July 2018 if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were fatally flawed Robert Mueller would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a result of its exploitation. The Mueller probe would have suffered severe scrutiny. The DOJ in 2018 was protecting Mueller’s poisoned fruit. The DOJ was being run by the resistance.

If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there’s a strong possibility some, perhaps much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated… and cases were pending. The solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid.

This is not simply a hunch, because that motive also speaks to why the FISC would order the current DOJ to release the letter.

Remember, in December 2019 the FISC received the IG Horowitz report; and they would have immediately noted the disparity between what IG Horowitz outlined about the FBI investigating Steele’s sub-source, as contrast against what the DOJ (Mueller Team) told them in July 2018. [Not coincidentally this is when Team Mueller released the FISA application to the public under the fraudulent premise of a FOIA release. They released the exact copies of the previously leaked FISA]

The DOJ letter (July 2018) is a transparent misrepresentation when compared to the information in the Horowitz report (Dec 2019). Hence, the court orders the DOJ THIS YEAR to release the July 2018 letter so that everyone, including congressional oversight and the public can see the misrepresentation.

The court was misled; now everyone can see it.

We can see it.

The content of that DOJ-NSD letter, and the subsequent disparity, points to an institutional cover-up; and as a consequence the FISC also ordered the DOJ to begin an immediate sequestration effort to find all the evidence from the fraudulent FISA application. The proverbial fruit from the poisonous tree…. And yes, that is ongoing.

Moving on… Two more big misstatements within the July letter appear on page #9. The first is the DOJ (Team Mueller) claiming that only after the application was filed did they become aware of Christopher Steele working for Fusion-GPS and knowing his intent was to create opposition research for the Hillary Clinton campaign. See the top of the page.

According to the DOJ-NSD claim the number four ranking official in the DOJ, Bruce Ohr, never told them he was acting as a conduit for Christopher Steele to the FBI. While that claim is hard to believe, in essence what the DOJ-NSD is saying in that paragraph is that the FBI hoodwinked the DOJ-NSD by not telling them where the information for the FISA application was coming from. The DOJ, via John Demers (writing for the resistance), is blaming the FBI.

The second statement, equally as incredulous, is at the bottom of page nine where the DOJ (Team Mueller) claims they had no idea Bruce Ohr was talking to the FBI throughout the entire time any of the FISA applications were being submitted. October 2016 through June 2017.

In essence the claim there is that Bruce Ohr was working with the FBI and never told anyone in the DOJ throughout 2016 and all the way past June 29th of 2017. That denial seems rather unlikely; however, once again the DOJ-NSD is putting the FBI in the crosshairs and claiming they knew nothing about the information pipeline.

Bruce Ohr, whose wife was working for Fusion-GPS and assisting Christopher Steele with information, was interviewed by the FBI over a dozen times as he communicated with Steele and fed his information to the FBI. Yet the DOJ (Team Mueller) claims they knew nothing about it.

Again, just keep in mind this claim by the DOJ-NSD is being made in July 2018, six months after Bruce Ohr was demoted twice (December 2017 and January 2018). If what the DOJ is saying is true, well, the FBI was completely off-the-rails and rogue.

Neither option speaks well about the integrity of either institution; and quite frankly I never bought the DOJ-NSD spin. Why? The reason is simple, the DOJ is claiming in the letter the predication was still valid… if the DOJ-NSD genuinely didn’t know about the FBI manipulation, they would be informing the court in 2018 the DOJ no longer supported the FISA application due to new information. They did not do that. Instead, in July 2018, the Mueller-led resistance unit specifically told the court the predicate was valid, yet the DOJ-NSD knew it was not.

The last point about the July 2018 letter is perhaps the most jarring. Again, keep in mind when it was written Chris Wray is FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy and Dana Boente is FBI chief legal counsel.

