The media narrative engineers are busy at work attempting to cloud the constitutional framework behind the accurate, lawful, sequence of steps surrounding the Nunes House Intel Memo. Don’t fall for the tricks.
The legislative branch has now voted in committee to declassify the House Intelligence Memo on FISA-702 abuse, and systemic fraudulent DOJ/FBI use therein. The memo has been sent to the executive branch for review and public release approval.
The White House has five days to review. Any DOJ or FBI officials who have a position against public release are now responsible to make their case known to the Office of the President who is in charge of them, and the executive branch.
Specifically because the Chief Executive (President Trump) granted permission for FBI Director Christopher Wray to see the intelligence memo prior to the House Intel vote; Director Wray and Asst. AG Rosenstein had an obligation to debrief the executive on their findings. That’s why Wray and Rosenstein were at the West Wing yesterday. However, the vote last evening transferred the declassification decision to the executive.
Likely the National Security Council, the Office of Legal Counsel, and all relevant Intelligence agency heads will have an opportunity to review and provide input prior to President Trump giving his final approval for declassification and making the document public. Tweet,.. not accidental:
Following the constitutional framework, POTUS Trump now holds all the cards.
Anticipating the executive branch wanting the Tuesday and Wednesday’s media cycles to remain focused on the Presidential State of the Union address, don’t anticipate the memo release prior to late Wednesday (earliest), or, more likely, Thursday.
President Trump has keen political instincts on best timing.
With the executive holding the memo, opposing political talking-points will now shift their narrative and claim the President is undermining the DOJ and FBI with a pending release. Opposition does not want the memo released. It’s just pantomime politics.
The executive branch IS the DOJ and FBI; the President cannot, therefore, undermine himself. Media opposition have worked earnestly for two years to create a false illusion of the intelligence apparatus being separate from the executive branch, they’re not. President Trump is the Chief Executive over all the agencies; just like President Obama was accountable for James Comey (FBI) and Loretta Lynch (DOJ) previously.
Then again, the prior political abuse by those agencies explains the reasoning for the media’s attempt to conflate the structure of government. By creating a false separation they are, in essence, also protecting Obama from the discovery of any prior malfeasance within the executive branch Justice Department: James Comey, Andrew McCabe (FBI), or Loretta Lynch and Sally Yates (DOJ) et al.
Traditionally, Democrats would look to dilute any pending damage from the declassification release by leaking to the media the content therein. However, in this example, until actually released by the executive, any leaks of content by the legislative branch are felony releases of classified intelligence. And, remember, there’s a leak task force looking for an opportunity to cull oppositional leakers.
No doubt the corrupt officials within the FBI and DOJ, and especially those who transferred over to Robert Muellers team, have already told their media allies what to anticipate. However, if the media release their scripts too soon those black hats are, like the legislative branch, at risk of having leaked classified intelligence.
The memo remains classified, until President Trump says it is not. So it’s best to wait and see how President Trump, and the aligned White Hats, have decided to play this out.
Lastly, keep in mind the memo is not the valuable commodity in this move. The intelligence behind the memo is what’s important.
The more the opposition fights against the memo, the more momentum there is to declassify and release the underlying supportive documents. Ultimately, that’s the goal. President Trump would want to draw all fire upon him and the memo bringing increased attention to it, and simultaneously providing support to release the underlying evidence.
The FBI and DOJ, or their immediate intelligence superior, DNI Dan Coats, can declassify all the underlying documents if needed; so long as they go through the appropriate channels – which means asking the Chief Executive (President Trump) for authority to do so; and going through the process of seeking input from all parties of interest including the National Security Council. Ultimately all declassification needs executive approval.
That’s the same process of declassification previously used, and conveniently overlooked in all discussion by the media, when ODNI Dan Coats declassified the April 2017 FISA court opinion revealing the historic DOJ/FBI FISA-702 abuse reported by NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers.
Ultimately, not only does President Trump hold authority over public release of the Intelligence Memo, President Trump also holds the declassification authority for all underlying evidence used in creating the memo.
Now you see why the Democrats were/are so apoplectic about how brilliantly Chairman Nunes gamed out the strategy. That’s why Democrats and Media were so violently trying to besmirch Nunes personally. He strategically outmatched them – and they were counting on using the compartmented structure of internal classified intelligence to keep the most damaging information hidden away from public view.
Where things are today appears to have been well thought out since sometime around April, May or June of 2017.
Key strategists: Dan Coats (DNI), Admiral Rogers (NSA), Chairman Nunes (House Intel), Chairman Goodlatte (House Judiciary) and Chairman Grassley (Senate Judiciary); against the complimentary timeline of Inspector General Michael Horowitz and his year-long Justice Department investigation.
None of this is random. All of this is sequential.
Imagine that despite your always knowing the DC swamp was deep (dangerous and full of terrors), corrupt, and generally horrible, you decided to do it anyway. You “just had to”.
Imagine you have spent years thinking about it; thinking about every angle within it; thinking and talking to people who know almost everything about it, well, from their perspective anyway; and ultimately you decided to do it.
Imagine that even though you knew it was bad, it wasn’t until you actually began running that you discovered the depth of the corrupt nature with it. –SEE HERE– You see things in the campaign you never expected; things no-one ever talked about.
One of the most alarming aspects of the *new knowledge* is discovering that the top-tier of the national intelligence apparatus has a political agenda you never thought about before.
Imagine yourself, a very successful business person, coming to the realization that the intelligence apparatus could, indeed was, weaponized against you. You fall back on your past experience with hostile organizations as your reference point having to contemplate that parts of the United States Government institutions would likely begin to conspire against you.
Imagine yourself having to deal with a weaponized intelligence community. Then, as time progresses, you begin to see those concerns are not imaginings – but they actually begin to surface.
Re-read this October 2016 speech with ‘new eyes’:
[…] For those who control the levers of power in Washington, and for the global special interests they partner with, our campaign represents an existential threat.
[…] This is not simply another 4-year election. This is a crossroads in the history of our civilization that will determine whether or not We The People reclaim control over our government.
The political establishment that is trying everything to stop us, is the same group responsible for our disastrous trade deals, massive illegal immigration, and economic and foreign policies that have bled this country dry. The political establishment has brought about the destruction of our factories and our jobs, as they flee to Mexico, China and other countries throughout the world. Our just-announced jobs numbers are anemic, and our gross domestic product, or GDP, is barely above one percent. Workers in the United States, were making less than they were almost 20 years ago – and yet they are working harder.
It’s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth, and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities.
[…] This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. This election will determine whether we are a free nation, or whether we have only the illusion of Democracy but are in fact controlled by a small handful of global special interests rigging the system.
This is not just conspiracy but reality, and you and I know it.
[…] They control the Department of Justice, and they even clandestinely meet with the Attorney General of the United States – in the back of her airplane, while on the runway – for 39 minutes – to most likely discuss her reappointment in a Clinton Administration just prior to the Attorney General making a decision over whether or not to prosecute Hillary Clinton.
Likewise, they have corrupted the Director of the FBI to the point at which stories are already saying the great men and women who work for the FBI are embarrassed and ashamed to what he’s done to one of our great institutions. Hillary Clinton is guilty of all of the things that Director Comey stated at his press conference and Congressional hearings, and far more – and yet he let her off the hook, while others lives are being destroyed for far less.
This is a conspiracy against you, the American people. (link)
Knowing what you know now, those words from October 13th, 2016, rally in West Palm Beach Florida most certainly hold a different resonance today, no?
Who can anyone turn to when the very institutions created to preserve liberty are intentionally utilized to eliminate the most basic of liberties: the right to choose our own government.
Imagine you are a candidate for the office of the presidency and you realize your political campaign is a very real existential threat to the system. As you begin to accept this reality you have to think entirely different now.
These people are political enemies.
As troubling as it is to accept, you have to face the reality of a weaponized intelligence community aligned against you; and a professional political class who will deny it exists.
The system, including the media, are now in synergy to eliminate the threat you represent.
Imagine, as time goes on, you realize this weaponized system is not going to go away. You begin to think about how to work around it, from your only reference points in dealing with hostile institutions. Approaches you know from business experience, become references.
Thankfully, you have a man, an intelligence officer, General Mike Flynn, who can rightly explain the capability of the intelligence apparatus. Yet even he cannot adequately describe how it is weaponized. Imagine yourself having to deal with this issue.
You are running for the Presidency, yet you have to accept a complete and incomprehensible inability to trust the U.S. intelligence community. You realize that, absent of your ability to coax individuals to change behavior inside the organization, it may be entirely necessary to build a parallel system that you can trust.
The nomination was tough, but you won.
It is within the general election when you really discover the scale of political alignment referenced as the ‘Deep Administrative State’.
Somehow, through grit, work and a relentless effort – your campaign overcomes many obstacles and a key part of the electorate are sharp enough to understand the bigger issues.
You win the election.
But as people celebrate around you, you know this is not the summit.
When dawn breaks, November 9th, 2016, everyone will begin to see what you already know; the summit is still a long way off. Those adverse interests are not going to accept the disruption. Well, not willingly anyway.
As everyone else cheers, maybe you don’t quite enjoy the same victory because you sense what is to come…
Then, at a critical juncture, a key player within the established system, who is not OK with what’s going on, comes to you and confirms your worst suspicions. –SEE HERE–
The apparatus of the IC is weaponized against you; and it’s worse than you thought.
However, despite the sheer scale of the opposition, and the people aligned against you, you have won the election – and thankfully that same key internal *whistle-blower* has a plan.
He too has been thinking.
Imagine the broad outline of a parallel intelligence system. A system that might only be temporary in nature, but feasibly could be trusted. A system that might overcome the challenge inherent from the domestic enemies embedded inside the current one.
While a politically weaponized intelligence apparatus is targeting/watching you… perhaps your parallel system might just be able to watch the watchers.
If you can imagine such a system, you’ll note the needs: established infrastructure close to completion, or at least in a solid phase of current utility. A safe system, a reasonable distance away from the threat; held and operated by people who have, or would have, a self-interest -a motive- to help you. Also a human intelligence network, contacts with people -who know people- and must also have ability to operate the parallel system.
Normal allies, at least the historic perspective of ‘allies’ as known to us outside the system, could not be used. The “Five Eyes” intelligence allies would be useless, because the embedded IC opposition would quickly discover the networking. They are, after all, an international intelligence community; and share a generally common ideology.
No, you would need a ‘new’ system.
Something outside current systems, yet mirroring the technological capability.
And all of this must take place in such a fashion as no-one would ever suspect it taking place. Yet, you don’t want to hide it, because that’s ultimately the easiest way for the adverse IC enemy to discover it.
That’s what you’d need.
Now, consider:
I know, it’s a mind-blowing exercise to fathom…. but why not?
As we consider this, basic frames of reference are questioned. Do your own work, your own analysis, apply your own reasoned logic. You, we, all of us, have all just recently began to understand the scale of the corruption within the U.S. intelligence apparatus, specifically the DOJ and FBI.
