Tag Archives: Agent provocateur
#Spygate – President Trump Highlights Lou Dobbs Segment Outlining December 2015 FBI CoIntel Operation….
The backstory is important here. Two days ago internet researcher Nick Falco discovered a potentially damning text dated December 28th 2015 within a previously released set of Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages. The original text was redacted in one section (Page #31); however, somehow further down the release (Page #159) the same text was not redacted. It is presumed the FBI redacted the word “lures”, whereas the IG did not.
In one release (page #31) the word “lures” was redacted. In the second release (page #159) it was NOT redacted.
The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Chairman Ron Johnson, released over 500 pages of documents and texts. On page #159 (pdf here) the unredacted version of the following message appears:
“You get all our oconus lures approved?”
“OCONUS” means Outside Continental U.S. “LURES” in this context is ‘spies’; or as Chris Farrell discusses, likely double agents. The messages were December 28th, 2015.
•Peter Strzok asking Lisa Page: Did you get all our outside U.S. spies approved?
•Lisa Page responds: “No, it’s just implicated a much bigger policy issue. I’ll explain later. Might even be able to use it as a pretext for a call…”
The implication is this could have been the pre-planning for #Spygate. This is what Lou Dobbs and Chris Farrell are discussing; and apparently President Trump noticed:
Here’s the full release of documents:
Fired FBI Director Andrew McCabe Requests Criminal Immunity in exchange for Congressional Testimony…
Wait, what? We’ve obviously come a full 180° from the place where Democrats were proclaiming McCabe’s innocence; and we’ve entered the phase where McCabe is requesting criminal immunity in exchange for testimony about what he knows of the corrupt FBI operations in 2016 and 2017. [Worm Turning Speech Increases]
In a series of letters going back and forth between Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley and Michael Bromwich, the attorney for fired Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, Bromwich is requesting criminal immunity in exchange for cooperation.
On May 31st, 2018, Chairman Grassley invited Andrew McCabe to testify [SEE HERE]; On June 4th Bromwich responded [SEE HERE] Grassley is requesting emails McCabe said he sent to Comey about talking to the media. According to McCabe, despite his false statements to FBI and INSD investigators (under oath), his conduct was with the full knowledge of FBI Director James Comey. Grassley was asking for proof. Bromwich responded by saying McCabe doesn’t have the emails, the current FBI does.
Here’s the response letter:
.
Chairman Grassley followed up requesting a copy of the Non Disclosure Agreement signed by Andrew McCabe which blocks McCabe from producing the requested documents [SEE HERE] and Grassley also responds to the request for criminal immunity.
First, with respect to your testimony, the Committee’s understanding of various controversies at the FBI related to and following the 2016 election would be greatly aided by your testimony, not only at the upcoming hearing but in a more comprehensive private setting as well.
While I have not yet done so, I am willing to discuss with the Ranking Member your request that the Committee consider seeking a court order compelling you to testify under a grant of immunity. However, under 18 U.S. Code § 6005, seeking such an order requires a two-thirds vote of the Committee, and even if that were to occur, the Justice Department would then have a formal opportunity to delay any testimony and attempt to persuade the Committee not to proceed. Before even beginning to consider whether to initiate that process, the Committee would need to know a lot more about the anticipated scope, nature, and extent of your testimony. The Committee could then informally consult with the Department to solicit its views before deciding whether to proceed formally. (read more)
McCabe’s lawyer Michael Bromwich responds June 5th:
.
According to CNN – Grassley has set the Judiciary hearing for next Monday, but it could be delayed, as the inspector general’s report — while a moving target — is still not public yet. Sources familiar with the report describe it as a massive undertaking, walking through the events leading up to the 2016 election over roughly 500 pages.
Lengthy FBI Official Testimony Ongoing – Briefing Report: Agent Strzok Worked Off Range on Counterintelligence Ops…
FBI Director of Counterintelligence E.W. “Bill” Priestap has been delivering testimony to a joint congressional committee for more than seven hours.