Their own FBI reports, by three different INSD and IG investigations; had turned up seriously alarming evidence going back to the early 2017 time-frame; the results of which ultimately led to the DC FBI office losing all of their top officials; and knowing the letter itself was full of misleading and false information about FBI knowledge in/around Christopher Steele; this particular sentence is alarming:

“The FBI has reviewed this letter and confirmed its factual accuracy?”

Really?

As we have just shared, the July 2018 letter itself is filled with factual inaccuracies, misstatements and intentional omissions. So who exactly did the 2018 “reviewing”?

This declassification release raised more questions than any other in recent memory. It seems likely now this release inspired AG Bill Barr to start asking some rather hard questions to FBI Director Christopher Wray. That’s where Dana Boente’s participation with the group in 2017, 2018 and 2019 comes in to play.

WASHINGTON DC – After a 38-year career with the Justice Department, the FBI’s top lawyer Dana Boente was asked to resign on Friday. Two sources familiar with the decision to dismiss Boente said it came from high levels of the Justice Department rather than directly from FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Here’s the Full Letter. I strongly suggest everyone read the 14-pages slowly. If you know the background, this letter is infuriating…

.

It is not accidental the fraudulent letter to the FISA court was written on July 12, 2018.

This is the exact same timeframe when the Mueller Team and FBI were involved in two other operations. These are two distinct cover-up operations carried out by the resistance unit to protect their prior activity.

The position of Bill Barr today is a direct result of decisions made by the DOJ (Team Mueller) in the summer of 2018. The events surrounding the March 17, 2017, leaking of the FISA warrant used against U.S. person Carter Page, and the 2018 DOJ decision not to prosecute SSCI Security Director James Wolfe for those leaks, was the fork in the road moment for the DOJ. The Mueller team coordinated the process.

This was the point of no return…

This is when every downstream action had to be taken to cover-up these decisions…

Everything since has been designed to protect three specific cover-up operations…

In the summer of 2018 Attorney General Jeff Session was recused, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein was in charge and the Mueller investigation was ongoing. That was when the DOJ made a decision not to prosecute SSCI Security Director James Wolfe for leaking classified information (The Page FISA Warrant).

As a result of people at the highest level of power and authority making a decision to protect themselves and the gross abuses of power by current and former DC officials and politicians…. DC-based U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu signed-off on a plea deal where Wolfe plead guilty to only a single count of lying to the FBI.

If the DOJ had pursued the case against Wolfe for leaking the FISA application, everything would have been different. The American electorate would have seen evidence of what was taking place in the background effort to remove President Trump. We would be in an entirely different place today if that prosecution or trial had taken place.

Three events revealed the Wolfe issue and highlight the cover-up:

EVENT ONE – On February 9th, 2018, the media reported on text messages from 2017 between Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Mark Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer, a lobbyist named Adam Waldman.

EVENT TWO – Four months after the Mark Warner texts were made public, on June 8th, 2018, another headline story surfaced. An indictment for Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Security Director James Wolfe was unsealed on June 7th, 2018.

EVENT THREE – Slightly less than two months after release of the Wolfe indictment, another headline story. On July 21st, 2018, the DOJ/FBI declassified and publicly released the FISA application(s) used against former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.

♦ Later on December 14th 2018 a fourth albeit buried public release confirmed everything. The FBI filed a sentencing recommendation proving it was the Carter Page FISA that was leaked by Wolfe:

So on July 12, 2018, the DOJ and FBI were lying to the FISA court; and telling the court there was reasonable justification for the Carter Page FISA warrant, when they knew that was false. At the same time the DOJ resistance unit and FBI were initiating processes to cover SSCI Security Director James Wolfe leaking the FISA application to the media.

But wait it gets worse….

Simultaneous to the decision to mislead the court; and simultaneous to the decision-making regarding Wolfe; there was yet another (a third) Robert Mueller resistance unit cover-up effort that was also necessary to retain the origin of the Russia-collusion fraud.