What if we had known it back in November of 2016?
How would we understand all of the intelligence events from November 2016 though today if we knew the scale of the Justice Department weaponization, back then. We have the benefit of hindsight to overlay against current events.
Do not trust me, nor expect me to convince you. Something about this has just struck me as deliberate for over eight months – for multiple reasons. So use your own knowledge, and put down an actual or mental timeline back to January 20th, 2017 (Inauguration day), and look/think carefully about what transpired. Who visited where, when, and how.
Look at who visits the White House, early on in the administration. Think about what you know of those visits and your reference points. Many citations will follow:
Look at what actions were taken, in the specific area, to secure any adverse entity away from discovering the intent of a possible parallel construct. –SEE HERE– Saudi Arabia Arrests 11 Princes, including Alwaleed.
Look at times and dates when specific people travel to the same specific area:
Understand that a parallel system means creating new alliances. Any entity aligned with the current adversary, or former administration, cannot be trusted. –SEE HERE– Qatar, financial epicenter of the Muslim Brotherhood, ally with the Obama administration, no longer considered a geopolitical ally; and completely isolated amid the Gulf States.
Then we have Canada, Australia and New Zealand, normally friendly allies, being exceptionally combative to an incoming administration –SEE HERE– and adding to the mix, the United Kingdom being more of an ideological adversary than geopolitical ally –SEE HERE– oh, there’s that Five Eyes reference again.
When you begin to question prior assumptions, some overseas visits by administration officials, emissaries or unofficial officials, take on new meaning. Visits seemed random. But maybe not –SEE HERE– Jared Kushner making unannounced visits to Saudi Arabia.
With a new nexus established, things continue for a long time; a very long while. All the while Deep-State Black Hats have absolutely no idea they are being watched.
Perhaps seemingly random or innocuous events take on a different dimension. –SEE HERE– Vice-President Mike Pence Travels to Egypt, Jordan and Israel.
Without context, things just don’t make sense.
The media are perplexed –SEE HERE– Headline: “Mike Pence visit to region serves no purpose“, ie. it doesn’t make sense.
However, with context, things, the timing of things, not only begins to make sense, but changes the entire landscape of what was previously thought. –SEE HERE– House Speaker Paul Ryan, and Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes travel to Saudi Arabia.
That’s Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes innocuously in the background.
While everyone was recently waiting on the memo….
And waiting on the #ReleaseTheMemo…
The history of interactions begins to shape a new understanding:
Maybe, just maybe, the ‘Intelligence Orb’ that everyone enjoyed was real.
Only ‘real’ in a way it just wasn’t thought of before:
Then again, what if the Orb, the new Saudi counter-extremism intelligence hub, is not technically *theirs* after all…
What if that Saudi Intelligence Orb (hub) is actually ours, or at least, maybe, we are leasing and equipping it for use… for a while…
…While our White Hat team (CIA-Pompeo, NSA-Rogers) modified the intel-hub’s operational use, to monitor and catch the Black Hat team.
Although this is simply just a citation of various events, with a rather different take on what they might possibly mean, it could, possibly, change the entire dynamic of what has been happening.
Did you think two years ago that FBI officials would actually be spying on political opposition? Did you fathom a year ago that the FBI, actual agents inside the FBI, might have been intentionally conspiring to help Hillary Clinton escape legal jeopardy?
Did you know the FBI were withholding evidence, lying to courts, using burner phones to communicate; hiring contract agents and giving them access to NSA and FBI counterintelligence databases to conduct domestic political spying operations?
Could you fathom the U.S. Department of Justice and FBI purchasing opposition research from Hillary Clinton, pitching it to FISA Courts as evidence; and working with their allies in the media by leaking information to place intentionally false material within their stories?
Were you previously ever able to imagine people within the Justice Department making demands of congressional oversight to see evidence of their own corruption in advance of accountability? …and the media making out congress as the bad-guy in that dynamic?
No? Don’t feel bad. Me neither.
I mean, seriously?
So my entire set of “reasonable assumptions” is considerably different now and I don’t dismiss possibilities that actually have a basis-in-fact that might explain what has taken place as the other side of the intelligence apparatus fights back against this jaw-dropping intelligence corruption.
Former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova outlines the majority of the events behind the unlawful surveillance of Donald Trump and each of the participating members within the FBI and DOJ corruption.
In essence, during this 30 minute discussion, diGenova outlines much of the back-story and how FBI officials Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok, Jim Baker, Andrew McCabe and Jim Comey participated along with Justice Department Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, John P Carlin, Bruce Ohr and Lisa Page. Mr. diGenova has a solid grasp on the players and how they are enmeshed within the entire operation.
DiGenova also shares how NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers, Chairman Devin Nunes and ODNI Dan Coats began to confront the unlawful behavior and position the entire Justice Department for a complete generational reset. This discussion is like the Big Ugly audio book. [ Hi Joe – Great Job! ]
♦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.
This outline is intended to clear up some confusion and answer common questions about the 2016 DOJ and FBI Counterintelligence Operation against candidate Trump. ie. “The Trump Operation”.
Today Byron York attempts to clear up some details about what congressional intelligence committee members have seen regarding the DOJ/FBI FISA-702 surveillance of Donald Trump. However, the FISA information is commonly, and inaccurately, conflated with “Wiretap Warrants”.
As we have explained there were no Title III wiretap warrants against the Trump campaign. Title III warrants are the historic reference to the DOJ or FBI wiretapping a suspect to gather information. Former DNI James Clapper has denied there were any Title III wiretap warrants issued. James Clapper is correct.
♦Here’s where the verbiage used by media doesn’t match with what was occurring. The DOJ and FBI didn’t use Title III wiretaps, because the current system of NSA intercepting and collecting all electronic data is already one big global wiretap.
The DOJ National Security Division and FBI Counterintelligence Division worked around the need for Title III wiretap warrants by using FISA-702 “Queries” to identify their targeted intercepts. FISA-702(16)(17) “Queries” work around the need for domestic Title III wiretap warrants by looking at the intersection of “foreign” contacts with U.S. individuals. Some refer to this approach as “reverse targeting”.
When the investigator at DOJ or FBI, the system ‘user’, interfaces with the NSA data-hub, they use the process of FISA “Queries” to identify their target. If they are picking up a U.S. citizen the 702 part comes in. FISA-702 is ‘incidental collection’ of U.S. individuals.
FISA Example: Where is foreign person “Natalia Veselnitskya‘s” cell phone? (input phone number)…
Oh, she’s in Trump Tower,… OK, great.
FISA-702 Query “all ip addresses and cell phone communication within Trump Tower”.
Review data, fill out FISA query authorization form explaining the reason for the FISA second query. Easy peasy, legal. That query then becomes a valid “FISA warrant”, but “Warrant” is really a misnomer based on traditional lingo.
The second search is actually a legally approved FISA-702 “query”, not really a “warrant”; the FISA-702 (U.S. individual or entity) search query (form required) is a result of a valid search query upon a foreign actor (no form required). The 702 authorization form is what people mistakenly refer to as the “warrant”.
See how that works?
[Also remember all FISA-702 approvals can be given retroactively. The operator doesn’t necessarily need to request approval in advance to search; only to make the search results legal, and then proceed to “unmasking”.]
The DATA already exists. The DOJ/FBI user is only seeking to find legal ways to explore the existing data using foreign entities to locate what they really want; which is domestic surveillance of a U.S. individual or group, perhaps only loosely connected to the foreign subject or entity.
In the example above, Trump Tower ip addresses are now authorized for further and future exploration by the existence of the legally authorized FISA-702 search “Query”. Ms. Veselnitskya leaves the building, but the FISA search query remains upon the U.S. ip addresses and U.S. cell phone numbers present while she was there. Now the DOJ and FBI investigator is just reviewing any additional and ongoing uses of the technology attached to the ip and phone communications. The surveillance has begun.
That’s an example of using FISA-702 to conduct surveillance upon Trump transition officials via their computers and cell phones. That’s appears to be what was happening.
♦SECOND QUESTION. Why would the Trump Transition Team leaving Trump Tower to Bedminister New Jersey stop the FISA-702 surveillance?
Now that you understand how the FISA-702 was conducted, you can see you only need to break the chain of contact. The Bedminister NJ ip addresses and cell towers are not authorized under the previous FISA-702 “Query”. That’s why moving everything to NJ creates new ip addresses, new cell towers, etc. Moving breaks the surveillance chain.
♦THIRD QUESTION. Why was judge Contreras recused from the Flynn case?
Two reasons – each likely. First, U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras is a FISA judge. He might have approved one of the FISA-702 search “Queries”, not wiretaps, the results of which might later have been used as evidence against Mike Flynn.
Second, simply because he is a FISC judge Contreras was on the court when NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers informed the full FISA Court of the unlawful 2016 FISA-702(16)(17) queries; and by extension Contreras has no way of knowing if the person in his court is there as an outcome of one of those unlawful queries.
There is a lot of news amid national headlines but there is only one story. Unfortunately, that story is a complex multidimensional matrix of politics, law enforcement corruption, the DC swamp, and vested interests attempting to hide and manipulate facts, ie. The Russian Election/Collusion Story.
What I am going to introduce today is how the 2016 FISA-702(16)(17) data and surveillance activity issues; and the 2016 FISA Court applications for surveillance and search warrants; and the Christopher Steele (Fusion GPS) Russian Dossier; and the individual actions by DOJ, FBI and IC officials; all connect within the targeted political weaponization of government.
As many of you are aware we have been chasing and researching the fact-trail of this story for over a year. In my opinion this is the biggest story in our lifetime as it relates to government officials, specifically DOJ and FBI leadership, weaponizing their offices to retain political power for their ideological allies. Taken in totality it is a very troubling story. Nonetheless THAT STORY exists regardless of our discomfort.
Additionally, in the downstream aftermath, there are two political forces facing off amid the aggregate “Russian Election/Collusion Story”. One side is trying to find out the details behind the origin therein; the other side is trying to hide the origin therein. When we look at the reason for hiding the origin of the Russian narrative, we enter the rabbit hole of previous intelligence community activity and their weaponization of government.
Yesterday President Trump signed an executive memorandum for the Director of National Intelligence that forces the DNI to develop a responsive plan for any inquiry from a non-public entity about their information being swept up in intelligence gathering operations. Also yesterday, Representative Ron DeSantis wrote a letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan requesting Ryan declassify all documents surrounding the Steele Dossier and its use therein.
Both of yesterdays actions appear connected to the larger battle within the back-story.
If you have not followed the prior research about how NSA Director Admiral Rogers responded to his discoveries in 2016 you might be lost in this discussion. –SEE HERE–
This outline builds on that prior research and exposes specific individuals who participated in the scheme.