This is Bill Priestap’s first testimony to congress. Previously all of Priestap’s statements have been made to FBI and INSD (Inspection Division) investigators. This is also likely the first time many congressional members will have heard of the scale and scope of the abuse by the DOJ-NSD and FBI.
The joint House Judiciary and Oversight Committee has been hearing testimony from Bill Priestap all day. A tweet from Chad Pergram notes: “Colleague Catherine Herridge rpts a mbrs familiar w/Hse closed-door i-view w/FBI espionage chief Bill Priestap has been cooperative. But says FBI Agent Strzok played an more central role than previously known in Clinton email/Russia investigations beyond Strzok/Page text messages.”
It appears there will be confirmation of prior research. There was always a strong suspicion FBI Agent Peter Strzok was working around his boss Bill Priestap and reporting directly to Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and to a lesser extent FBI chief legal counsel James Baker. Activity in both the Clinton email and Russia investigations that was outside normal chain-of-command structure.
If this aspect of Priestap’s general testimony is confirmed it will solidify the construct of the small group and their closely-guarded, unscrupulous and political intentions.
Another interesting tweet from Chad Pergram surrounds four specifically democrat members of the congressional intelligence oversight:
Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff and Mark Warner are the four democrat members of the Intelligence Oversight “Gang-of-Eight” as an outcome of their committee and leadership positions….
… it would appear the Democrats on the Go8 recognize the risk of their attachment to the corrupt CIA, DNI, FBI and DOJ behavior in 2016. The documents the DOJ and FBI have refused to give Chairman Devin Nunes are directly related to the intelligence briefings given by CIA Director John Brennan to the Gang-of-Eight in 2016.
Apparently the Democrats want to know if President Trump has been provided evidence of the actual truth of what transpired. They don’t want to make more political statements until they can absorb just how much the President knows.
Angst They Much.
On Cue – Mitch McConnell Welcomes Legislation To Block President Trump Trade Policy…
There are Trillions At Stake. There is no upper limit to what congress is willing to do to stop President Trump from turning off the lobbyist funding. Without influence in DC there can be no affluence in DC. That’s why McConnell cancelled the recess.
If the president continues to remain focused exclusively on what is in the U.S. best interests, he must be stopped. Politicians in DC cannot just sit-by and allow the U.S. economy to be based on the interests of Americans; it would mean the destruction of years of central planning by DC Lobbyists, multinational banks, Wall Street and multinational corporations.
WASHINGTON DC – Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Tuesday that he will not bring up a freestanding bill to push back on President Trump’s trade agenda, but that GOP senators might be able to add it as an amendment to other legislation.
Support among Republicans has grown for legislation backed by Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) that would give Congress power to authorize or reject any new tariffs imposed because of national security concerns.
GOP senators says McConnell doesn’t want to risk a confrontation with the president but also wants to be responsive to the concerns of colleagues who think Trump’s trade agenda has run amuck. (read more)
♦POTUS Trump is disrupting the global order of things in order to protect and preserve the shrinking interests of the U.S. He is fighting, almost single-handed, at the threshold of the abyss. Our interests, our position, is zero-sum. Our opposition seeks to repel and retain the status-quo. They were on the cusp of full economic victory over the U.S.
In these economic endeavors President Trump is disrupting decades of financial interests who use the U.S. as a host for their ideological endeavors. President Trump is confronting multinational corporations and the global constructs of economic systems that were put in place to the detriment of the host (USA) ie. YOU. There are trillions at stake; it is all about the economics; everything else is chaff and countermeasures.
Familiar faces, perhaps faces you previously thought were decent, are now revealing their alignment with larger entities that are our abusers.
We are already familiar how China, Mexico and ASEAN nations export our raw materials (ore, coking coal, rare earth minerals etc.). The raw material to manufacture goods are then trans-shipped back into the U.S. for purchase.
It is within this decades-long process where we lost the manufacturing base, and the multinational economic planners (World Trade Organization) put us on a path to being a “service driven” economy.