To further understand the decision-making of the resistance, and purposeful utility of Rosenstein & Liu as to why they hid the James Wolfe leak, it is important to note the DOJ in the Eastern District of Virginia was creating the cover-story to block sunlight on the origin of how Wikileaks gained the leaked DNC emails.

On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA. From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:

(Link to pdf)

On Tuesday April 15th 2019 more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….

The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.

How does this all connect?

What does it mean?

James Wolfe was confronted about his leaking by the FBI in December of 2017. At the same time the FBI were investigating Wolfe and the SSCI, the FBI was also investigating Wikileaks and Julian Assange. This matters because it shows what the mindset was within the resistance unit of the DOJ in late 2017 and early 2018.

In both examples, Wolfe and Assange, the actions by the Mueller team reflect a predisposition to hide the much larger background story:

• An honest and ordinary prosecution of Wolfe would have exposed a complicit conspiracy between corrupt U.S. intelligence actors, the United States senate intelligence committee, and the resistance unit now running the DOJ. Two branches of government essentially working on one objective; the removal of a sitting president. The Mueller team was protecting multiple U.S. agencies, allied in the resistance cause, and their comrades in congress.

• Additionally, a non-prosecution of Julian Assange would have exposed a complicit conspiracy between corrupt U.S. intelligence actors and a host of political interests who created a fraudulent Russia-collusion conspiracy with the central component of Russia “hacking” the DNC. If Assange were allowed to show he received the DNC emails from a leaker, and not from a hack, the central component of the Russia interference narrative would collapse. The Mueller team decision protected multiple U.S. agencies and the fraudulent auspices of the Robert Mueller appointment.

As soon as the team were set to release their Russia report, the EDVA activated their prior cover-up operation; and shut down Assange with the DOJ indictment; in a similar way the DOJ shut down Wolfe with a weak plea agreement.

Again, the key takeaway here is the timing. Both DOJ operations were taking place at the same time (Fall 2017 through spring/summer 2018). Both hold a similar purpose.

What we can see from both DOJ operations is an intentional effort by Main Justice, now being run by Team Mueller, not to expose the epicenter of a multi-branch effort against the White House.

Some people within the FBI were obviously participating along with people within the DOJ. However, not all Washington DC FBI agents/officials were involved. We know there were genuine investigators, at least in the Wolfe case, because their investigative evidence shows Wolfe was leaking classified information. If they did not present the investigative evidence that proves Wolfe leaked, quite simply we wouldn’t have it to show you.

This buried attachment (from the supervisory FBI special agent who conducted the investigation) was attached to the DOJ sentencing memorandum for James Wolfe.   This statement under oath was sworn by the FBI agent on December 14, 2018:

The FBI swears under penalty of perjury:

…”because the known disclosure of classified information –the FISA application– involved an FBI equity”…

This is after the same FBI special agent outlined how the leak took place in the Wolfe indictment; which was subsequently shaped by the Mueller team to hide it.   He refused to accept the corruption that allowed Wolfe to escape.  Ten months after the FBI presented their investigative files to the DOJ to begin grand jury proceedings; the FBI special agent wasn’t going to let them plead out Wolfe without again affirming the truth.

In hindsight we can see the corrupt influences of the resistance operation within the DOJ because the direct and concrete FBI evidence against Wolfe was buried.

The high-level resistance group inside the DOJ in Washington DC, in the Summer of 2018, was making decisions on what NOT to do; and who not to prosecute. .

These two events highlight corruption and how much control was held by the Mueller team within the DOJ despite the presence of AG Jeff Sessions (firewalled and recused) and apparently with the willfully blind participation of Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein.

The decisions in the Wolfe case are critical. That’s the fork in the road. If the Wolfe prosecution for leaking the FISA application had continued it would have undoubtedly surfaced that key government officials and politicians were working together (executive and legislative); to frame a sitting president and remove him from office.

The Wolfe leak had that purposeful design.