IMPORTANT – We are no longer taking it for granted a FISA warrant was ever given to the DOJ because NO-ONE can prove a FISA warrant exists. Heck, no-one can even point to anything that directly claims a FISA warrant was even requested. There are inferences, suspicions, media reports based on anonymous leaks, but no direct or reasonable evidence beyond innuendo. We are eighteen months past the reported origination dates, and there’s not a single official who will state a 2016 FISA warrant was applied for or granted. Therefore we must begin to question that basic assumption.
That said, the inability to prove the existence of a FISA warrant does not prove a FISA warrant doesn’t exist. Additionally, the cloud-of-uncertainty conveniently, perhaps purposely, makes it challenging to outline the liars within the intelligence community.
When it comes to questions around the 2016 DOJ/FBI FISA warrant – A key approach to finding the truth is to apply the scientific method during the research; question our underlying assumptions and reverse the hypothesis.
Example: Can we prove the non-existence of the FISA warrant?
Well, there is direct and attributable, evidence no FISA warrant existed.
And there is no direct, and attributable, evidence a FISA warrant did exist.
However, the absence of evidence is not evidence of its absence. Just because we cannot prove a FISA Warrant exists doesn’t prove the non-existence of the FISA Warrant; which, as you will see, is a critical piece of this puzzle.
It is important, heck, critical, to underscore that all of the currently available evidence indicates that TWO intelligence units participated in the majority of the illegal activity surrounding the 2016 Trump Operation: ♦The Department of Justice National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), and the ♦FBI Counterintelligence Division.
If you have read the prior explanation about compartmented intelligence, and how the process was used to hide illegal intelligence activity, you will more easily connect-the-dots on who/how this was strategically used.
On March 20th 2017 FBI Director James Comey testified to congress. During that congressional testimony James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight, senior leadership, about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.
FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence, W.H. “Bill” Priestap suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*
FBI Director James Comey is stating on the record that the FBI Counterintelligence Operation was happening without oversight, and that lack of oversight was intentional. *Important Detail*
However, for the sake of this review pay attention to his remarks about the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, or DNI.
WATCH the first three minutes:
.
Notice how Director Comey avoids mentioning the 2016 DNI James Clapper. Clapper was DNI throughout President Obama’s tenure and was DNI during the 2016 counterintelligence operation that James Comey and Bill Priestap intentionally kept hidden from congress.
The obfuscation about James Clapper might not seem like a big deal, and almost everyone missed it at the time, however in hindsight it is another critical part of the evidence against James Comey.
IF THERE WAS a FISA Warrant issued against the Trump Campaign, or Trump Officials, by the FBI (Counterintelligence Unit), or DOJ (National Security Division), James Clapper would have to be notified of it.
Now, let’s look at what happens when James Clapper is questioned about the FISA Warrant, as he explains on NBC March 5th 2017. This is TWO WEEKS BEFORE the James Comey testimony to congress on March 20th.
Pay close attention to the exact wording Clapper uses, and the thought he puts into explaining himself.
.
Watch it Again. Closely.
There’s no ambiguity in James Clapper in that March 5th 2017 interview. He can specifically deny any FISA Warrant for Trump Tower, Campaign Officials, or Trump Campaign HQ.
That interview is so critical to Clapper personally – when questioned about FISA Warrants and Wiretaps six months later, September 24th 2017, he refers the questioning back to his NBC answer on March 5th, 2017.
Again, Watch Closely:
.
Do ya think that earlier answer and conversation was parsed carefully between March 5th and September 24th?
Title III requires Federal, state and, other government officials to obtain judicial authorization for intercepting “wire, oral, and electronic” communications such as telephone conversations and e-mails. It also regulates the use and disclosure of information obtained through authorized wiretapping. 18 U.S.C. §§ 2516-18.
An exception to the requirement that government obtain a warrant before intercepting covered communications is provided where:
“any investigative or law enforcement officer, specially designated by the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or by the principal prosecuting attorney of any State or subdivision thereof acting pursuant to a statute of that State…
reasonably determines that an emergency situation exists that involves
immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any person,
conspiratorial activities threatening the national security interest, or
conspiratorial activities characteristic of organized crime
that requires a wire, oral, or electronic communication to be intercepted before an order authorizing such interception can, with due diligence, be obtained, and
there are grounds upon which an order could be entered under this chapter to authorize such interception.”
In such an emergency situation, the Federal government may begin intercepting communications, provided “an application for an order approving the interception is made in accordance with this section within forty-eight hours after the interception has occurred, or begins to occur.” In this situation, if the warrant is ultimately denied, the intercepted communications are treated as having been obtained in violation of Title III. 18 U.S.C. § 2518(7). (LINK)
Within this entire enterprise of spying on the Trump Campaign there is no “wiretapping” per se’ because EVERYTHING is being collected by NSA. The issue is: can you legally “look at” what is already being collected?
That’s where Admiral Mike Rogers comes in because he discovered political operatives were LOOKING AT IT. Hence, his report to the FISC about FISA-702(17) violations.
Again, all research indicates the DOJ National Security Division (John P Carlin) and FBI Counterintelligence Division (W.H. “Bill” Priestap) were the two DOJ organizations operating in concert with Fusion-GPS and Christopher Steele while simultaneously carrying out the prior known surveillance activity. Any FISA Warrant stemming from these two entities would have to pass the desk of ODNI James Clapper.
If a FISA Wiretap warrant is factually discovered, against the backdrop of James Clapper stating EMPHATICALLY no Title III FISA Wiretap warrant existed, how would that conflict be resolved?
Additionally, the internal issues with FISA-702(16)(17) unauthorized “About Query” searches being conducted and discovered in 2016 by NSA Director Admiral Rogers, would lend even greater weight to the DOJ-NSD and FBI CoIntel as the origin. SEE HERE.
We know the FBI Counterintelligence Operation against the Trump Campaign was operating without congressional notification or oversight.
We also know the DOJ-NSD Operation was also operating without oversight:
In 2015 Asst. Attorney General Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The Office of Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight over the DOJ National Security Division and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
It is important to note here that President-elect Trump nominated Senator Dan Coats as ODNI on January 5th, 2017 – however, Democrats held up that nomination until March 16th, 2017. It is not coincidental that immediately following DNI Dan Coat’s ability to provide information, Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes first reported his concerns.
After Devin Nunes review the Eisenhower SCIF information March 22nd 2017, two days after James Comey’s testimony, Chairman Nunes stated the intelligence product he reviewed was: “not related to Russia, or the FBI Russian counter-intelligence investigation”.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, then held a brief press conference and stated he has been provided intelligence reports brought to him by unnamed sources that include ‘significant information’ about President-Elect Trump and his transition team.
WATCH:
1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”
2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”
3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”
4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities.
“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”
•“Who was aware of it?”
•“Why it was not disclosed to congress?”
•“Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”
•“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”
•“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”
“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th (2017) letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”
President Obama’s political operatives within the DOJ-NSD were using FISA 702(17) surveillance “about inquiries” that would deliver electronic mail and phone communication for U.S. people (Trump campaign). The NSD unit (John Carlin) was working in coordination with the FBI Counterintelligence Unit (Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok etc.) to look at this campaign activity. DOJ Attorney Lisa Page was the intermediary between the DOJ National Security Division and he FBI Counterintelligence Division.
In an effort to stop the FISA 702(17) activity NSA Director Mike Rogers initiated a full 702 compliance review. However, before the review was complete the DOJ-NSD had enough information for their Russian narrative; which was built upon FISA-702(17) that began in July ’16 per James Comey. Mike Rogers stopped the FISA702(17) process on October 26th 2016. As a result of his identifying the activity, Rogers became a risk; DNI James Clapper demanded he be fired.
♦Ten days after the presidential election, November 17th 2016, Admiral Rogers travels to Trump Tower without telling ODNI James Clapper. Rogers likely informs President-elect Trump of the prior activity by the FBI and DOJ, including the probability that all of Trump Tower’s email and phone communication was being collected and reviewed by political operatives within the DOJ-NSD and FBI.
♦ On November 17th, 2016, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers went to see President-Elect Donald Trump in Trump Tower, New York. –SEE HERE– Director Rogers never told his boss DNI, James Clapper.
♦ On November 18th, 2016, the Trump Transition Team announced they were moving all transition activity to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. –SEE HERE– Where they interviewed and discussed the most sensitive positions to fill. Defense, State, CIA, ODNI.
The transition team was set up in Trump Tower. The very next day, November 18th 2016, Trump moves the entire transition team to Bedminister New Jersey?
Does this make more sense now?
All research indicates the information the DOJ and FBI collected via their FISA-702(16)(17) queries, and the stuff Fusion GPS was creating via Christopher Steele (The “Russian Dossier), was used to create the Russian Narrative, “The Insurance Policy“.
♦Ultimately, the people within all of these unlawful intercepts of information is what Devin Nunes discovered when he looked at the “unmasking requests” which were a result of those FISA 702(17) collections on Team Trump. That’s why Devin Nunes was so stunned at what he saw in February and March 2017.
The ENTIRE SYSTEM of surveillance and data collection was weaponized against a political campaign. There were no authorizing or accompanying FISA warrants.
♦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.
(L-R) Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, FBI Director Christopher Wray
NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers has announced to his staff he is resigning. A nominee will be announced to replace him shortly. Rogers departure makes sense. His incredible accomplishments are complete; he will now be free to testify, unencumbered, to congress.
Intelligence information is housed by compartments within the larger intelligence community network. Each intelligence unit holds intelligence unique to that compartment and task.
The FBI Counterintelligence unit would hold the intelligence information specific to their task or assignment; the DOJ National Security Division would hold their own compartmented intelligence; again, specific to their task and objectives. So too would the DoD (Pentagon), State Dept., or CIA.
This compartmented structure is what led to the creation of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI. The 911 commission recommended the office to serve as a hub able to ensure intelligence sharing; that is – to ensure intelligence was not intentionally withheld from other compartments when needed.
In 2016 the ODNI for President Obama was James Clapper. The DNI is a political appointment, a cabinet member, of the President. If the executive branch, the President, wanted to weaponize intelligence as a political tool, he/she would have control over such weaponization as an outcome of their political appointees within the: FBI (Comey, McCabe), DOJ (Lynch/Yates), CIA (Brennan), DNI (Clapper), or DoD (Ash Carter). The efficient weaponization of intelligence stems from controlling the hub, James Clapper.
The civilian (representative) oversight into the compartmented intelligence falls to a very select group known as the Intelligence Gang of Eight.
Four Democrats and Four Republicans (four minority party and four majority party political leaders) for a total of eight. Four from the House and Four from the Senate. –Understand the Gang of Eight Here– The Gang-of-Eight can, if they choose, interact with the intelligence product they oversee with the same level of security clearance as the originating compartment being reviewed.
Only these eight members can interact with the intelligence product in this way. This ensures their ability to conduct oversight. The eight elected officials also hold oversight on all covert intelligence operations and are briefed on all presidential finding memos.
It becomes important to understand the difference between the House Intelligence Committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Gang of Eight.