The road to a “service-driven economy” is paved with a great disparity between financial classes. The wealth gap is directly related to the inability of the middle-class to thrive.
Elite financial interests, including those within Washington DC, gain wealth and power, the U.S. workforce is reduced to servitude, “service”, of their affluent needs.
The destruction of the U.S. industrial and manufacturing base is EXACTLY WHY the wealth gap has exploded in the past 30 years.
With that familiarity, did you think the multinationals would stop with only “DURABLE GOODS”?
They don’t.
They didn’t.
The exact same exfiltration and exploitation has been happening, with increased speed, over the past 15 years with “CONSUMABLE GOODS“, ie food.
Raw material foodstuff is exported to China, ASEAN nations and Mexico, processed and shipped back into the U.S. as a finished product. This is the same design-flow with food as previously exploited by other economic sectors, including auto manufacturing.
Multinational corporations, BIG AG, are now invested in controlling the outputs of U.S. agricultural industry and farmers. This process is why food prices have risen exponentially in the past decade.
The free market is not determining price; there is no “supply and demand” influence within this modern agricultural dynamic. Food commodities are now a controlled market just like durable goods. The raw material (harvests writ large) are exploited by the financial interests of massive multinational corporations.
Again, if we were to pull out of NAFTA our food bill would drop 25% (or more) within the first year. Further, if U.S. supply and demand were part of the domestic market price for food, we would see the prices of aggregate food products drop by half almost immediately. Some perishable food products would predictably drop so dramatically in price it is unfathomable how far the prices would fall.
Behind this dynamic we find the international corporate and financial interests who are inherently at risk from President Trump’s “America-First” economic and trade platform. Believe it or not, President Trump is up against an entire world economic establishment.
When we understand how trade works in the modern era we understand why the agents within the system are so adamantly opposed to U.S. President Trump.
♦The biggest lie in modern economics, willingly spread and maintained by corporate media, is that a system of global markets still exists.
It doesn’t.
Every element of global economic trade is controlled and exploited by massive institutions, multinational banks and multinational corporations. Institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Bank control trillions of dollars in economic activity. Underneath that economic activity there are people who hold the reigns of power over the outcomes. These individuals and groups are the stakeholders in direct opposition to principles of America-First national economics.
The modern financial constructs of these entities have been established over the course of the past three decades. When you understand how they manipulate the economic system of individual nations you begin to understand understand why they are so fundamentally opposed to President Trump.
In the Western World, separate from communist control perspectives (ie. China), “Global markets” are a modern myth; nothing more than a talking point meant to keep people satiated with sound bites they might find familiar. Global markets have been destroyed over the past three decades by multinational corporations who control the products formerly contained within global markets.
The same is true for “Commodities Markets”. The multinational trade and economic system, run by corporations and multinational banks, now controls the product outputs of independent nations. The free market economic system has been usurped by entities who create what is best described as ‘controlled markets’.
U.S. President Trump smartly understands what has taken place. Additionally he uses economic leverage as part of a broader national security policy; and to understand who opposes President Trump specifically because of the economic leverage he creates, it becomes important to understand the objectives of the global and financial elite who run and operate the institutions. The Big Club.
Understanding how trillions of trade dollars influence geopolitical policy we begin to understand the three-decade global financial construct they seek to protect.
That is, global financial exploitation of national markets.
FOUR BASIC ELEMENTS:
♦Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national outputs (harvests an raw materials), and ancillary industries, of developed industrial western nations. {example}
♦The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks. (*note* in China it is the communist government underwriting the purchase)
♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).
♦With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.
Against the backdrop of President Trump confronting China; and against the backdrop of NAFTA being renegotiated, likely to exit; and against the necessary need to support the key U.S. steel industry; revisiting the economic influences within the modern import/export dynamic will help conceptualize the issues at the heart of the matter.
There are a myriad of interests within each trade sector that make specific explanation very challenging; however, here’s the basic outline.