The ramifications of the Wolfe case are stunning. Had the prosecution continued it’s very likely a seditious conspiracy would have surfaced.

♦ I often field a question: If you know this; if all of this information is in the public sphere; then why didn’t any member of the media cover it?

Here’s the answer: They couldn’t….

…..At least they couldn’t cover it and still retain all of the claims they had been making since March 2017 when journalist Ali Watkins gained a fully non-redacted copy of the Carter Page FISA application and first renewal.

Politico, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC and The Washington Post are all implicated in the James Wolfe leak to Ali Watkins. They had the FISA information since March 2017, yet those media outlets were disingenuously falsifying their reporting on the actual content of the FISA application despite their actual knowledge.

Remember all of the media denials about what Devin Nunes wrote in the “Nunes memo”? Remember the media proclaiming the Steele Dossier was not part of the FISA application?

How was the media fifteen months later (July 2018) going to report on the Wolfe leak to Watkins without admitting they had been manufacturing stories about its content for the past year-and-a-half?

It was in the media’s interest NOT to cover, or dig into, the Wolfe story. The media were allied with the resistance unit which was leaking them information to retain the fraud.

Additionally, from both the DOJ and Media perspective, coverage of the Wolfe leak would prove the senate intel committee (SSCI) was, at a minimum, a participating entity in the coup effort. That same SSCI is responsible for oversight over the CIA, FBI, DOJ-NSD, ODNI, DNI, and all intelligence agencies.

Worse yet, all officers within those agencies require confirmation from the SSCI (including Chair and Vice-Chair); and any discussion of the Wolfe leak would highlight the motive for ongoing corruption within the SSCI in blocking those nominations (see John Ratcliffe).

WASHINGTON—Members of the Senate Intelligence Committee have been notified they may be asked for testimony as part of the criminal trial of a veteran Senate staffer accused of lying to the FBI while working for the panel.

Attorneys for James A. Wolfe sent letters to all 15 senators on the committee, notifying them that their testimony may be sought as part of Mr. Wolfe’s defense, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Wolfe, who for nearly 30 years served as the director of security for the intelligence committee, was arrested last month and charged with lying to the FBI about his contacts with reporters while the bureau was conducting an investigation into leaks of classified information to journalists. Mr. Wolfe wasn’t charged with leaking any information.  (July 27, 2018)

Stunning ramifications.

There was a clear fork in the road, and the resistance unit running the DOJ constructed the cover-up; which, considering what the special counsel resistance unit was simultaneously doing with the EDVA regarding Assange, is not entirely surprising.

Were the special counsel (resistance) decisions done with forethought to coverup a transparent trail showing gross abuses of government? Yes.

Where the DOJ is today, under AG Barr, is directly connected to the decisions the resistance operations made in 2017 and 2018 to protect themselves and internally corrupt actors from discovery.

It is often said: “the coverup is always worse than the crime.” This is never more true than with these examples, because where we are today… now miles down the path of consequence from those corrupt decisions… is seemingly disconnected from the ability of any institutional recovery. That’s now become the issue for Bill Barr and John Durham.

So what happened recently? Well…

WASHINGTON DC – After a 38-year career with the Justice Department, the FBI’s top lawyer Dana Boente was asked to resign on Friday. Two sources familiar with the decision to dismiss Boente said it came from high levels of the Justice Department rather than directly from FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Considering the decision about Dana Boente came from John Durham and Bill Barr, this removal makes sense.

But what about the FBI investigator, the Supervisory Special Agent, who invested over a year tracking down classified intelligence leaks, only to have the Mueller team bury the case?

(source)

[…] “During the OIG’s investigation the SSA and the FBI entered into a mediated settlement agreement”.

.

Sorry bitches, we are not going to let you hide it again.

We know; if the DOJ is trying to hide it that doesn’t change our level of information.

Regardless of whether John Durham or Bill Barr actually admit what took place, there are people who know…

We know….

You know….

Soon everyone will know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.