Two members from the House Intelligence Committee (chair Nunes and minority Schiff), and two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee (chair Burr and vice-chair Warner) are participants. The other four are Speaker of the House (Ryan), minority leader of House (Pelosi), Leader of Senate (McConnell) and Minority leader of Senate (Schumer). The latter four are not part of any other intelligence committee.
♦We begin: During March 20th 2017 congressional testimony, James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight, senior leadership, about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.
FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*
I cannot emphasize this enough. *VERY* important detail. Again, notice how James Comey doesn’t use FBI Counterintelligence Director WH “Bill” Priestap’s actual name, but refers to his position and title. Again, watch the first three minutes:
.
“Because of the sensitivity of the matter“? FBI Director James Comey was caught entirely off guard by that first three minutes of questioning. He simply didn’t anticipate it.
Oversight protocol requires the FBI Director to tell the congressional intelligence “Gang of Eight” of any counterintelligence operations. The Go8 has oversight into these ops at the highest level of classification. In July 2016, the time when the operation began, oversight was the responsibility of this group, the Gang of Eight:
Obviously, based on what we have learned since March 2017, and what has surfaced recently, we can see a motive why the FBI and DOJ would want to keep hidden that they were running a counterintelligence operation against a presidential candidate.
After all, as FBI Agent Peter Strzok said it in his text messages, establishing the Russian Conspiracy narrative was an “insurance policy”. REMINDER – FBI Agent Strzok to FBI Attorney Page:
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
FBI Director James Comey told congress on March 20th, 2017, the reason he didn’t inform the statutory oversight “Gang of Eight” of the counterintelligence operation was because Bill Priestap (Director of FBI Counterintelligence) recommended he didn’t do it.
James Comey throwing this guy under a bus:
W.H. “Bill” Priestap, FBI Director of Counterintelligence
♦The originating intelligence agency agency, in these examples the DOJ National Security Division and/or FBI Counterintelligence Division, holds the proprietary intelligence they create in their intelligence compartment. They may also receive intelligence products created for them, which they will also host in their unique compartment. Access to this intelligence comes via a “SCIF” Secure Compartmented Information Facility. Thus, intelligence is compartmentalized.
In 2015 Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The Office of Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight over the DOJ National Security Division and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
♦The White House -the executive branch- is also a host of intelligence information and consequently the White House has their own compartmented intelligence unit and SCIF which holds intelligence products they would create (very little), or intelligence products created for them (the vast majority).
An example of an intelligence product created for the executive branch would be the President’s Daily Briefing or PDB.
The PDB as a whole product would only exist in the White House compartment. Parts of the PDB would be hosted by the originating participant, ex. NSA, FBI, DOJ, DoD, CIA State Dept. etc., but only the White House would have the fully assembled product. After all, it’s assembled for the President.
Putting the “Oversight” structure together with the “Compartmented” intelligence security you will note that only a few people ‘could’ traditionally access the full PDB. However, under President Obama the President’s Daily Brief went to almost everyone at top levels in his administration. Regarding the Obama PDB:
[…] But while through most of its history the document has been marked “For the President’s Eyes Only,” the PDB has never gone to the president alone. The most restricted dissemination was in the early 1970s, when the book went only to President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who was dual-hatted as national security adviser and secretary of state.
In other administrations, the circle of readers has also included the vice president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with additional White House staffers.
By 2013, Obama’s PDB was making its way to more than 30 recipients, including the president’s top strategic communications aide and speechwriter, and deputy secretaries of national security departments. (link)
Pay attention to that last part. According to the Washington Post outline Obama’s PDB’s were going to more than 30 recipients including: Ben Rhodes and “Deputy Secretaries of national security departments”.
During an MSNBC interview about her unmasking U.S. citizens within 2016 intelligence reports, in April 2017, President Obama’s National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, defined the Obama national security departments to include: “State” – “Defense” (Pentagon includes NSA) and “CIA”. Other national security departments include FBI (counterintelligence) and DOJ (National Security Division).
So under President Obama’s watch Deputy Asst. Secretaries of Defense had daily access to the PDB. An example of an Obama Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense, Evelyn Farkas.
With dozens of people having access to President Obama’s PDB, Rice’s unmasking of names within the intelligence product gave dozens of people direct access to unmasked intelligence – including Obama officials who could, likely did, use the PDB for specific and intentional political purposes. This political outcome was essentially confirmed by Evelyn Farkas who was one of the downstream recipients of unmasked intelligence.
I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.
Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.
So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to the Hill.” … “That’s why we had the leaking”. (link)
♦ If the House Intelligence Committee, or Senate Intelligence Committee, as a whole – wanted to see the President’s Daily Briefing, they would have to request the individual components from the individual intelligence agencies because the PDB product was not created for them; it was created for the Office of The President.
Only the Chairman and Minority leader from each Intel committee could go to the White House to see the PDB end product. [Remember, they alone are four of the Gang-of-Eight.]
This is why Devin Nunes, who is a Go8 member, has to request the intelligence from each department (NSA, DOJ, FBI etc.) in order to share it with the oversight committee. Nunes can review the ‘executive SCIF product’ but cannot export or import intelligence product he did not create.
The Congressional SCIF would then hold the compartmented information after delivery for the committee members to review under very tight controls. The intelligence is removed/deleted after review. No systems are connected.
Our research indicates that in February and March 2017 Chairman Devin Nunes, a gang of eight member, reviewed intelligence reports (most likely PDB’s) that were assembled exclusively for the office of the former President (Obama). That is why he went to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB) Information Facility to review.
The intelligence product would be delivered to that SCIF system for his review, most likely by the ODNI (Dan Coats) or NSA (Mike Rogers). It would be removed from that SCIF system after Nunes review, (no systems are connected). It is important to note here that President Trump nominated Senator Dan Coats as ODNI on January 5th, 2017 – however, Democrats held up that nomination until March 16th, 2017.
It is not coincidental that immediately following DNI Dan Coat’s ability to provide that information, Chairman Devin Nunes first reported his concerns.
After Devin Nunes review the information March 22nd 2017, Nunes stated the intelligence product he reviewed was: “not related to Russia, or the FBI Russian counter-intelligence investigation”.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, then held a brief press conference and stated he has been provided intelligence reports brought to him by unnamed sources that include ‘significant information’ about President-Elect Trump and his transition team.
WATCH:
1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”
2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”
3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”
4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities.
“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”
•“Who was aware of it?”
•“Why it was not disclosed to congress?”
•“Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”
•“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”
•“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”
“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th (2017) letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”
Again, this is why the intelligence reports seem likely to have been political opposition research -that was part of Obama’s PDB– unless it was a separate intelligence product, apart from the PDB, which was created for the Office of the President. [I view the latter as highly doubtful because it would be too risky for the President to be asking for specific ‘stand alone’ intelligence against political adversaries, ie candidate Donald Trump.]
…Here’s where all the dots connect:
♦Fast forward to 2018 – Aside from the larger Russian conspiracy narrative, up to now the controversial media story has been around the origin of the 2016 FISA warrant(s).
As previously stated by all reporting there was a June 2016 FISA application that was denied, and an October 2016 application that was approved. The current line of congressional inquiry surrounds the underlying content of the requested FISA warrant, and whether it was built upon fraud and manipulated content (the ‘Steele Dossier’) presented to the FISA Court (FISC).
Recently the media have been working frantically, against an entire year of prior support for the Steele Dossier, to distance the origin of the FBI counterintelligence operation from the dossier. The probable motive reveals the bigger underlying story.
When Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes explained his concern in March 2017 -about what he saw from a review of 2016 intelligence gathering, reporting and subsequent unmasking- the issue behind his concern was clouded in mystery. Indeed the larger headlines at the time were about demanding a special prosecutor and driving the Russia conspiracy narrative.
In hindsight, and with information from our assembled timelines of 2016 though today, we can now revisit that March 2017 concern expressed by Chairman Nunes with a great deal more perspective and information. Understanding the latest information will help us all understand the totality of Nunes original frame of reference.
Admiral Mike Rogers became NSA director in April 2014.
Sometime in early 2016 Admiral Rogers became aware of “ongoing” and “intentional” violations of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), Section 702(17) surveillance. Specifically item #17 which includes the unauthorized upstream data collection of U.S. individuals within NSA surveillance through the use of “About Query”.
Section 702 – Item #17 “About Queries” are specifically the collection of electronic messaging, emails and upstream phone call surveillance data of U.S. persons.
The public doesn’t discover this issue, and Director Rogers action, until May 2017 when we learn that Rogers told the FISA court he became aware of unlawful surveillance and collection of U.S. persons.
Put into context, with the full back-story, it appears that 2016 surveillance was the political surveillance now in the headlines; the stuff Chairman Nunes is currently questioning. The dates here are important as they tell a story.
As a result of Rogers suspecting FISA 702(17) surveillance activity was being used for reasons he deemed unlawful, in mid 2016 Rogers ordered the NSA compliance officer to run a full audit on 702 NSA compliance.
Again, 702 is basically spying on Americans; the actual “spying” part is 702. Item 17 is “About Queries“, which allows user queries or searches of content (messaging, email and phone conversations) based on any subject matter put into the search field.
The NSA compliance officer identified several strange 702 “About Queries” were being conducted. These were violations of the fourth amendment (search and seizure), ie searches, privacy violations, and surveillance without a warrant. Admiral Rogers was briefed by the compliance officer on October 20th, 2016.
Admiral Mike Rogers ordered the “About Query” activity to stop, reported the activity to the DOJ, and then went to the FISA court.
On October 26th, 2016, full FISA court assembled, NSA Director Rogers personally informed the court of the 702(17) violations. Additionally, and as an outcome of the NSA systems inability to guarantee integrity, Rogers also stopped “About Query” permanently.
[Things to note: ♦Note the sequencing; ♦note that Rogers a career military person, followed the chain of command; ♦note the dates as they align with the Trump FISA application from the FBI and DOJ-NSD, (ie. early October 2016); ♦and note amid this sequence/time-line the head of DOJ-National Security Divsion, John P Carlin resigns.]
IMPORTANT – WATCH The first two and a half minutes of this video:
.
Here’s the part where we find criminal intent and malice aforethought.
By looking at the way the FISA court was notified, it becomes apparent the DOJ National Security Division set Admiral Mike Rogers up to take the fall for their unlawful conduct.
Asst. Attorney General in charge of the DOJ National Security Division, John P Carlin, preempted Rogers by filing a notification with the FISA Court on 26th September 2016 (look at the pdf). DOJ-NSD head John Carlin was setting up Rogers as the scapegoat while knowing the NSA FISA compliance officer was still reviewing their conduct.
According to what we know of the FISA warrant, right around the time the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for the FISA Application, the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. It would have specifically been John Carlin’s responsibility to ensure a valid legal basis for the FISA application submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
The timing is way too suspicious. DOJ-NSD Director Carlin wouldn’t notify the court of a FISA compliance issue, while a compliance review was ongoing, unless he was trying to cover something. Conspicuously John Carlin never informed Admiral Rogers, but rather announced his resignation. The NSA compliance officer did not brief Admiral Rogers until 20th Oct 2016. Admiral Rogers notified the FISC on 26th Oct 2016.
