Interesting Tweets From President Trump Draw Attention To Chairman Goodlatte, House Judiciary Committee and FISA Investigation…

A few hours ago President Trump tweeted a curiously specific pair of tweets targeting the FBI, DOJ and FISA investigations as it relates to the House Judiciary Committee and Chairman Bob Goodlatte.  Something’s up:

Against the backdrop of the DOJ notifying the House Intelligence and House Senate committees last night of their ability to review the DOJ/FBI submission of the FISA Court application used to target U.S. person Carter Page, the specificity of POTUS Trump’s direction is curious.

As we previously discussed the DOJ allowing expanded congressional oversight over the FISA application, against the backdrop of a previously announced IG review of this specific FISA application, would indicate Inspector General Michael Horowitz and Federal Prosecutor John Huber signed-off on, or perhaps directed, last night’s approval.

There are several angles that loom as possibilities, including the beginning of a process to make this specific FISA application declassified and available to the general public.  There’s also the outstanding issue, a very serious issue, of the application currently in the FISA court being different from the FBI/DOJ version shared with congress (Nunes memo).  That unresolved issue is ongoing, and specifically involves Chairman Goodlatte.

Additionally, accepting the OIG report is almost certainly the most complex undertaking of IG Horowitz career; and the multitude of possible angles within each part of the investigative inquiry are so consequential; there’s an increased likelihood the report is coming out in stages.

Just the sheer process of an ordinarily complex OIG report with the inherent fact-audit, draft-report review, fact-check, and preliminary draft vetting of all references is exhaustive in itself.

Now imagine overlaying that process atop the tentacles behind millions of pages of gathered evidence on multiple investigative issues surrounding the FBI/DOJ conduct: •Clinton email, manipulated investigations with predetermined outcomes; •unlawful and coordinated media leaks; •false testimony to FBI, congress and under oath to IG; •manipulated FBI 302 reports; •issues with Andrew McCabe etc.. and then if that’s not complex enough to report about…. you overlay the •issues with the FISA court; •false presentations; •source material (Steele Dossier); and well, you get the picture…. This is massive and ¹complex.

[…¹and that still leaves the unmasking and state dept issues for a special prosecutor]

In my opinion, part of the reason why FBI Director Christopher Wray doubled the size of the staff assigned to the congressional fulfillment is specifically because there’s a phase in the OIG process where initial statements of fact go through an exhaustive OIG draft vetting process within the targeted agency.  The “source vetting” or “referencer” phase is part of the target response -and internal review audit- prior to the final draft and ultimately publication.

I don’t think all 54 of those FBI staff Director Wray assigned to this task are simply vetting for declassification needs.  Think about it, and contrast against the formal process. More likely a significant number of these staff are vetting the underlying evidence that’s noted in Horowitz’s draft notification document.  Remember, many of these elements are also potentially criminal actions individually; and quite likely, in the aggregate, also the broad outlines of a criminal conspiracy amid all of the participants.

You can call it a soft-coup, or you can call it politicization of the DOJ and FBI, but the end result is the same – the intentional effort to manipulate, influence, and ultimately subvert an election for the presidency of the United States.

So with all of that in mind, for Inspector General Horowitz and Prosecutor Huber to be signing-off on releasing the Carter Page FISA application; there has to be something more there.  Something in addition to the end-stages of an IG report that is almost guaranteed to come in chapters or stages.

This is where I would draw your attention to EW “Bill” Priestap.  The head of Counterintelligence Division of the FBI who was present for the entire time, and is still in place today.

It would be intellectually dishonest in the extreme not to accept that any investigative approach taken by Michael Horowitz and John Huber, that is in any way related to the DOJ-NSD and FBI intelligence apparatus – including specifically the FISA court, has not been directed as an outcome of extensive interviews with the head of the FBI counterintelligence agency.

Horowitz and Huber ain’t fishing in uncharted waters.  They have a subject matter expert guiding them to the exact epicenter location of the fish.

So yeah, this looks very curiously specific:


Intellectual Froglegs – Liberal Farm

Joe Dan Gorman presents the latest anti-derp headline news:


BREAKING: Dept of Justice Grants House and Senate Intel Committee Full Access To Review FISA Application…

Until today the only people allowed to review the full Title-1 FISA application were Trey Gowdy, Adam Schiff, Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Rep John Ratcliffe.

In an interesting development, the Department of Justice has responded to HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes notifying him the DOJ will allow all members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees full access to review the unredacted FBI/DOJ FISA application used to gain a Title-1 surveillance warrant against U.S. citizen Carter Page.

