The primary ‘spygate” architect appears on CBS with Margaret Brennan to share his reaction to the sentence of Paul Manafort for tax fraud. Andrew McCabe said he was ‘shocked’, ‘s.h.o.c.k.e.d‘, that Manafort was not given a life sentence.

.

[Transcript] MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re back with former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe. He is the author of a new book, The Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump. Good to have you here.

ANDREW MCCABE (Former Acting FBI Director/The Threat): Thanks so much for having me.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to start you off on some of the news of the week.

ANDREW MCCABE: Okay.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort was sentenced this week. He will also face sentencing in a DC court in the days to come. He was given forty-seven months, far less than what is the sentencing guideline of up to–

ANDREW MCCABE: That’s right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –twenty-plus years? Is the length of time he will serve matching the crimes he’s being accused of?

ANDREW MCCABE: Well, I was really surprised by the sentence he was given. I think it’s an incredibly lenient sentence in light not just of the– of the offenses he was convicted for but the additional offenses that he has pled guilty to in DC and the offenses he’s acknowledged, essentially, in the sentencing process in Virginia, that he is res– responsible for. So like most people I was shocked by how lenient the sentence was.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So it sounds like you’re predicting that the DC court may add to those forty-seven months?

ANDREW MCCABE: Well, there’s no question he’s going to get additional time from DC. I don’t think it’s probably the– the job of the DC courts to rectify a mistake or– or something that was done in another jurisdiction. I’m sure that Judge Jackson will approach her sentence with just keeping our eye on the facts of that case but there’s no doubt he’ll get additional time from that process.

MARGARET BRENNAN: In your book The Threat you write about some of the President’s public comments about Paul Manafort in particular and you frame it in one passage as possible witness tampering. You say you fear a judge will be influenced by some of the po– the President’s comments. Did you have any sense that that’s what happened here with Judge Ellis?

ANDREW MCCABE: I don’t. I don’t. But the point that I try to make in the book is that it’s to try to highlight how incredibly irresponsible and, indeed, corrosive statements like that from the chief executive are on the process and on the public’s perception of the fairness and the effectiveness of the process. When the President engages in messaging like people can’t help but step back and ask themselves that question that you just asked, did that have an impact on the process or on the result in this case. We don’t know the answer to that but it introduces a level of doubt and insecurity into a system that we all need to depend on– depend upon to being fair and– and free.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The charges that Paul Manafort faced were in regard to financial crimes. Do you believe that he was a Russian asset?

ANDREW MCCABE: I don’t know the answer to that. I think that Mister Manafort’s extensive involvement with Ukrainian and Russian actors is highly suspicious. I think that that’s something that we’ll wait to see what the Mueller team opines on with their– with their final conclusion.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Because the President seized on a comment made by Judge Ellis who seemed to be just pointing out that the Russian potential links were not actually part of the trial–

ANDREW MCCABE: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –that we have seen underway here. So you’re saying there the President’s comments were not actually accurate.

ANDREW MCCABE: Well, that– that shouldn’t be a surprise. I think that Judge Ellis was very careful to indicate that he was sentencing Mister Manafort for the conduct that was before him. And he– Mister Manafort was not charged in that case with being an agent for the government of Russia. So I think– I think Judge Ellis’s efforts to be careful and tailor his words are far from an exoneration of Mister Manafort on any other potential charges.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you as well about Michael Cohen, the President’s longtime attorney and we played in the open some of the– the tapes showing the changing stories here in regard to–

ANDREW MCCABE: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –whether there was discussion or not of a presidential pardon. Now it appears according to the President that it was discussed. As an investigator, what do you make of that?

ANDREW MCCABE: Very, very hard to sort through a basically he said– he said argument between two people who have very challenged credibility. At the end of the day, the strength of Michael Cohen’s testimony– potential testimony is derived not from what he’s telling us now but rather from whatever facts and corroborative evidence the prosecutors were able to glean from that treasure trove of documents and recordings and other things that we’ve heard so much about.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re saying, don’t take him at his word, take him by the evidence he presents.

ANDREW MCCABE: That’s right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I– I want to ask you as well because, of course, the President constantly mentions the credibility that you have–

ANDREW MCCABE: Sure.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –and calls that into question, specifically, on the texts between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, which is something the President often comments on. You were asked about this on CNN by Anderson Cooper and you said you had no recollection of the meeting that was referred to in one of the text exchange between those two individuals which mentioned an insurance policy in case Trump got elected. Do you know why you were personally mentioned in those texts?