October 2016 is a very important month:
♦DOJ Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr was “demoted” in the summer of 2017 after the Inspector General discovered unreported 2016 contacts between Ohr and Russian Dossier author Christopher Steele, as well as contact with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, that happened in October 2016.
♦Also in October 2016 the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for the Trump FISA application; the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. It would have specifically been John Carlin’s responsibility to ensure a valid legal basis for the FISA application submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).
♦In October 2016 the NSA compliance officer completes a review and briefs Rogers of FISA(17) violations, email collection and phone surveillance. Rogers informs FISC – [FISA Court Ruling Link]
Now Look At This – October 2016: On Friday November 18th, 2016, The Washington Post reportedon a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position:
The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed.
The recommendation, delivered to the White House last month, was made by Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., according to several U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
[…] In a move apparently unprecedented for a military officer, Rogers, without notifying superiors, traveled to New York to meet with Trump on Thursday at Trump Tower. That caused consternation at senior levels of the administration, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel matters. (link)
Important reminder. Remember, in 2015 Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The OIG, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
There’s a pretty clear picture here.
Obama’s political operatives within the DOJ-NSD were using FISA 702(17) surveillance “about inquiries” that would deliver electronic mail and phone communication for U.S. people (Trump campaign). The NSD unit (John Carlin) was working in coordination with the FBI Counterintelligence Unit (Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok etc.). DOJ Attorney Lisa Page was the intermediary between the DOJ National Security Division and he FBI Counterintelligence Division.
In an effort to stop the FISA 702(17) activity NSA Director Mike Rogers initiated a full 702 compliance review. However, before the review was complete the DOJ-NSD had enough information for their unlawful FISA warrant which worked retroactively to make the prior FBI surveillance (began in July ’16 per James Comey) lawful. Mike Rogers stopped the FISA702(17) process on October 26th 2016. As a result of his activity, Rogers became a risk; DNI James Clapper demanded he be fired.
♦Ten days after the presidential election, November 17th 2016, Admiral Rogers travels to Trump Tower without telling ODNI James Clapper. Rogers likely informs President-elect Trump of the prior activity by the FBI and DOJ, including the probability that all of Trump Tower’s email and phone communication was being collected.
♦ On November 17th, 2016, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers went to see President-Elect Donald Trump in Trump Tower, New York. –SEE HERE– Director Rogers never told his boss DNI, James Clapper.
♦ On November 18th, 2016, the Trump Transition Team announced they were moving all transition activity to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. –SEE HERE– Where they interviewed and discussed the most sensitive positions to fill. Defense, State, CIA, ODNI.
The transition team was set up in Trump Tower. The very next day, November 18th 2016, Trump moves the entire transition team to Bedminister New Jersey?
Does this make more sense now?
It would appear Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, is up to his eyeballs in this; though he denies participating. The FBI counterintelligence unit was monitoring Trump through FISA 702(17) upstream surveillance collected by a DOJ National Security Division that had no oversight. No-one knows the exact start date of the data-mining but FBI Director James Comey admitted the FBI counterintelligence operation began in July 2016.
All research indicates the information the FBI collected, and the stuff Fusion GPS was creating via Christopher Steele (The “Russian Dossier), was used to create the Russian Narrative and also to manipulate the FISC into giving them a FISA warrant. ie. “The Insurance Policy”.
♦Ultimately, the people within all of these intercepts is what Devin Nunes discovered when he looked at the “unmasking requests” which were a result of those FISA 702(17) collections on Team Trump. That’s why Devin Nunes was so stunned at what he saw in February and March 2017.
This is why Chairman Devin Nunes is currently gathering evidence.
In hindsight it appears that President Trump was fully aware when the tide would change. The moment when an empowered group of congressional people, Devin Nunes, Chuck Grassley and Bob Goodlatte, would develop a coordinated plan to defeat the corruption amid a corrupt intelligence apparatus Admiral Rogers had been holding back for the past several years.
What we are seeing now, leading up to the release of a years-worth of Office of Inspector General evidence, is the outcome of a specific plan –WELL OUTLINED HERE– to deal with the deep corruption inside the FBI and DOJ.
That night, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was seated at the head of the table as each member of the military likely aware -in varying degrees- just how consequential NSA Director Mike Rogers was in fending off the biggest constitutional crisis in the history of the U.S.
A grateful U.S. President, recognizing a great and patriotic man, amid many great and patriotic men. ….And no-one outside that room even knew. Until now.
You know it’s funny…. We all felt the tide change mid-November, something was different. By early December the Inspector General stories about the DOJ and FBI malfeasance and corruption began to hit the headlines (Strzok, Page, Ohr, Baker, etc.); but it only becomes clear today, how that entire chain-of-events began.
♦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.
This outline is the stunning backstory to how the FBI Counterintelligence Division and DOJ National Security Division were weaponized. This outline is the full story of what House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes is currently working to expose. This outline exposes the biggest political scandal in U.S. history. This outline is also the story of how one man’s action likely saved our constitutional republic.
His name is Admiral Mike Rogers.
I’m calling the back-story to the 2016 FISA 702(16)(17) political corruption by the Obama administration “Operation Condor”. Those of you familiar with the film “Three Days of The Condor” will note how the real life storyline almost mirrors the Hollywood film. For the real life version, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers plays the role of “Condor”.
“SCIF” – a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility. To understand the larger FISA 702(16)(17) issues in 2016 it is important to focus on the word “compartmented”.
Intelligence information is housed by compartments. Each intelligence unit holds intelligence unique to that compartment. The FBI Counter-Intelligence Unit would hold the intelligence information specific to their task or assignment; the DOJ National Security Division would hold their own compartmented intelligence; again, specific to their task and objectives. So too would the DOJ, DoD (Pentagon), State Dept., or CIA.
This compartmented structure is what led to the creation of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI. The 911 commission recommended the office to serve as a hub able to ensure intelligence sharing; that is – to ensure intelligence was not intentionally withheld from other compartments when needed.
In 2016 the ODNI for President Obama was James Clapper.
It is doubtful the 911 commission ever gave thought to what might happen when intelligence is weaponized as a political tool. The DNI is a political appointment, a cabinet member, of the President. If the executive branch, the President, wanted to weaponize intelligence as a political tool, he/she would have control over such weaponization as an outcome of their political appointees within the: FBI (Comey, McCabe), DOJ (Lynch/Yates), CIA (Brennan), DNI (Clapper), or DoD (Ash Carter), etc.
The civilian (representative) oversight into the compartmented intelligence falls to a very select group known as the Intelligence Gang of Eight.
Four Democrats and Four Republicans (four minority party and four majority party political leaders) for a total of eight. Four from the House and Four from the Senate. –Understand the Gang of Eight Here– The Gang-of-Eight can, if they choose, interact with the intelligence product with the same level of security clearance as the compartment being reviewed.
Only these eight members can interact with the intelligence product in this way. This ensures their ability to conduct oversight.
It is critical to understand the difference between the House Intelligence Committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Gang of Eight. Only two members from the House Intelligence Committee (chair and minority), and two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee (chair and vice-chair) are participants. The other four are Speaker of the House, minority leader of House, Leader of Senate and Minority leader of Senate. The latter four are not part of any other intel committee.
On March 20th 2017 congressional testimony, James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.
FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*
I cannot emphasize this enough. *VERY* important detail. Again, notice how Comey doesn’t use FBI Counterintelligence Director WH “Bill” Priestap’s actual name, but refers to his position and title. Again, watch the first three minutes:
.
FBI Director James Comey was caught entirely off guard by that first three minutes of that questioning. He simply didn’t anticipate it.
Oversight protocol requires the FBI Director to tell the congressional intelligence “Gang of Eight” of any counterintelligence operations. The Go8 has oversight into these ops at the highest level of classification. In July 2016 the time the operation began, oversight was the responsibility of this group, the Gang of Eight:
Obviously, based on what we have learned since March 2017, and what has surfaced recently, we can all see why the FBI would want to keep it hidden that they were running a counterintelligence operation against a presidential candidate. After all, as FBI Agent Peter Strzok said it in his text messages, it was an “insurance policy”.
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
FBI Director James Comey told congress on March 20th, 2017, the reason he didn’t inform the statutory oversight “Gang of Eight” was because Bill Priestap (Director of Counterintelligence) recommended he didn’t do it.
The originating intelligence agency agency, in these examples the DOJ National Security Division and/or FBI Counterintelligence Division, holds the proprietary intelligence they create in their SCIF. They may also receive intelligence products created for them, which they will also host in their unique SCIF. Thus, intelligence is compartmentalized.
In 2015 Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The Office of Inspector General. Michael Horowitz, requested oversight over the DOJ National Security Division and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
The White House -the executive branch- is also a host of intelligence information and consequently the White House has their own SCIF which holds intelligence products they would create (very little), or intelligence products created for them (the vast majority).
An example of a product created for the executive branch would be the President’s Daily Briefing (PDB).
The PDB as a whole product would only exist in the White House SCIF. Parts of the PDB would be hosted by the originating participant, ex. NSA, FBI, DOJ, DoD, CIA State Dept. etc., but only the White House would have the fully assembled product. After all, it’s assembled for the President.
Putting the “Oversight” structure together with the “Compartmented” intelligence security you will note that only a few people ‘could’ traditionally access the full PDB. However, under President Obama the President’s Daily Brief went to almost everyone at top levels in his administration. Regarding the Obama PDB:
[…] But while through most of its history the document has been marked “For the President’s Eyes Only,” the PDB has never gone to the president alone. The most restricted dissemination was in the early 1970s, when the book went only to President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who was dual-hatted as national security adviser and secretary of state.
In other administrations, the circle of readers has also included the vice president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with additional White House staffers.
By 2013, Obama’s PDB was making its way to more than 30 recipients, including the president’s top strategic communications aide and speechwriter, and deputy secretaries of national security departments. (link)
Pay attention to that last part. According to the Washington Post outline Obama’s PDB’s were going to more than 30 recipients including: “Deputy Secretaries of national security departments”.
During an MSNBC interview about her unmasking U.S. citizens within intelligence reports, in April 2017, President Obama’s National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, defined the Obama national security departments to include: “State” – “Defense” (Pentagon includes NSA) and “CIA”….
So under President Obama’s watch Deputy Asst. Secretaries of Defense had daily access to the PDB. An example of an Obama Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense, Evelyn Farkas.
With dozens of people having access to President Obama’s PDB, Rice’s unmasking of names within the intelligence product gave dozens of people direct access to unmasked intelligence – including Obama officials who could, likely did, use the PDB for specific and intentional political purposes. This political outcome was essentially confirmed by Evelyn Farkas who was one of the downstream recipients of the unmasked intelligence.