According to CNN: ‘Separately, Justice Department spokesman Ian Prior said the department on Monday will supplement its document production to the House Judiciary Committee by producing another 1,000 pages of materials in response to a subpoena issued by committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte.’

This is an interesting development for several reasons:

♦This will be the first opportunity for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes to see the underlying highly classified documentary evidence that underpins his FISA Memo. Previously only one majority member (Gowdy), and one minority member (Schiff), from the HPSCI was permitted to review the heavily classified and unredacted FISA application.

♦Allowing the full House and Senate intelligence committee to review the FISA application is the first step in getting the application declassified. It would be enormously interesting if the public could see the full application as submitted by the FBI and DOJ. There is a significant public interest in knowing exactly how strong the underlying evidence was for the FISA Court to grant such extensive surveillance authority.

♦There has been some discussion of a possibility the FISA application held by the Department of Justice, and used to structurally create the Nunes memo, may not be the same FISA Title-1 application held by the FISA Court per Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer. Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte has requested the FISA Court application. That issue remains unresolved.  (link)

If, and this is a big “if”, there are actually two versions, the consequences are astronomical. Almost immediately Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, James Comey and Andrew McCabe would be indicted.

Lastly, the willingness of the DOJ (Sessions, Rosenstein) to allow expanded access to the FISA application, at the same time the IG has expanded his investigation therein, would indicate IG Michael Horowitz and Federal Prosecutor John Huber have completed their review of the evidentiary weight therein…. and this release exactly backs up what we previous noted:

Horowitz was not announcing this investigative avenue from a position of only just now starting to gather evidence; he already has the evidence. He was announcing the context for him to drop a report summarizing findings of content from the investigation; a report that has nothing to do with the original launch of the OIG investigation.

In essence he announced the need to write a report based on investigative material he has already gathered. Horowitz already has the FISA material, he needed a reason to include it.


…. Or, Huber/Horowitz could also be setting a trap.

“WHY” – The first video highlights the historic backdrop of DOJ/FBI FISA court abuses:


“HOW” – The second video highlights the specific example of how the DOJ and FBI used false information to the FISA Court to secure a fraudulent ‘Title-1’ surveillance warrant:


“WHO” – The third video highlights who the primary players were within the scheme:

John Brennan’s Contributions to Fraud Upon FISA Court…

Most of the ‘vast-Russian-conspiracy‘ media presentations seem to start with a discussion of intelligence gathering beginning in July of 2016. The GOP convention to nominate Donald Trump was July 18-21st of 2016.

Adding to the July 2016 origination narrative FBI Director James Comey stated the counterintelligence operation against candidate Trump began in July 2016.   However, not a single MSM entity has looked at the FISA-702(16)(17) abuses by the FBI and DOJ-NSD outlined by the FISA court and NSA well before July 2016.

It is a matter of unclassified public record the FBI and DOJ-NSD were allowing “contractors” to conduct searches of the FBI and NSA databases, and extract raw intelligence, throughout 2015 until April 28th 2016 when NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers shut down all access and initiated a compliance review.

Any objective review of that time period indicates (strongest likelihood) the search activity was political ‘opposition research’ for the 2016 presidential election.  With hindsight of the FBI and DOJ’s political intents, ‘opposition research’ was almost certainly the motive.

Surrounding the nomination that stunned the geo-political world almost every foreign government was trying to figure out who and what Donald J Trump was all about; and more specifically: how would his run for the presidency impact their specific interests.

2017- WASHINGTON NYT — American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers, according to three current and former American officials familiar with the intelligence.

[Paragraph #5] The information collected last summer was considered credible enough for intelligence agencies to pass to the F.B.I., which during that period opened a counterintelligence investigation that is continuing. It is unclear, however, whether Russian officials actually tried to directly influence Mr. Manafort and Mr. Flynn. Both have denied any collusion with the Russian government on the campaign to disrupt the election. (link)

The New York Times should win a Pulitzer for undermining their own ‘Russian Conspiracy’ headline narrative within the fifth paragraph. [It’s a trend] I digress.

Obviously, attempting to understand the policies of outsider Donald Trump, Russia would be asking these same questions along with China, France, England, the larger EU and every nation in every continent. It would be silly to claim otherwise.

Ergo a diplomatic mission by Russian governmental officials surrounding the GOP convention to understand the Trump orbit is no different than a Chinese, European or Arab-Asian effort for the same reason.

However, the international interest did necessarily initiate a bunch of foreign officials making contact with anyone and everyone who would be associated with Trump-world regardless of concentric circle distance from the epicenter.  That intellectually honest understanding highlights how much of the post convention (July 2016) raw intelligence gathering began so easily.