For three decades economic “globalism” has advanced, quickly. Everyone accepts this statement, yet few actually stop to ask who and what are behind this – and why?
Influential people with vested financial interests in the process have sold a narrative that global manufacturing, global sourcing, and global production was the inherent way of the future. The same voices claimed the American economy was consigned to become a “service-driven economy.”
What was always missed in these discussions is that advocates selling this global-economy message have a vested financial and ideological interest in convincing the information consumer it is all just a natural outcome of economic progress.
It’s not.
It’s not natural at all. It is a process that is entirely controlled, promoted and utilized by large conglomerates, lobbyists, purchased politicians and massive financial corporations.
Again, I’ll try to retain the larger altitude perspective without falling into the traps of the esoteric weeds. I freely admit this is tough to explain and I may not be successful.
Bulletpoint #1: ♦ Multinational corporations purchase controlling interests in various national elements of developed industrial western nations.
This is perhaps the most challenging to understand. In essence, thanks specifically to the way the World Trade Organization (WTO) was established in 1995, national companies expanded their influence into multiple nations, across a myriad of industries and economic sectors (energy, agriculture, raw earth minerals, etc.). This is the basic underpinning of national companies becoming multinational corporations.
Think of these multinational corporations as global entities now powerful enough to reach into multiple nations -simultaneously- and purchase controlling interests in a single economic commodity.
A historic reference point might be the original multinational enterprise, energy via oil production. (Exxon, Mobil, BP, etc.)
However, in the modern global world, it’s not just oil; the resource and product procurement extends to virtually every possible commodity and industry. From the very visible (wheat/corn) to the obscure (small minerals, and even flowers).
Bulletpoint #2 ♦ The Multinational Corporations making the purchases are underwritten by massive global financial institutions, multinational banks.
During the past several decades national companies merged. The largest lemon producer company in Brazil, merges with the largest lemon company in Mexico, merges with the largest lemon company in Argentina, merges with the largest lemon company in the U.S., etc. etc. National companies, formerly of one nation, become “continental” companies with control over an entire continent of nations.
…. or it could be over several continents or even the entire world market of Lemon/Widget production. These are now multinational corporations. They hold interests in specific segments (this example lemons) across a broad variety of individual nations.
National laws on Monopoly building are not the same in all nations. Most are not as structured as the U.S.A or other more developed nations (with more laws). During the acquisition phase, when encountering a highly developed nation with monopoly laws, the process of an umbrella corporation might be needed to purchase the targeted interests within a specific nation. The example of Monsanto applies here.
Bulletpoint #3 ♦The Multinational Banks and the Multinational Corporations then utilize lobbying interests to manipulate the internal political policy of the targeted nation state(s).
With control of the majority of actual lemons the multinational corporation now holds a different set of financial values than a local farmer or national market. This is why commodities exchanges are essentially dead. In the aggregate the mercantile exchange is no longer a free or supply-based market; it is now a controlled market exploited by mega-sized multinational corporations.
Instead of the traditional ‘supply/demand’ equation determining prices, the corporations look to see what nations can afford what prices. The supply of the controlled product is then distributed to the country according to their ability to afford the price. This is essentially the bastardized and politicized function of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This is also how the corporations controlling WTO policy maximize profits.
Back to the lemons. A corporation might hold the rights to the majority of the lemon production in Brazil, Argentina and California/Florida. The price the U.S. consumer pays for the lemons is directed by the amount of inventory (distribution) the controlling corporation allows in the U.S.
If the U.S. lemon harvest is abundant, the controlling interests will export the product to keep the U.S. consumer spending at peak or optimal price. A U.S. customer might pay $2 for a lemon, a Mexican customer might pay .50¢, and a Canadian $1.25.
The bottom line issue is the national supply (in this example ‘harvest/yield’) is not driving the national price because the supply is now controlled by massive multinational corporations.
The mistake people often make is calling this a “global commodity” process. In the modern era this “global commodity” phrase is particularly nonsense.