If the House Intelligence Committee, or Senate Intelligence Committee, as a whole – wanted to see the President’s Daily Briefing, they would have to request the individual components from the individual intelligence agencies because the PDB product was not created for them; it was created for the Office of The President.
Only the Chairman and Minority leader from each Intel committee could go to the White House to see the PDB end product. [Remember, they alone are four of the Gang-of-Eight.]
This is why Devin Nunes, who is a Go8 member, has to request the intelligence from each department (NSA, DOJ, FBI etc.) in order to share it with the oversight committee. Nunes can review the ‘executive SCIF product’ but cannot export or import intelligence product he did not create.
The Congressional SCIF would then hold the compartmented information after delivery for the committee members to review under very tight controls. The intelligence is removed/deleted after review. No systems are connected.
Our research indicates that in February and March 2017 Chairman Devin Nunes, a gang of eight member, reviewed intelligence reports (most likely PDB’s) that were assembled exclusively for the office of the former President (Obama). That is why he went to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB) Information Facility to review.
The intelligence product would be delivered to that SCIF system for his review, most likely by the ODNI (Dan Coats) or NSA (Mike Rogers). It would be removed from that SCIF system after Nunes review, (no systems are connected). It is important to note here that President Trump nominated Senator Dan Coats as ODNI on January 5th, 2017 – however, Democrats held up that nomination until March 16th, 2017.
It is not coincidental that immediately following DNI Dan Coat’s ability to provide that information Chairman Devin Nunes first reported his concerns. After Devin Nunes review the information March 22nd 2017, Nunes stated the intelligence product he reviewed was “not related to Russia, or the FBI Russian counter-intelligence investigation”.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, then held a brief press conference and stated he has been provided intelligence reports brought to him by unnamed sources that include ‘significant information’ about President-Elect Trump and his transition team.
WATCH:
1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”
2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”
3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”
4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities.
“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”
•“Who was aware of it?”
•“Why it was not disclosed to congress?”
•“Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”
•“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”
•“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”
“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th (2017) letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”
Again, this is why the intelligence reports seem likely to have been political opposition research -that was part of Obama’s PDB– unless it was a separate intelligence product, apart from the PDB, which was created for the Office of the President. [I view the latter as highly doubtful because it would be too risky for the President to be asking for specific ‘stand alone’ intelligence against political adversaries, ie candidate Donald Trump.]
…Here’s where all the dots connect:
Fast forward to 2018 – Aside from the larger Russian conspiracy narrative, up to now the controversial media story has been around the origin of the 2016 FISA warrant(s).
As previously stated by all reporting there was a June 2016 FISA application that was denied, and an October 2016 application that was approved. The current line of congressional inquiry surrounds the underlying content of the requested FISA warrant, and whether it was built upon fraud and manipulated content (the ‘Steele Dossier’) presented to the FISA Court (FISC).
Recently the media have been working frantically, against an entire year of prior support for the Steele Dossier, to distance the origin of the FBI counterintelligence operation from the dossier. The reason why reveals the bigger underlying story.
When Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes explained his concern in March 2017 about what he saw from a review of 2016 intelligence gathering, reporting and subsequent unmasking, the issue behind his concern was clouded in mystery. Indeed the larger headlines at the time were about demanding a special prosecutor and driving the Russia conspiracy narrative.
In hindsight, and with information from our assembled timelines of 2016 though today, we can now revisit that concern expressed by Chairman Nunes with a great deal more perspective and information. Understanding the latest information will help us all understand the totality of Nunes original frame of reference.
As many of you are aware, immediately following the 2016 presidential election NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers traveled to Trump Tower to meet with president-elect Donald Trump. The day AFTER the Rogers visit, President-elect Trump moved his transition team out of Trump Tower to Bedminister New Jersey.
We always suspected NSA Director Rogers gave President-elect Trump a head’s up of sorts.
Later, during the December 2016 and Jan, Feb, March, April 2017 Russian Conspiracy frenzy, when the entire intelligence community seemed to be collectively leaking against Trump’s interests, those suspicions gained even greater likelihood. However, what we learned in 2017 about the activity in 2016 almost guarantees that was exactly what happened. That back-story also ties into both the FISA issue and the Devin Nunes concern.
Admiral Mike Rogers became NSA director in April 2014.
Sometime in early 2016 Admiral Rogers became aware of “ongoing” and “intentional” violations of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), Section 702 surveillance. Specifically item #17 which includes the unauthorized upstream data collection of U.S. individuals within NSA surveillance.
Section 702 – Item #17 “About Queries” is specifically the collection of emails, and phone call surveillance of U.S. persons.
The public doesn’t discover this issue, and NSA Director Rogers action, until May 2017 when we learn that Rogers told the FISA court he became aware of unlawful surveillance and collection of U.S. persons. Put into context, with the full back-story, it appears that 2016 surveillance was the political surveillance now in the headlines; the stuff Chairman Nunes is currently questioning.
The dates here are important as they tell a story.
As a result of Rogers suspecting [FISA 702 (#17 – email and phone calls)] surveillance activity was being used for reasons he deemed unlawful, in mid 2016 Rogers ordered the NSA compliance officer to run a full audit on 702 NSA compliance.
Again, 702 is basically spying on Americans; the actual “spying” part is 702. Item 17 is “About Queries“, which allows queries or searches of content of email and phone conversations based on any subject matter put into the search field.
The NSA compliance officer identified several strange 702 “About Queries” that were being conducted. These were violations of the fourth amendment (search and seizure), ie. unlawful surveillance and gathering. Admiral Rogers was briefed by the compliance officer on October 20th, 2016.
Admiral Mike Rogers ordered the “About Query” activity to stop, reported the activity to the DOJ, and then went to the FISA court.
On October 26th, 2016, full FISC assembly, NSA Director Rogers personally informed the court of the 702(17) violations. Additionally, Rogers also stopped “About Query” permanently.
[Things to note: ♦Note the sequencing; ♦note that Rogers a career military person, followed the chain of command; ♦note the dates as they align with the Trump FISA application from the FBI and DOJ-NSD, (ie. early October 2016); ♦and note amid this sequence/time-line the head of DOJ-National Security Divsion, John P Carlin resigns.]
IMPORTANT – WATCH The first two and a half minutes of this video:
.
The DOJ National Security Division set Admiral Mike Rogers up to take the fall for their unlawful conduct. They preempted Rogers by filing a notification with the FISA Court on 26th September 2016 (look at the pdf). DOJ-NSD head John P Carlin was setting up Rogers as the scapegoat while knowing the NSA FISA compliance officer was still reviewing their conduct. Carlin wouldn’t notify the court unless he was trying to cover something. Carlin then announced his resignation. The NSA compliance officer did not brief Admiral Rogers until 20th Oct 2016. Admiral Rogers notified the FISC on 26th Oct 2016.
October 2016 is a very important month:
♦DOJ Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr was “demoted” in the summer of 2017 after the Inspector General discovered unreported 2016 contacts between Ohr and Russian Dossier author Christopher Steele, as well as contact with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, in October 2016.
♦Also in October 2016 the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for the Trump FISA application; the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. It would have specifically been John Carlin’s responsibility to ensure a valid legal basis for the FISA application submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).
♦In October 2016 the NSA compliance officer completes a review and briefs Rogers of FISA(17) violations, email collection and phone surveillance. Rogers informs FISC – [FISA Court Ruling Link]
Now Look At This – October 2016: On Friday November 18th, 2016, The Washington Post reportedon a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position:
The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed.
The recommendation, delivered to the White House last month, was made by Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., according to several U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
[…] In a move apparently unprecedented for a military officer, Rogers, without notifying superiors, traveled to New York to meet with Trump on Thursday at Trump Tower. That caused consternation at senior levels of the administration, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel matters. (link)
Important reminder. Remember, in 2015 Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The OIG, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
There’s a pretty clear picture here.
Obama’s political operatives within the DOJ-NSD were using FISA 702(17) surveillance “about inquiries” that would deliver email and phone communication for U.S. people (Trump campaign). The NSD unit was working in coordination with the FBI Counterintelligence Unit (Peter Strzok etc.). In an effort to stop the activity NSA Director Mike Rogers initiated a full 702 compliance review. However, before the review was complete the DOJ-NSD had enough information for their unlawful FISA warrant which worked retroactively to make the prior FBI surveillance (began in July ’16 per James Comey) lawful. Rogers stopped the process on October 26th 2016. As a result of his not going along, Rogers became a risk; Clapper demanded he be fired.
Ten days after the election, November 17th 2016, Admiral Rogers travels to Trump Tower without telling ODNI James Clapper. Rogers likely informs President-elect Trump of the prior activity by the FBI and DOJ, including the probability that all of Trump Tower’s email and phone communication was being collected.
♦ On November 17th, 2016, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers went to see President-Elect Donald Trump in Trump Tower, New York. –SEE HERE– Director Rogers never told his boss DNI, James Clapper.
♦ On November 18th, 2016, the Trump Transition Team announced they were moving all transition activity to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. –SEE HERE– Where they interviewed and discussed the most sensitive positions to fill. Defense, State, CIA, ODNI.
The transition team was set up in Trump Tower. The very next day, November 18th 2016, Trump moves the entire transition team to Bedminister New Jersey?
Does this make more sense now?
It would appear Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, is up to his eyeballs in this; though he denies participating. The FBI counterintelligence unit was monitoring Trump through FISA 702(17) upstream surveillance collected by a DOJ National Security Division that had no oversight.
The information the FBI collected, and the stuff Fusion GPS was creating via Christopher Steele, was used to create the Russian Narrative and also to manipulate the FISC into giving them a FISA warrant. ie. “The Insurance Policy”.
Ultimately, the people within all of these intercepts is what Devin Nunes discovered when he looked at the “unmasking requests” which were a result of those FISA 702(17) collections on Team Trump. That’s why Devin Nunes was so stunned at what he saw in February and March 2017.
This is why Chairman Devin Nunes is currently gathering evidence.
In a brilliant move of strategery, Senate Judiciary Chairman, Chuck Grassley, and Senate Judiciary member, Lindsey Graham, send a criminal referral of Christopher Steele to the DOJ for investigation. But things are not what they seem…
Today Senators Grassley and Graham sent a letter of criminal referral to the Department of Justice, based on information -provided by the FBI- their investigation has uncovered.
However, the actual motive for the criminal referral is not exactly what it appears.
Highlighting two pertinent passages (emphasis mine) from the New York Times article will explain what’s really going on:
[…] Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a senior committee member, told the Justice Department they had reason to believe that a former British spy, Christopher Steele, lied to federal authorities about his contacts with reporters regarding information in the dossier, and they urged the department to investigate. The committee is running one of three congressional investigations into Russian election meddling, and its inquiry has come to focus, in part, on Mr. Steele’s explosive dossier that purported to detail Russia’s interference and the Trump campaign’s complicity.
[…] The criminal referral appears to make no assessment of the veracity of the dossier’s contents, much of which remains unsubstantiated nearly a year after it became public.