The CIA simply monitoring chatter amid foreign diplomats, their customary job, turns into raw data provided to the FBI which in turn becomes the subject matter of frequent FISA searches/warrants to explore the U.S. contacts on the other side of that chatter.

The FISA searches/warrants turn into intelligence reports and that begins the entire process now known as “unmasking” etc. Nothing within this process so far is even in question. However, this is also the backdrop for intelligence reports to be weaponized for political purposes.  In May 2017, CIA Director John Brennan testified to this exact process before congress.

What was not reported by any media outline is John Brennan, understanding actions taken by the Obama administration in 2016 created his own exit from the controversy.

Former CIA Director John Brennan gave very specific testimony to congress where he noted he provided the raw intelligence to FBI Director Comey – FULLSTOP. Where “fullstop” directly and immediately indicates Brennan’s throwing the responsibility for all that came next upon FBI Director James Comey.

John Brennan structured his self-defense with great specificity: (@13:35)


“Again, in consultation with the White House, I PERSONALLY briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership; specifically: Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr; and to representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members.”

“Given the highly sensitive nature of what was an active counter-intelligence case [that means the FBI], involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”… (link)

Shorter version: don’t try pinning this unsubstantiated Russia investigation to no-where, and the illegal leaks, on me; I just provided the raw intelligence.

It is important to emphasize here the possibly illegal “unmasking“, and the certainly illegal “leaking“, were all based on intelligence reports generated from raw intelligence, and not the raw intelligence itself.

It was the FBI (Comey) and ODNI (Clapper) generating the intel reports, including the Presidents’ Daily Briefing (PDB).

The CIA provided raw intel, and the NSA generated the raw monitoring intelligence from the characters identified by the CIA and approved by FBI FISA warrant submissions.

The FBI were running the counter-intelligence operation and generating the actual reports that were eventually shared with the White House, Susan Rice and the Dept of Justice. After the November election, those reports, or interpretations of the report content, were eventually leaked to the media in a coordinated effort to undermine the incoming administration.

During the time James Comey’s FBI was generating the intelligence reports, Comey admitted he intentionally never informed congressional oversight: “because of the sensitivity of the matter“.

In his may 2017 testimony John Brennan tried to take himself out of the picture from the perspective of the illegal acts within the entire process. ODNI James Clapper, while rubbing his face and scratching his head, had taken the same route earlier. That left the majority of scrutiny for the anti-Trump intelligence operation upon James Comey.

This explained why Comey changed his mind on testifying to congress until he had the opportunity to talk to newly appointed special counsel Robert Mueller.

Former FBI Director James Comey is not stupid.  He is, however, intensely political.

James Comey completely understood the legal risks he was  facing within the faux “Russian conspiracy story” and the “subsequent leaking” of his political FBI reports.


Important CTH Confirmation – Catherine Herridge Confirms Lisa Page Statements Contradicted Andrew McCabe, Ultimately Leading to His Firing…

Fox News Catherine Herridge reports today, per her FBI investigative sources, it was an investigative interview with FBI Attorney Lisa Page, in July 2017, that contradicted FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and ultimately led to his firing.

That revelation is exactly what we anticipated was the origin to Inspector General Michael Horowitz gaining the text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok.  The issue is actually more stunning than presented.  However, first here’s the report from Herridge (emphasis mine):

Fox News – Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was fired last month for committing three violations of the bureau’s ethics code, an investigative source told Fox News on Thursday.

The violations initially were uncovered by the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General and confirmed by the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility. They included lack of candor under oath, lack of candor when not under oath, and the improper disclosure of non-public information to the media about the FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

The violations stemmed from McCabe’s response to an October 2016 Wall Street Journal report about sizeable campaign donations from Democrats to McCabe’s wife, Jill, during her campaign for the Virginia State Senate. The investigation found that McCabe instructed FBI lawyer Lisa Page and FBI public affairs chief Michael Kortan to work with the Journal’s reporter to set the record straight.

The source said Page’s statements to investigators were “critical” because they directly contradicted her boss, McCabe.

According to the source, McCabe’s lack of candor about the contact with the Journal reporter led to his firing. The source added that Page’s testimony about the matter contradicted McCabe’s. Then-FBI Director James Comey claimed he never authorized the leak to the Journal.  (read more)

A picture was initially clear in March once we had the full timeline of the interviews with Andrew McCabe that led to his firing.  This Fox News report only confirms the obvious; however, it’s important to review the events to fully understand the scope of McCabe’s lying and also understand the reason for Lisa Page to be so angry.