A true global commodity is a process of individual nations harvesting/creating a similar product and bringing that product to a global market. Individual nations each independently engaged in creating a similar product.
Under modern globalism this process no longer takes place. It’s a complete fraud. Massive multinational corporations control the majority of production inside each nation and therefore control the global product market and price. It is a controlled system.
EXAMPLE: Part of the lobbying in the food industry is to advocate for the expansion of U.S. taxpayer benefits to underwrite the costs of the domestic food products they control. By lobbying DC these multinational corporations get congress and policy-makers to expand the basis of who can use EBT and SNAP benefits (state reimbursement rates).
Expanding the federal subsidy for food purchases is part of the corporate profit dynamic.
With increased taxpayer subsidies, the food price controllers can charge more domestically and export more of the product internationally. Taxes, via subsidies, go into their profit margins. The corporations then use a portion of those enhanced profits in contributions to the politicians. It’s a circle of money.
In highly developed nations this multinational corporate process requires the corporation to purchase the domestic political process (as above) with individual nations allowing the exploitation in varying degrees. As such, the corporate lobbyists pay hundreds of millions to politicians for changes in policies and regulations; one sector, one product, or one industry at a time. These are specialized lobbyists.
EXAMPLE: The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)
CFIUS is an inter-agency committee authorized to review transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person (“covered transactions”), in order to determine the effect of such transactions on the national security of the United States.
CFIUS operates pursuant to section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA) (section 721) and as implemented by Executive Order 11858, as amended, and regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 800.
The CFIUS process has been the subject of significant reforms over the past several years. These include numerous improvements in internal CFIUS procedures, enactment of FINSA in July 2007, amendment of Executive Order 11858 in January 2008, revision of the CFIUS regulations in November 2008, and publication of guidance on CFIUS’s national security considerations in December 2008 (more)
Bulletpoint #4 ♦ With control over the targeted national industry or interest, the multinationals then leverage export of the national asset (exfiltration) through trade agreements structured to the benefit of lesser developed nation states – where they have previously established a proactive financial footprint.
The process of charging the U.S. consumer more for a product, that under normal national market conditions would cost less, is a process called exfiltration of wealth. This is the basic premise, the cornerstone, behind the catch-phrase ‘globalism’.
It is never discussed.
To control the market price some contracted product may even be secured and shipped with the intent to allow it to sit idle (or rot). It’s all about controlling the price and maximizing the profit equation. To gain the same $1 profit a widget multinational might have to sell 20 widgets in El-Salvador (.25¢ each), or two widgets in the U.S. ($2.50/each).
Think of the process like the historic reference of OPEC (Oil Producing Economic Countries). Only in the modern era massive corporations are playing the role of OPEC and it’s not oil being controlled, thanks to the WTO it’s almost everything.
Again, this is highlighted in the example of taxpayers subsidizing the food sector (EBT, SNAP etc.), the corporations can charge U.S. consumers more. Ex. more beef is exported, red meat prices remain high at the grocery store, but subsidized U.S. consumers can better afford the high prices.
Of course, if you are not receiving food payment assistance (middle-class) you can’t eat the steaks because you can’t afford them. (Not accidentally, it’s the same scheme in the ObamaCare healthcare system)
Agriculturally, multinational corporate Monsanto says: ‘all your harvests are belong to us‘. Contract with us, or you lose because we can control the market price of your end product. Downside is that once you sign that contract, you agree to terms that are entirely created by the financial interests of the larger corporation; not your farm.
The multinational agriculture lobby is massive. We willingly feed the world as part of the system; but you as a grocery customer pay more per unit at the grocery store because domestic supply no longer determines domestic price.
Within the agriculture community the (feed-the-world) production export factor also drives the need for labor. Labor is a cost. The multinational corps have a vested interest in low labor costs. Ergo, open border policies. (ie. willingly purchased republicans not supporting border wall etc.).