[…] Mr. Grassley’s decision to recommend criminal charges appeared likely to be based on reports of Mr. Steele’s meetings with the F.B.I., which were provided to the committee by the Justice Department in recent weeks.
It was not clear why, if a crime is apparent in the F.B.I. reports that were reviewed by the Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department had not moved to charge Mr. Steele already.
The circumstances under which Mr. Steele is alleged to have lied were unclear, as much of the referral was classified. (full article)
Can you see what is really going on here?
The criminal referral is based on FBI reports of meetings the FBI has given to the Senate Judiciary Committee about the FBI meetings with Christopher Steele.
Within those FBI reports (presented to the committee) are conflicting statements and accounts that do not align with known evidence.
The FBI is attributing claims to the meetings with Christopher Steele that do not match known evidence about the Steele Dossier and use therein.
Remember what Senator Graham said recently about his review of the evidence surrounding the Steele Dossier and how it was used, by the FBI in gaining the FISA warrant? –Refresh Memory Here–
What Grassley and Graham are now doing is forcing the DOJ to reconcile the conflicts between the FBI presentations to the judiciary committee -about the origin of, and their use of, the Steele Dossier- against known evidence.
Someone is lying.
Graham and Grassley know the motive to lie about the Steele Dossier does not necessarily belong to Christopher Steele. The motive is within the corrupt FBI.
In order to accurately prove ownership of the the falsehoods Grassley and Graham are saying: ‘If what the FBI says is true then Chris Steele is lying, because the evidence doesn’t support what the FBI previously said to us, and attributed to Christopher Steele’…
Grassley and Graham are calling the bluff of the FBI.
“Based on the information contained therein, we are respectfully referring Mr. Steele to you for investigation of potential violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, for statements the Committee has reason to believe Mr. Steele made regarding his distribution of information contained.” (link)
The “information contained therein” is the FBI presentation of statements and evidence the FBI is attributing to Christopher Steele.
By referring a criminal complaint to the DOJ the Senators are, in essence, forcing the DOJ to outline that material presentations by the FBI, to the committee, were false…. OR, that Christopher Steele is lying. The former is likely, the latter not-so-much.
Additionally, by asking Rod Rosenstein (DOJ) and Christopher Wray (FBI) to investigate the conflicting evidence and FBI statements Grassley and Graham are also providing political cover for Rosenstein and Wray to showcase the corruption within both the DOJ and the FBI.
…”Ever watch those nature documentaries on the cable?” Yeah. “See the one about lions?”…
Today we get details about the DOJ deal with Chairman Devin Nunes. Included in the report from Catherine Herridge there is some really good news:
According to the letter, committee investigators also will get access to eight key witnesses this month including FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who exchanged anti-Trump text messages during an affair and previously worked on the special counsel’s Russia probe; FBI general counsel James Baker, who was reassigned; FBI head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap, whom ex-FBI boss James Comey testified made the decision not to brief Congress about the Russia case during last year’s election; and Bruce Ohr, a DOJ official reassigned after concealing meetings with figures involved in the dossier.
That’s right. For the first time the ‘one who shall not be named‘ is going to have to face questioning from congress. Bill Priestap is the FBI head of counterintelligence who has been conspicuously absent from all previous conversations. All research, including prior testimony from FBI Director James Comey (March 20th, 2017), indicates Priestap is at the epicenter of the 2016 counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign.
Here’s the full report:
WASHINGTON DC – House investigators will get access this week to “all remaining investigative documents” – in unredacted form – that they had sought as part of their Russia inquiry, under a deal between Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., according to a letter obtained by Fox News.
The letter, from Nunes to Rosenstein, summarizes an “agreement” reached on a phone call Wednesday evening and also says key FBI and Justice Department witnesses in the probe will be provided for interviews later this month.
“It is my hope that this agreement will provide the Committee with all outstanding documents and witnesses necessary to complete its investigations,” Nunes wrote.
The agreement comes after the DOJ and FBI faced a Wednesday deadline to comply, under the threat of new subpoenas and even contempt citations. Under deadline pressure, FBI Director Christopher Wray and Rosenstein met Wednesday with House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to discuss the demands from the intelligence committee.
Nunes’ letter outlines the terms of the deal reached, as he seeks information that could shed light on whether the controversial anti-Trump “dossier” was used to open the Russia probe and justify surveillance on Trump campaign officials.
Nunes wrote that the committee is “extremely concerned by indications that top U.S. Government officials who were investigating a presidential campaign relied on unverified information that was funded by the opposing political campaign and was based on Russian sources.”
This is a reference to the dossier’s funding from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign. Opposition research firm Fusion GPS hired former British spy Christopher Steele to compile the document, which contained salacious allegations about Trump.
The congressman originally issued subpoenas for related records on Aug. 24 that remain in effect, but the committee was stonewalled by the Justice Department and FBI for months.
Nunes said committee investigators and staff will now have access to all remaining documents during a review at the Justice Department on Friday.
According to the letter, committee investigators also will get access to eight key witnesses this month including FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who exchanged anti-Trump text messages during an affair and previously worked on the special counsel’s Russia probe; FBI general counsel James Baker, who was reassigned; FBI head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap, whom ex-FBI boss James Comey testified made the decision not to brief Congress about the Russia case during last year’s election; and Bruce Ohr, a DOJ official reassigned after concealing meetings with figures involved in the dossier.
The witnesses are directly tied to allegations of political bias.
Nunes wrote that outstanding text messages between Strzok and Page will be delivered by Jan. 11.
The agreement could subject the DOJ and FBI to a level of scrutiny to which they are not accustomed.
“The FBI in particular is not used to having its inner discussions kind of brought to light, and I think that’s of huge concern for probably people at the FBI,” former Justice Department official Robert Driscoll said. (LINK)
Bill Priestap is the head of the FBI Counterintelligence operation. He was FBI Agent Peter Strozk’s direct boss. If anyone in congress really wanted to know if the FBI paid for the Christopher Steele Dossier, Bill Priestap is the guy who would know.
In April 2016 Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid Glenn Simpson with Fusion-GPS to dig up dirt on Donald Trump.
April 19th 2016 Glenn Simpson’s wife, Mary Jacoby travels to the White House.
The wife of Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS), Mary B. Jacoby, with years of Russia-angled reporting –including Donald Trump– visits the White House in April 2016, at the same time as the DNC and Clinton hire Fusion GPS to conduct the opposition research on Donald Trump, surrounding Russia? This timeline is entirely too obvious to be coincidental.
In May 2016 Fusion GPS hired Nellie Ohr, wife of DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr, to lead the opposition research effort. That same month, Fusion GPS contracted with retired British MI6 Agent Christopher Steele to write the ‘Trump Russia Dossier’.
On May 5, 2016, (Via Katica) FBI lawyer Lisa Page (FBI Peter Strzok mistress) was in an important meeting at the White House. On the same day, WaPo had a ‘sources say’ story about the meeting. The subject was Hillary’s emails.
Yup, “small group” FBI Lawyer Lisa Page worked on the email case, too. Here are the White House logs for the May 5th meeting:
The May 5th, 2016, meeting was after FBI Director James Comey initially drafted the exoneration letter and BEFORE James Comey met with President Obama on MAY 16th.
FBI Director James Comey met with President Obama on the morning of May 16, 2016 and by afternoon the draft letter was circulating to FBI leadership (not by Comey though).
In late June 2016 the first draft of the Steele Dossier was shared back with Fusion GPS and presumably Nellie Ohr was one of the recipients. According to Robby Mook, the partial dossier information was also given to the DNC and Clinton Campaign.
July 2nd, 2016 Hillary Clinton is interviewed by FBI investigator Peter Strzok. No transcripts or recordings of the interview are made.
July 5th, 2016, FBI Director James Comey exonerates Hillary Clinton.
In July 2016 candidate Donald Trump won the GOP nomination. That same month the FBI Counterintelligence Division began an investigation they later described as a counterintelligence operation looking at Russian interference in the U.S. election. However, from 10 months of researched documentation, much of it in the MSM, we now know it was an FBI counterintelligence operation against candidate Donald Trump.
Also in July 2016, immediately following candidate Donald Trump’s successful bid to win the GOP nomination, a FISA application was denied. The timing here is far too coincidental (the later narrower version clearly evidences), the FISA application was to wiretap, monitor and conduct surveillance on candidate Trump and his campaign.
In August 2016, the lead FBI Agent in charge of that counterintelligence operation, Peter Strzok told his FBI Attorney and mistress: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
The “insurance policy” appears to be the ongoing counterintelligence operation that later utilized the Steele Dossier to get the FISA warrant and actually begin the wiretaps and surveillance. The conversation referenced between Strzok and Page took place in FBI Assistant Director Andrew “Andy” McCabe’s office.
All of this information is really just a recap. Everyone now sees this construct clearly. The Timelines are brutally obvious. Congress and DC investigators, including the years-long OIG investigation, are currently in the phase of nailing down the players and putting the final touches on the evidence. The outline is clear as day.
FBI Asst. Director in charge of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap was the immediate supervisor of FBI Counterintelligence Deputy Peter Strzok.
Bill Priestap is #1. Before getting demoted Peter Strzok was #2.
The investigation into candidate Donald Trump was a counterintelligence operation. That operation began in July 2016. Bill Priestap would have been in charge of that, along with all other, FBI counterintelligence operations.
FBI Deputy Peter Strzok was specifically in charge of the Trump counterintel op. However, Strzok would be reporting to Bill Priestap on every detail and couldn’t (according to structure anyway) make a move without Priestap approval.
On March 20th 2017 congressional testimony, James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.
FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*
I cannot emphasize this enough. *VERY* important detail. Again, notice how Comey doesn’t use Priestap’s actual name, but refers to his position and title. Again, watch [Prompted]
FBI Director James Comey was caught entirely off guard by that first three minutes of that questioning. He simply didn’t anticipate it.
Oversight protocol requires the FBI Director to tell the congressional intelligence “Gang of Eight” of any counterintelligence operations. The Go8 has oversight into these ops at the highest level of classification. In July 2016 the time the operation began, oversight was the responsibility of this group, the Gang of Eight:
Obviously, based on what we have learned since March 2017, and what has surfaced recently, we can all see why the FBI would want to keep it hidden that they were running a counterintelligence operation against a presidential candidate. After all, as FBI Agent Peter Strzok said it in his text messages, it was an “insurance policy”.
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
So there we have FBI Director James Comey telling congress on March 20th, 2017, that the reason he didn’t inform the statutory oversight “Gang of Eight” was because Bill Priestap (Director of Counterintelligence) recommended he didn’t do it.
Apparently, according to Comey, Bill Priestap carries a great deal of influence if he could get his boss to NOT perform a statutory obligation simply by recommending he doesn’t do it.
Then again, Comey’s blame-casting there is really called creating a “fall guy”. FBI Director James Comey is ducking responsibility in March 2017 by blaming FBI Director of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap for not informing congress of the operation that began in July 2016. (9 months prior).