Remember, Lisa Page was a DOJ attorney assigned to the office of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe specifically to provide legal guidance.  Imagine how pissed off she was when she discovered (July 2017) the Deputy FBI Director who told her to leak a story -on his behalf- to the Wall Street Journal, denied ever telling her to leak the story.

It’s no wonder why Ms. Page told FBI Agent Peter Strzok to “never text her again”, and she quit working for the Mueller team several weeks before IG Horowitz informed Mueller about the conspiracy issues (which led to Strzok’s removal).

Here’s the timeline from an assembly of media reporting and investigative releases to congress.

Andrew McCabe was first interviewed about the media leaks in May 2017.  He denied.  “A couple of months later” he was interviewed by Inspector General Horowitz, and he again denied.  On July 20th of 2017 Inspector General Horowitz gained the Peter Strzok and Lisa Page text messages.

•May 2017 McCabe denies leaking for WSJ story to FBI investigators (link).

•July 2017 McCabe denies again; to Inspector General Horowitz.

•July 2017 Lisa Page admits to Horowitz she was told to construct the Wall Street Journal story (Devlin Barrett, journalist).  This conflicts with McCabes repeated denials. (link)

•July 20th 2017 Horowitz gets Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages (link). Proving McCabe constructed the WSJ story.

(Full back-story to text message discovery)

•August 2017: After Horowitz gets the proof McCabe was lying – McCabe follows up on the two denials saying “he may have allowed FBI officials to speak with the newspaper”. (link)

•August 2017:  FBI re-interviews McCabe based on new admissions.

•November 29th 2017: One day before SC Mueller indicts Michael Flynn, IG Horowitz interviews McCabe again.  Apparently this time McCabe admitted to constructing the leak. (link)

In May, June and July 2017, while FBI Deputy Director Andrew “Andy” McCabe was lying to FBI investigators and the Inspector General, Lisa Page was working for McCabe as his legal counsel.

Therein lies the heart and origin of the motive for Lisa Page to flip against the conspiracy group when she discovered Andrew McCabe lying to investigators about his instructions to her.  IG Horowitz then interviews Page in July and she tells the truth, thereby contradicting McCabe.

However, Ms. Page had the evidence – The Text Messages delivered July 20th.

 It’s Complicated – Chairman Devin Nunes Demand Letter to FBI Director Wray and AAG Rosenstein…

It was noted –and reported– yesterday, that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes sent a letter (full pdf below) to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein demanding un-redacted FBI origination documents surrounding the beginning of the July 2016 counterintelligence operation against candidate Donald Trump, and the FISA application stemming from that investigation.

The issues surrounding the declassification of the FISA application and subsequent FISA warrant against Carter Page are not new.  The new aspect within the Nunes demand relates to a request for the intelligence community “electronic communication” (EC) that kicked off the initial FBI counterintelligence op.  Within that new line of inquiry the subject of interest is ultimately former CIA Director John Brennan.

However, there are issues here; serious issues, and likely only those who are deep in the weeds of this entire dynamic are going to understand.  There are VERY valid reasons why the FBI (Wray) and DOJ (Rosenstein) would push back against HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes.  It’s complicated, and we’ll try to unpack.

Begin by noting on page two of the Nunes request, Paragraph #3, something that all media writing about the Nunes demand seem to overlook.  Screengrab below:

(full pdf here)

Chariman Nunes takes exception to the origination documents being redacted for his committee review while noting that “multiple members of other committees have been the beneficiaries of such access”, this is a key aspect that outlines the motive for the FBI and DOJ to proceed cautiously with the HPSCI.

From earlier research and congressional letters we know House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, holding direct statutory oversight over the DOJ, is working closely with DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz.  It almost a certainty the committee Nunes is referring to that has been allowed access is Goodlatte’s Judiciary Committee.  However, the DOJ/FBI are reluctant to share the same information with Nunes HPSCI committee.

Remember, at the instruction and authority of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Inspector General Michael Horowitz and Federal Prosecutor John Huber are investigating the DOJ (National Security Division) and FBI (counterintelligence unit: Priestap/Strzok) in their conduct toward the FISA court; and the potential for unlawful abuse of the process therein.  As such, the FISA material is now much more than a controversial political matter, it is in the purview of an ongoing criminal investigation (Huber).

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly – yet more challenging to understand, the origination documents [“electronic communication” (EC)] surround another important aspect that directly relates to CIA Director John Brennan and his earlier testimony to congress about the origination of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Operation against Trump.

Most media and pundits discussing this issue have likely forgotten how John Brennan explained his role on May 23rd, 2017.  THIS IS CRITICAL.