This corrupt economic manipulation/exploitation applies over multiple sectors, and even in the sub-sector of an industry like steel. China/India purchases the raw material, coking coal, then sells the finished good (rolled steel) back to the global market at a discount. Or it could be rubber, or concrete, or plastic, or frozen chicken parts etc.
The ‘America First’ Trump-Trade Doctrine upsets the entire construct of this multinational export/control dynamic. Team Trump focus exclusively on bilateral trade deals, with specific trade agreements targeted toward individual nations (not national corporations).
‘America-First’ is also specific policy at a granular product level looking out for the national interests of the United States, U.S. workers, U.S. companies and U.S. consumers.
Under President Trump’s Trade positions, balanced and fair trade with strong regulatory control over national assets, exfiltration of U.S. national wealth is essentially stopped.
This puts many current multinational corporations, globalists who previously took a stake-hold in the U.S. economy with intention to export the wealth, in a position of holding contracted interest of an asset they can no longer exploit.
Perhaps now we understand better how massive multi-billion multinational corporations and institutions are aligned against President Trump.
RELATED:
♦The Modern Third Dimension in American Economics – HERE
♦The “Fed” Can’t Figure out the New Economics – HERE
♦Proof “America-First” has disconnected Main Street from Wall Street – HERE
♦Treasury Secretary Mnuchin begins creating a Parallel Banking System – HERE
♦How Trump Economic Policy is Interacting With The Stock Market – HERE
♦How Multinationals have Exported U.S. Wealth – HERE
McConnell Cancels Recess…
FBI Director of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap to Testify Tomorrow to Joint Congressional Committee…
As previously discussed, FBI Director of Counterintelligence E.W. “Bill” Priestap, FBI Head of National Security Division, Michael Steinbach, and the former head of the FBI National Security Division, John Giacalone, are all scheduled to testify to congress this month.
The three FBI officials will be testifying to a joint congressional committee of the Judiciary and House Oversight members. The joint committee was formed by Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy. The first testimony is tomorrow; and FBI Director of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap will go first. This will be Priestap’s first congressional testimony. Unfortunately, the testimony will be behind closed doors.
FBI Asst. Director of Counterintelligence, Bill Priestap, is central to all of the activity that was happening in both the Clinton investigation and the Trump investigation. Bill Priestap was FBI Agent Peter Strzok’s immediate boss. However, as noted in the text messages Strzok often worked around Priestap at the behest of the person giving him political instructions – FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
The timing of the testimony also speaks to the timing of the upcoming Inspector General report regarding the politicization of the DOJ and FBI surrounding the Clinton investigative outcomes. Some of the most significant releases have come while President Trump is outside of Washington DC; and with the G7 on June 8th – 9th in Canada; it would seem likely the IG report is to be made public anytime over the next 72 hours.
Again, a note of caution. Eight months ago -in advance of the sunlight now upon the FBI and DOJ- Trey Gowdy created the joint committee between Oversight and Judiciary. There is increased reason to believe Trey Gowdy is compromised and working on a self-driven-agenda to defend the institutions currently under review.
Remember, Gowdy opened a ridiculous investigation on the White House doctor, but refused to participate in an investigation of the Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Priorities. Recently Gowdy has been very public with his defense of Mueller, the corrupt FBI apparatus and the DOJ where he was a former U.S. prosecutor. Ergo, given his structured positioning – these closed door hearings might not generate the type of inquisitive and hard-lined questioning that many are hoping for. Again, just a precaution on expectations.
Earlier today Lou Dobbs and John Solomon discussed tomorrow’s hearing. [Prompted, just hit play]
.
Prior CTH article on Joint Committee Hearing.
Prior The Hill article on Joint Committee Hearing.