At that moment, that very specific moment during that March 20th hearing, anyone who watches these hearings closely could see Comey was creating his own exit from getting ensnared in the consequences from the wiretapping and surveillance operation of President Donald Trump. In essence, Bill Priestap is James Comey’s shield from liability.
But more curiously for current discussion, there has been NO MENTION of Bill Priestap in any of the recent revelations, despite his centrality to all of it.
Bill Priestap would have needed to authorize Peter Strzok to engage with Christopher Steele over the “Russian Dosssier”.
Bill Priestap would have needed to approve of the underlying documents that were used for both FISA applications (June/July and Sept/Oct).
Bill Priestap would be the person to approve of paying, or reimbursing, Christopher Steele for the Russian Dossier used in their counterintelligence operation and subsequent FISA application.
Without Bill Priestap involved, approvals, etc. the entire Russian/Trump Counterintelligence operation just doesn’t happen. Heck, James Comey’s March testimony in that regard is also evidence of Priestap’s importance.
So we all can see that Bill Priestap is a central figure. •FBI Director James Comey defers to him; •2016 Acting Attorney General Sally Yates relied on him; •FBI Special Agent in Counterintelligence Peter Strzok reports to him. Yet there was absolutely no mention of Bill Priestap in any of the explosive investigative story-lines. Why?
Bill Priestap is the FBI Director of Counterintelligence. There’s no way he hasn’t been caught inside the investigative net.
Bill Priestap’s boss, Andrew McCabe has been caught. Bill Priestap’s subordinate, Peter Strzok, has most certainly been caught. And in March 20th 2017 FBI Director Comey pushed Priestap directly in front of the congressional oversight bus.
On the home-front: FBI Director of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap is married to Sabina Menschel a self-employed “consultant” with a history of donations to Democrat candidates, specifically to Hillary Clinton.
Bill’s wife Sabina comes from a Goldman Sach’s connected family, which must be why Bill and Sabina can afford to live in a $3.2 million home in Washington DC.
Would be a little difficult to afford a $3,000,000.00 mortgage on a G-Man’s payroll.
♦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.
As we have walked through the investigative deep weeds of corruption within the FBI (Counterintelligence Division) and DOJ (National Security Division), many people have asked why CTH has not pulled in the ODNI (Clapper) and CIA (Brennan) aspect of the total intelligence community involvement against candidate Donald Trump. There’s been a good reason for that; actually two good reasons.
First, as many of you are aware, the people involved in the entire apparatus are following our investigative research (both sides). We proceed carefully, trying to avoid provoking activity that creates defensive posturing, until the story reaches a point of non-deniability.
The public statements today highlighting the DOJ-NSD FISA warrant documents being delivered tonight to Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes is an example of one of those thresholds crossed.
[Incidentally, and directly related to the release of documents to Chairman Nunes, I would advise everyone to remember the ongoing leak investigations and the sting operations as previously cited. In the coming days do not be surprised to see leaks to the Washington Post, New York Times or CNN that are the outcome of those continuing operations. It would not be surprising to see variations of the same documents used as tracers. We are in the phase where the intelligence leakers will have to wonder if they are a target.]
Secondly, it is challenging to absorb the construct of the larger 2016 political operation against the Trump campaign unless it is in digestible portions. Some of this stuff is in the deepest of deep weeds. Today we take a deep research dive into the larger IC aspect of the 2016 Trump Operation. Specifically into the deeper story of the FISA warrant and the use of unlawful FISA 702(17) spying operations. As customary all citations are provided and some of this will take time to explain.
I’m calling the backstory to this 702 enterprise by the Obama administration “Operation Condor”. Those of you familiar with the film “Three Days of The Condor” will note how the real life (lame-duck) timeline almost mirrors the Hollywood film. For the real life version, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers plays the role of “Condor”.
Aside from the larger Russian conspiracy narrative, up to now the controversial media story has been around the origin of the FISA warrant(s). As previously stated by all reporting there was a June FISA application that was denied, and an October application that was approved.
The current line of congressional inquiry surrounds the underlying content of the requested FISA warrant, and whether it was built upon fraud and manipulated content (the ‘Steele Dossier’) presented to the FISA Court (FISC). But there’s a bigger underlying story.
When Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes explained his concern in March 2017 about what he saw from a review of 2016 intelligence gathering, reporting and subsequent unmasking, the issue behind his concern was clouded in mystery. Indeed the larger headlines at the time were about demanding a special prosecutor and driving the Russia conspiracy narrative.
In hindsight, and with information from our assembled timelines of 2016 though today, we can now revisit that concern with a great deal more perspective and information. Understanding the latest information will help us all understand the totality of Nunes original frame of reference.
As many of you are aware, immediately following the 2016 presidential election NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers traveled to Trump Tower to meet with president-elect Donald Trump. The day AFTER the Rogers visit, President-elect Trump moved his transition team out of Trump Tower to Bedminister New Jersey.
We always suspected NSA Director Rogers gave President-elect Trump a head’s up of sorts.
Later, during the Russian Conspiracy frenzy, when the entire intelligence community seemed to be collectively leaking against Trump’s interests, those suspicions gained even greater likelihood. However, what we learned in 2017 about the activity in 2016 almost guarantees that was exactly what happened. That back-story also ties into both the FISA issue and the Devin Nunes concern.
Admiral Mike Rogers became NSA director in April 2014.
Sometime in early 2016 Admiral Rogers became aware of “ongoing” and “intentional” violations of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), Section 702 surveillance. Specifically item #17 which includes the unauthorized upstream data collection of U.S. individuals within NSA surveillance.
Section 702 – Item #17 “About Queries” is specifically the collection of emails, and phone call surveillance of U.S. persons.
The public doesn’t discover this issue, and NSA Director Rogers action, until May 2017 when we learn that Rogers told the FISA court he became aware of unlawful surveillance and collection of U.S. persons. Put into context, with the full back-story, it appears that 2016 surveillance was the political surveillance now in the headlines; the stuff Chairman Nunes is currently questioning.
The dates here are important as they tell a story.
As a result of Rogers suspecting [FISA 702 (#17 – email and phone calls)] surveillance activity was being used for reasons he deemed unlawful, in mid 2016 Rogers ordered the NSA compliance officer to run a full audit on 702 NSA compliance.
Again, 702 is basically spying on Americans; the actual “spying” part is 702. Item 17 is “About Queries“, which allows queries or searches of content of email and phone conversations based on any subject matter put into the search field.
The NSA compliance officer identified several strange 702 “About Queries” that were being conducted. These were violations of the fourth amendment (search and seizure), ie. unlawful surveillance and gathering. Admiral Rogers was briefed by the compliance officer on October 20th, 2016.
Admiral Mike Rogers ordered the “About Query” activity to stop, reported the activity to the DOJ, and then went to the FISA court.
On October 26th, 2016, full FISC assembly, NSA Director Rogers personally informed the court of the 702(17) violations. Additionally, Rogers also stopped “About Query” permanently.
[Things to note: ♦Note the sequencing; ♦note that Rogers a career military person, followed the chain of command; ♦note the dates as they align with the Trump FISA application from the FBI and DOJ-NSD, (ie. early October 2016); ♦and note amid this sequence/time-line the head of DOJ-National Security Divsion, John P Carlin resigns.]
IMPORTANT – WATCH The first two and a half minutes of this video:
.
The DOJ National Security Division set Admiral Mike Rogers up to take the fall for their unlawful conduct. They preempted Rogers by filing a notification with the FISA Court on 26th September 2016 (look at the pdf). DOJ-NSD head John P Carlin was setting up Rogers as the scapegoat while knowing the NSA FISA compliance officer was still reviewing their conduct. Carlin wouldn’t notify the court unless he was trying to cover something. Carlin then announced his resignation. The NSA compliance officer did not brief Admiral Rogers until 20th Oct 2016. Admiral Rogers notified the FISC on 26th Oct 2016.
October 2016 is a very important month:
♦DOJ Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr was “demoted” in the summer of 2017 after the Inspector General discovered unreported 2016 contacts between Ohr and Russian Dossier author Christopher Steele, as well as contact with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, in October 2016.
♦Also in October 2016 the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for the Trump FISA application; the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. It would have specifically been John Carlin’s responsibility to ensure a valid legal basis for the FISA application submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).
♦In October 2016 the NSA compliance officer completes a review and briefs Rogers of FISA(17) violations, email collection and phone surveillance. Rogers informs FISC – [FISA Court Ruling Link]
Now Look At This – October 2016: On Friday November 18th, 2016, The Washington Post reportedon a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position:
The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed.
The recommendation, delivered to the White House last month, was made by Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., according to several U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
[…] In a move apparently unprecedented for a military officer, Rogers, without notifying superiors, traveled to New York to meet with Trump on Thursday at Trump Tower. That caused consternation at senior levels of the administration, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel matters. (link)
Important reminder. Remember, in 2015 Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The OIG, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
There’s a pretty clear picture here.
Obama’s political operatives within the DOJ-NSD were using FISA 702(17) surveillance “about inquiries” that would deliver email and phone communication for U.S. people (Trump campaign). The unit would work in coordination with the FBI Counterintelligence Unit (Peter Strzok etc.) To stop the activity NSA Director Mike Rogers initiated a full 702 compliance review. Before the review was complete the DOJ-NSD had enough information for their unlawful FISA warrant which worked retroactively to make the prior FBI surveillance (began in July ’16 per James Comey) lawful. Rogers stopped the process on October 26th 2016. As a result of his not going along, Rogers became a risk; Clapper demanded he be fired.
Ten days after the election, November 17th 2016, Admiral Rogers travels to Trump Tower without telling ODNI James Clapper. Rogers likely informs President-elect Trump of the prior activity by the FBI and DOJ, including the probability that all of Trump Tower’s email and phone communication was being collected.
The transition team was set up in Trump Tower. The very next day, November 18th 2016, Trump moves the entire transition team to Bedminister New Jersey.
Does this make more sense now?
It would appear Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, is up to his eyeballs in this; though he denies participating. The FBI counterintelligence unit was monitoring Trump through FISA 702(17) upstream surveillance collected by a DOJ National Security Division that had no oversight.
The information the FBI collected, and the stuff Fusion GPS was creating via Christopher Steele, was used to create the Russian Narrative and also to manipulate the FISC into giving them a FISA warrant. ie. “The Insurance Policy”.
This is what Devin Nunes discovered when he looked at the “unmasking requests” which were a result of those FISA 702(17) collections on Team Trump. That’s why Devin Nunes was so stunned at what he saw in February and March 2017.
This is why Chairman Devin Nunes is currently gathering evidence.
♦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.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
That’s the same process of declassification previously used, and conveniently overlooked in all discussion by the media, when ODNI Dan Coats declassified the April 2017 FISA court opinion revealing the historic DOJ/FBI FISA-702 abuse reported by NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers.
Centinel2012 