On March 20th, 2017, FBI Director James Comey stated he did not inform congressional oversight about the FBI counterintelligence operation against Trump, that began in July 2016, at the recommendation of his counterintelligence division head Bill Priestap, and due to “the sensitivity of the matter”.  {GO DEEP}

Two months later, May 23rd, 2017, former CIA Director John Brennan testified in his opening statement to congress that, in addition to providing intelligence to the FBI, he personally informed the “Congressional Gang of Eight” of the underlying raw intelligence.

Pay very close attention to the segment at 13:35 of this video of Brennan’s testimony:

Brennan: [13:35]  “Third, through the so-called Gang-of-Eight process we kept congress apprised of these issues as we identified them.”

“Again, in consultation with the White House, I PERSONALLY briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership; specifically: Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr; and to representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members.”

“Given the highly sensitive nature of what was an active counter-intelligence case [that means the FBI], involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”…

In essence John Brennan told congress he informed: Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes, Adam Schiff, Mitch McConnell, Harry Reid, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr of the same intelligence information he delivered to FBI Director James Comey and ODNI James Clapper.  According to his testimony those briefings were between the 11th of August and 6th of September 2016.

So Devin Nunes is asking for the “electronic communication” (EC) documents that initiated the July 2016 FBI counterintelligence operation, while seemingly having been briefed by CIA Director John Brennan on the substance of the material in Aug/Sept 2016?

And the FBI/DOJ are reluctant to share with the HPSCI (Nunes) the same information they are willing to share with the House Judiciary (Goodlatte).

Why would that be?

Simple answer, the HPSCI is compromised.

Remember, ranking member Adam Schiff and Representative Eric Swalwell are also targets of ongoing FBI leak investigations; and notably (with that self-interest in mind) they have been working to undermine -and politicize- the outcomes of the Inspector General Horowitz investigation.

Additionally, the HPSCI is where the Awan Brothers scandal (investigation and indictments) comes into play and the Democrats on the HPSCI committee who waived the background checks for their use as IT support staff.

There are very good reasons for the FBI and DOJ to keep potentially devastating criminal evidence away from the HPSCI until Huber is prepared to use it.  The HPSCI membership is inherently tied up in multiple facets of the soft-coup plot and supportive ideology within the conspiracy against candidate Trump, and later President-elect and President Donald Trump.

Lastly, and importantly, remember the Chief Legal Counsel for the FBI is now Dana Boente.  If you stand back and remind yourself where within the FBI and DOJ the small group was operating, you go directly to the DOJ National Security Division.

We know from the recent text messages of Strzok/Page and from the critical last days of the Obama administration’s action they viewed Dana Boente as a threat with President-elect Trump taking office.   After the top-tier of the corrupt DOJ-NSD officials were removed, Dana Boente became the head of the DOJ-NSD and subsequently IG Horowitz was granted full oversight authority (previously denied by Sally Yates).

So Dana Boente, a perceived risk from the Obama “small group” perspective, goes into the DOJ-NSD as the rats run out… Boente grants IG oversight access… and then remains inside the division for a year prior to exit and going into the FBI as Chief Legal Counsel (replacing corrupt James Baker).   There’s no better authority with inside information into the heart of the conspiracy group effort than the current chief legal counsel of the FBI, Dana Boente.

That’s why the investigative White Hats are going to keep the HPSCI at a distance.

Here’s Nunes letter:


Joe diGenova Goes Full Wolverine on Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein…

Alan Dershowitz and Joe diGenova appear on Sean Hannity TV show to discuss the latest revelations in the Robert Mueller ‘Muh Russia’ collusion investigation.

Against yesterday’s backdrop discovery of the secret instructions from Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Joe diGenova goes full wolverine.


Second Amendment Repealed!

Former Justice John Paul Stevens says it’s time to scrap the 2nd Amendment altogether. But what does that mean for our supposedly free Republic?

August 2nd, 2017 DOJ Letter From Rod Rosenstein To Special Counsel Mueller Outlining Investigative Authorization…

When reviewing new information against the backdrop of existing information it is important not to get so caught up in the weeds that you miss the obvious.  This is the important aspect to a new information release from Robert Mueller.

Overnight last night Special Counsel Robert Mueller released an attachment as part of a responsive court pleading.   The attachment was a previously unknown letter from Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller outlining the specific authority of his investigative appointment.  The letter from Rosenstein to Mueller is dated August 2nd, 2017.

There are several elements to break down, and one of the best ways to review the information is to first ask “why”?

  • Question #1) Why did Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein deliver a non-public outline of investigative authority to Mueller on August 2nd, 2017?
  • Question #2) Why would Robert Mueller be seeking a signed more specific outline of his investigative authority on August 2nd, 2017; a full three months after he was assigned the role of Special Counsel?
  • Question #3) Why would Robert Mueller need to redact the content of an official outline of his investigative instructions from the Asst. Attorney General?