Spy Games: George Papadopoulos, via Sketchy Simona Mangiante, Begins Media Tour…
On January 27th, 2017, after over a year of covert surveillance on Trump campaign officials [via FISA searches, FISA(702) Title-1 surveilance, SIGNIT and HUMIT), the FBI first sat down to interview low level campaign aide George Papadopoulos. (likely FBI Special Agent Jennifer Zelski Edwards, and/or FBI Agent Peter Strzok, participated)
Six months later, July 27th, 2017 the FBI arrested George Papadopoulos at the airport and charged him with giving false information to FBI investigators during that interview. The very next day, July 28th, 2017, the DOJ filed a motion to seal with the DC federal court to hide the arrest. (FBI Agent Jennifer Zelski Edwards)
From evidence that surfaced AFTER the motion to seal was removed (October 5, 2017) we discover the charges, motions, pleadings, and case information (ASSEMBLED DOCKET HERE). This is now the reference point for a historic review, including the TRANSCRIPT of the October 30th guilty plea hearing. All needed references are within the DOCKET.
From the motion to seal, we discover Robert Mueller leveraged the July 27th, 2017, charges against George Papadopoulos to make him a cooperating witness for the special counsel. The July 28th, 2017, motion to seal was transparently intended to disguise the arrest of Papapdopoulos and his subsequent role as a “proactive cooperator”:
(Motion to Seal – Page 2, Point #3)
What is a “Proactive Cooperator”? Let’s turn to another legal case where the terminology is clearly defined:
(DOJ-Eastern district of PA: U.S. -v- Jose Garcia)
What this means is that after his arrest July 27th, 2017, and before the arrest was unsealed in October 2017, George Papadopoulos was working on behalf of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team to gain information against the targets of the DOJ investigation, Donald Trump officials.
For approximately two-plus months, August/September 2017, George Papadopoulos would have been targeting contact with former and current Trump campaign officials. The purpose of that targeting would have included an effort by the Mueller Special Counsel to build a “conspiracy” charge against anyone associated with President Trump. The agent running Papadopoulos appears to have been FBI Special Agent Jennifer Zelski Edward.
Remember, despite the media use of the term “collusion” is not a crime; “conspiracy” is. It seems obvious Mueller’s targeting of President Trump is centered around building a political impeachment case. [Not a criminal indictment case – which is unlikely] The path to the impeachment would come from creating the appearance of a conspiracy.
It seems almost certain the objective of Mueller’s final investigative report will be to present a political case for impeachment to congress. Democrats are looking for a reason, and many Republicans are looking for an excuse. The aggregate UniParty goal is removal of the existential threat represented by President Trump. Mueller’s anticipated report can predictably be forecast as a means to that end.
It does not look like Papadopoulos was able to generate any valuable information while he was working as an informant for the Special Counsel. Apparently there was no forward value on using Papadopoulos any longer, and on May 23rd, 2018, Robert Mueller informed the court he was done with Papadopoulos, prepare to sentence him according to the earlier plea-deal and guidelines of his cooperation. [Read plea transcript here]
And now, about two-weeks after Mueller informed the court Papadopoulos exhausted his usefulness; and with the back-story of Papadopoulos’ activity in 2016 now gaining much more attention; the wife-not-wife/spy-not-spy of Papadopoulos, Ms. Simona Mangiante, begins a media tour to rehabilitate the image of her husband-not-husband/spy-not-spy.
I doubt anyone actually truly knows if they are married or not; or whether there’s some form of mutual benefit in the appearance therein etc. And similarly I doubt anyone can ever be sure if they are spies or not. Remember the single-most-consistent professional trait about professional liars – they lie; often, quite well.
Spies for corrupt U.S. DOJ, CIA and FBI intelligence officials in 2015 and 2016? Spies for U.S. CIA and FBI agents (like Stefan Halper) on foreign assignment in 2016? Spies for special counsel in 2017 and 2018?…. Who knows?…..
Sketchy. All of it.
The only thing certain is that Papadopoulos was: interviewed by the FBI January 27th, 2017; arrested July 27th 2017; hidden July 28th 2017; a cooperating informant thereafter; and recently in May 2018 scheduled for sentencing.
You can decide the rest.