First, it is important to put the Rod Rosenstein releases into context.

On Wednesday May 17th, 2017 Rosenstein announced the following:

Notice no-where in this public announcement does AAG Rosenstein mention President Donald Trump.

Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein today announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.

The “previously-confirmed FBI investigation … efforts” is apparently code-speak for the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign confirmed by FBI Director James Comey on March 20th, 2017 to congress.

The simultaneous release of investigative intent then includes a more specific and formal outline, which does include Donald Trump:

(pdf link)

So there we have the three areas of direct authority:  ¹Links or coordination between the Russian Government and the campaign of Donald Trump.  ²Matters that may arise from the investigation of the Russian government and the campaign of Donald Trump. And ³other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a). [<- ie. ‘Jurisdiction‘]

So there’s the instructions to Robert Mueller and his team on May 17th, 2017.

Now, as we previously discussed: “Robert Mueller didn’t necessarily appoint or select a team of lawyers and investigators…. the previously assembled team of lawyers and investigators selected him.”  The key player in that assembly was FBI Chief-Legal-Counsel and personal confidant to Robert Mueller, James Baker. (pictured right)

Remember, the “small group”, career officials inside the DOJ and FBI needed to continue their group effort after the election.  Therefore they needed to stay assembled as a group; they needed to stay on task, to facilitate the original intent of their association.  The Special Counsel was merely a way, an approach, a tool for this specific team to continue their efforts after the 2016 presidential election, nothing more – nothing less.

The team already existed. The objectives already existed. The only thing they needed was a willfully-blind leader and an excuse to continue their ideological efforts. Robert Mueller became their selected willfully-blind leader because the small group already knew him and they knew they could manipulate/use him.

Their ideological association is why the same people behind Phase 1 (Clinton Exoneration ’15, ’16), and Phase 2 (opposition research, counterintelligence and surveillance against Trump ’15, ’16, ’17), became the same people in Phase 3, the post-election vast Russian-Trump Collusion Conspiracy; also known as “The Insurance Policy”.  In many ways Phase 3 was/is more of a continued opposition research endeavor, part of the “resistance” per se, with a good dose of self-preservation binding them all together.

Robert Mueller could technically shut down the official Special Counsel tomorrow and for the ‘small group’ nothing would change much. The ‘group’ shifts back out of government work and reconnects with Fusion GPS (or similar).  They inform their media allies to change the official name of their tasks from ‘investigation’ back to ‘opposition research’. Sans Mueller all group tasks remain consistent, and three days from now it’s just another Friday.

If it is a paradigm shift to understand that Mueller didn’t select his team, but rather the team selected him…. then a similar paradigm shift will be found in the following motive behind Robert Mueller requesting Rosenstein to outline his investigation on August 2nd, 2017:

Mueller wasn’t asking Rosenstein to expand the focus of the endeavor; team Mueller was asking Rosenstein to NARROW the focus of their investigation.

Why would Team Mueller be asked to narrow the focus?

Because Inspector General Michael Horowitz just informed him/them of his discovery of the conspiracy behind the DOJ and FBI plan against Donald Trump.

On July 20th, 2017 IG Horowitz gets the Page/Strzok text messages.  Horowitz informs Mueller there is evidence of a conspiracy evident within his team.  That had to be an ‘oh, shit’ moment for the “small group”; and for Robert Mueller.

The investigation was going on for more than two months and the team was already moving on Paul Manafort.  Quickly, the investigative team needs Rosenstein to narrow the investigation.  The last thing the Special Counsel team needed, was an open door to investigate corrupt officials within their own ideological ranks.  Lord knows where that would end-up.

On August 2nd, 2017, Rosenstein does exactly that.

Now, before getting to #3 (why the redacted memo from Mueller last night), and retaining the bigger picture, take a look at a few aspects that need to fall into place within this timeline.

FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was was interviewed about his media leaks in May 2017.  He denied.  Notice what comes next… “a couple of months later” he was interviewed by IG Horowitz.  And he again denied.  Now think!  That conversation would be around July of 2017.  What happened right after/amid this period?  Answer: Horowitz gained the Peter Strzok and Lisa Page text messages.