SCOTUS Rules 7-2: Christian Baker Wins Case Against Colorado Civil Rights Commission – Full Ruling pdf…
The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 today in support of a Christian Colorado baker who declined to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. (full pdf below) The majority of the justices’ decision revolved around the severity of anti-religious bias displayed by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission when it originally ruled against the baker Jack Phillips. According to the ruling the commission violated Mr. Phillips’ rights under the First Amendment.
The court did not rule upon whether Mr. Phillips held a first amendment right to refuse to bake the cake; the court ruled Mr. Phillips first amendment rights, religious liberty, was actually violated by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission itself. Much irony here.
Due to the severity of discrimination, exhibited by the Colorado Commission, against the first amendment right of the baker to hold and express Christianity as a foundational moral value, the Supreme court ruled against Colorado to support the rights of the Mr. Phillips.
(Via AP) […] Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his majority opinion that the larger issue “must await further elaboration” in the courts. Appeals in similar cases are pending, including one at the Supreme Court from a florist who didn’t want to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding.
The disputes, Kennedy wrote, “must be resolved with tolerance, without undue disrespect to sincere religious beliefs, and without subjecting gay persons to indignities when they seek goods and services in an open market.” (read more from AP)
As Amy Howe summarized for SCOTUS Blog: […] “the critical question of when and how Phillips’ right to exercise his religion can be limited had to be determined, Kennedy emphasized, in a proceeding that was not tainted by hostility to religion. Here, Kennedy observed, the “neutral and respectful consideration to which Phillips was entitled was compromised” by comments by members of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. At one hearing, Kennedy stressed, commissioners repeatedly “endorsed the view that religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, implying that religious beliefs and persons are less than fully welcome in Colorado’s business community.” And at a later meeting, Kennedy pointed out, one commissioner “even went so far as to compare Phillips’ invocation of his sincerely held religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust.” “This sentiment,” Kennedy admonished, “is inappropriate for a Commission charged with the solemn responsibility of fair and neutral enforcement of Colorado’s anti-discrimination law—a law that protects discrimination on the basis of religion as well as sexual orientation.” Moreover, Kennedy added, the commission’s treatment of Phillips’ religious objections was at odds with its rulings in the cases of bakers who refused to create cakes “with images that conveyed disapproval of same-sex marriage.”
Here, Kennedy wrote, Phillips “was entitled to a neutral decisionmaker who would give full and fair consideration to his religious objection as he sought to assert it in all of the circumstances in which this case was presented, considered, and decided.” Because he did not have such a proceeding, the court concluded, the commission’s order – which, among other things, required Phillips to sell same-sex couples wedding cakes or anything else that he would sell to opposite-sex couples and mandated remedial training and compliance reports – “must be set aside.” (read more)
Here’s the full ruling:
.
Chairman Devin Nunes Discusses Trey Gowdy, Spygate, Five-Eyes, the IG Report, and the Mirrored Rabbit Hole….
Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes appeared earlier today on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the ongoing aspects of Spygate etc. WATCH:
.
As CTH shared over a week ago, the investigative focus has shifted toward a larger backstory within the CIA and professional counterintelligence actors, ie. spies. Within this line of inquiry it is dangerous to take current presentations and overlay them against their historic footprint. Inevitably the discussion leads to contradictions and forces the conversation into the world of mirrored halls filled with purposeful disinformation.
Intelligence professionals use words like “tradecraft” to explain the process of lying, manipulation and falsehood construction as a professional skill-set. It is almost impossible to identify the truth in current claims by those who are skilled in dark arts; especially when you accept they are likely holding motives and intentions that might be 180 degrees in the opposite direction from initial appearances.
There’s a blue-zillion ‘spy infiltration theories‘ floating around the internet in various granular forms. A few are solid and possible, but most appear based on abject nonsense and twisted logic.
The Inspector General report on the FBI and DOJ action in the Clinton investigation is due out this week. In my humble opinion it is best to wait and see what discoveries are within the fact-centric report, and the confirmed underlying evidence, before wandering out into the speculative land of mirrored rabbit holes.





