  • •May 2017 McCabe denies leaking for WSJ story (to FBI).
  • •July 2017 McCabe denies again (to IG Horowitz).
  • •July 20th, 2017 Horowitz gets Strzok/Page text messages. Proving McCabe constructed the WSJ story and lied to FBI investigators and Inspector General.
  • •August 2017: After Horowitz gets the proof McCabe was lying – McCabe follows up on the two denials sayinghe may have allowed FBI officials to speak with the newspaper”.
  • •August 2017:  FBI re-interviews McCabe based on new admissions.
  • •November 29th 2017: One day before SC Mueller indicts Michael Flynn, IG Horowitz interviews McCabe again.  Apparently this time McCabe admitted to constructing the leak.

Apply Occam’s razor.

Lisa Page is likely also questioned about the Wall Street Journal article and she told the truth. However, now her story conflicts with Andrew McCabe.  So to prove her side of the story, Lisa Page provides the text messages July 20th, 2017 to investigators. That’s where the “Page was already disenfranchised with the SC Mueller assignment” and the “removed earlier” aspect comes from.

Andrew McCabe lied in May and July 2017. Lisa Page likely gave a statement that conflicted with McCabe and used the text messages to back up her side. That’s how IG Horowitz gained the original access to the Page/Strzok messages. The rest is history.

The ‘good guys’ inside the investigative FBI unit have a motive to be angry.

♦Think about it…. McCabe admits to lying to the FBI on November 29th, 2017.  On November 30th, Michael Flynn is forced to sign a sketchy guilty plea for *presumably* lying to the FBI.  On December 1st the media pushes the Flynn lying guilty plea.  On December 2nd *some entity* within the process hits back against the corrupt insiders (around McCabe) and begins blasting out information about Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr…  That’s where most people began to take notice.

Additionally, think about the time-frame knowing IG Horowitz informed SC Mueller about Strzok and Page and the potential criminal conduct outlined within their text messages.

In between the time McCabe lied to the FBI (May ’17), and then lied to Horowitz (July ’17), and then attempted to clean up his lie (Aug ’17), and then McCabe’s November 29th re-interview with Horowitz…. Prosecutor John Huber was brought on board.

There’s obviously a history of White Hats and Black Hats inside the DOJ and FBI while the entire operation against Trump was taking place.  There’s White Hats -vs- Black Hats playing out inside the intelligence apparatus (Rogers -vs- Clapper/Brennan). In 2017 there’s White Hats and Black Hats inside dueling investigative units (Horowitz -vs- Mueller).  And with Huber added there’s now White Hats -vs- Black Hats as prosecutors.

So lets look at a few interpersonal and organizational dynamics for examples.  [Forgive my plain-speak].  Taking some cues from inside the text messages already reviewed:

♦DOJ Attorney assigned to the FBI effort, Lisa Page, was willing to go along with the plans in 2015/2016 because she’s ideologically aligned with the political objectives to aid Hillary Clinton.  However, after the election she ain’t stupid.  By late spring she can see the writing on the wall… the intended outcome ain’t working.  Nervous already, with McCabe lying about the media leaks in July, she’s had enough… she shoots down “Andy’s” lies and exits.

♦FBI Asst. Director in charge of counterintelligence, Bill Priestap, was already likely not comfy with the entire scheme, and his #2 Deputy FBI Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok was too far out-of-bounds.  Priestap likely never agreed to ‘Phase-3’.  He’s also rich with a well-off spouse and too much to lose.

♦FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker did his earnest best to support the operation through Phase #1, Phase #2 and helped set up Phase #3… but after he found out congress was going to subpoena him, the next day something happened and FBI Director Christopher Wray removed him.  The ‘something’ was likely Baker realizing Phase-3 wasn’t working, and began working toward self preservation.

♦FBI Agent Peter Strzok is just all around FUBAR.  He’s busted all over the place… ‘where do I sign’?  Halp.

♦Comey’s former Chief-of-Staff James Rybicki knew his goose was cooked as soon as he saw the Page/Strzok text messages surfacing in December 2017.  But his loyalty to his former boss, and the actual physical risk to life and limb precluded his ability to help.  He quit.

FBI Communications Director Michael Kortan was caught within the media leaks and also inside the spin machine from the Clinton investigation the ‘small group’ intentionally sunk and he sold as valid.  Kortan decides to give the team the last help he can and releases an unauthorized FBI media statement in January, slamming the Nunes memo and undermining the official FBI position.  It was his parting shot to attempt cover for the remaining crew.  A few days later he was resigned by Director Wray.

On the Main Justice side:

♦DOJ-NSD Deputy Bruce Ohr was in too deep.  Demoted twice in between a series of twelve, yes twelve, FBI investigative interviews… Obviously Bruce knew too much, and the collaboration/connection with his wife Nellie and Fusion GPS just put a massive target on his back.    Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr connect the activity from the DOJ (national security division) and FBI (counterintelligence division) together with Fusion GPS (Nellie’s 2016 employer, Glenn Simpson) and Christopher Steele (the recipient of the unwashed intelligence product).

Nellie and Bruce didn’t exactly have an option… no doubt that’s why all the FBI investigative interviews from Horowitz and Huber.  Tick.Tock on the IG report.

♦DOJ-NSD Deputy AAG David Laufman sat in on the Clinton investigations and was part of the collaborative effort to construct the fraudulent FISA application.   In his former position, Laufman would have been involved and hold knowledge of the FISA “Title-1” surveillance program initiated on target Carter Page and the “incidental” Trump campaign officials. Laufman would also have close contact with former Asst. Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr; husband of Fusion GPS employee Nellie Ohr.  Laufman quit in February, 2018.

♦DOJ-NSD Asst. Attorney General John P. Carlin quit in October 2016 immediately after notifying the FISA court of the misuse of FISA(702)(16)(17) database search queries by contractors within the FBI and DOJ-NSD apparatus.  Carlin admitted misrepresentations to the FISA court and then immediate resigned.

♦DOJ-NSD Principle Deputy Asst. Attorney General Mary McCord replaced John Carlin in October 2016 and assisted Sally Yates in Phase-3 along with the Flynn scheme.  Mary McCord accompanied Yates to the White House.  Three things happened right before McCord resigned at the DOJ-NSD in April 2017.  First, Sally Yates was fired.  Second, the #2 re-authorization of the Page surveillance warrant occurred; and Third, IG Michael Horowitz gained oversight over the DOJ-NSD.

Sally Yates had blocked OIG oversight over the DOJ-NSD for the previous years.  In 2015 the OIG 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.  In April 2017 all of that changed.

Not coincidentally the first White Hat arrives at the DOJ-NSD leadership ranks when Dana Boente shows up, also in April 2017, from his prior position as U.S. AG for the Eastern District of Virginia.  Boente acted as interim Attorney General after Yates was removed. Boente left Main Justice in October 2017 and in January joined Christopher Wray at the FBI as Chief Legal Counsel to replace the removed James Baker.

OK, so that’s a long and rather exhaustive summary of the key inside-players without going directly into the White House (Obama), CIA (Brennan) and ODNI (Clapper) roles.

Why is this pertinent to Robert Mueller and the August 2nd, 2017 request to Rod Rosenstein for a clarification/narrowing of investigative authority?

Because Mueller’s team, the small group of political officials and lawyers, know all of these people inside the DOJ apparatus.  These are their peers, their comrades in ideology… this is their crew and social circle.  The last thing their legal endeavors need is to be put in a position of intel or information about their brethren.

And for Team-Leader Robert Mueller, against the back-drop of this information; and with IG Horowitz giving him details about Page/Strzok messages; there’s a strong motive to ask for a signed letter from Rosenstein prior to continuing to investigate the President of the United States knowing President Donald Trump was also a target of this plan – and these details were going to surface at some point.

Lastly, and specifically about Rod Rosenstein, perhaps at a certain point in the spring and early summer 2017 he might have thought there was a substantive way for the assembly to carry out their plan.  Perhaps he even believed the popular leftist narrative and thought there might be something to these ‘Trump-Russia-Collusion’ claims.  Perhaps that’s why he directed the Muller investigative mandate in May 2017 to the exclusivity of President Donald Trump with no mention of any other campaign (Hillary Clinton) contact with Russian entities.

However, by August 2017 with full information coming from IG Horowitz about the likelihood of criminal conduct by FBI and DOJ officials; at the time Rosenstein wrote the more carefully detailed outline; he had to know the investigation into Trump was heading no-where.

Prequel – Specific Instructions From Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller Surface…

Overnight last night Special Counsel Robert Mueller released an attachment as part of a responsive court pleading.   The attachment was a previously unknown letter from Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller outlining the specific authority of his investigative appointment.  The letter from Rosenstein to Mueller is dated August 2nd, 2017.

The revelation of the content within the letter, in conjunction with the specific date of transmission to Robert Mueller, substantively changes my review of Rod Rosenstein’s 2017 motives and intents surrounding his authorization of the Special Counsel appointment.

Before getting to the Rosenstein letter to Mueller, it is important to review the origin of a specific fact that will be a key component in the next post.  To establish an important and needed time-frameSee Page 18, Item #3, second paragraph of Interim Congressional Report:

“The FBI’s conduct in relation to supplying the text messages between Strzok and Page only heightens concern about actions and intentions at the highest echelons of the FBI. The DOJ OIG obtained the initial batch of text messages on July 20, 2017.

Inspector General Horowitz gained the Page/Strzok text messages on July 20th, 2017.