ANDREW MCCABE: I don’t. Lisa Page, Pete Strzok, and I and many other members of that investigative team met in my office, in conference rooms around FBI headquarters all the time. Right? So it was a– it was a ve– intensive investigation that required a lot of attention and a lot of involvement. So I can’t sit here and tell you years later the circumstances of exactly that instance that they seem to be referring to in that text. I also wasn’t a participant in that text, so I can’t add too much more to your understanding of it. I know that Peter has described in his own congressional testimony what he was referring to and I take him at his word for that description.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Because the– the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Lindsey Graham, has been on this program, specifically, referred to those texts and said that it is proof that you along with Strzok and Page showed political bias and a political agenda. And that’s why he wants to call you before the committee to ask– to answer some questions. So one of the other texts there was a quote that said, “We need to open the case we’ve been waiting on now while Andy is acting.” You, while you were acting FBI director. Do you know what case this is? Why would it matter that you were in that acting role?

ANDREW MCCABE: Well, again, I– I can’t tell you what Lisa and Pete were referring to in their private texts. I think I’ve been very clear publicly about how the investigators felt about the work that we needed to do–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Mm-Hm.

ANDREW MCCABE: –in May of 2017. After Director Comey was fired, they made a recommendation to me that we open cases. I acted on that recommendation. I was feeling– I felt very strongly at that time that I needed to make those decisions quickly–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Mm-Hm.

ANDREW MCCABE: –because I anticipated I would not be in the acting role for very long and I didn’t know who would be coming in behind me or how they would handle the ongoing investigation that we thought was important to conclude.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Thank you very much–

ANDREW MCCABE: Sure.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Mister McCabe.

We’ll be back in a moment for some Republican reaction.

[Transcript Link]

NBC News penned an article about the unorthodox release of DOJ official Bruce Ohr’s transcript.  Within the article NBC notes current DOJ officials responded to the congressional request for release by sending them an approved “redacted version”:

(NBC) […]  The transcripts of interviews with Ohr and other witnesses before the joint committee investigation were sent to the Justice Department last December to be vetted for public release at the request of the outgoing GOP chairmen, Bob Goodlatte from the Judiciary Committee and Trey Gowdy from the Oversight Committee.

The Justice Department returned the Ohr transcript to the committee this week with redactions. But Collins said he was releasing a copy without those edits because the changes sought by the department did not relate to classified information or sensitive personal data. By releasing the transcript on the House floor, Collins would be protected under what is known as the Speech and Debate Clause from any reprimand. (read more)

Having read the Ohr transcript (also provided below), there didn’t appear to be any national security interests, sources or methods, beyond investigative embarrassment for DOJ and FBI, simply because of the sham of it all.

What parts did the current DOJ redact, and what would have been their justification? What did the current DOJ attempt to hide? …Maybe Representative Doug Collins could provide the redacted version, so we can find out.  Curiouser, and curiouser…

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/401416842/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-AyCp2wgYEeayOna9Vixa

.

Two backstory aspects frame this discussion.

♦First, Nancy Pelosi specifically set up the House committee rules to: (1) drop any committee notification for the minority; (2) drop any need for committee participation by the minority.  What this first point highlights is the scale of pre-planning from 2018 (last year), for this impeachment scheme.

♦Second, the planning of Cohen as the first step in an impeachment process was entirely predictable. [SEE HERE]  On a positive note, Jim Jordan appears to know the scheme.

As CTH has outlined since last year, the use of Michael Cohen as the cornerstone of  heavily scripted and pre-planned testimony -toward their organized impeachment efforts- is part of a staged and coordinated strategy.  Nothing is organic; everything is planned; this is simply what the Democrats do every single time.  They use the same playbook.

Adding further evidence toward this insufferable scheme, reports are now surfacing that HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff dispatched his staff members to coach Michael Cohen on his testimony on four occasions (in New York), prior to his congressional appearance, totaling more than 10 hours.  Again, everything is rehearsed and scripted.

These latest developments explain why the Cohen testimony was delayed.  Political democrat operatives, working with Cohen’s handler Lanny Davis, worked through a training and coaching process for maximum effect.  This coordinated process is also why Cohen was given a deferment to the beginning of his prison sentence.  None of this should be a surprise to anyone who has followed the predictable ‘Tripwires‘ as outlined.

WASHINGTON DC – President Trump’s former personal attorney Michael Cohen told House investigators this week that staff for Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., traveled to New York at least four times to meet with him for over 10 hours immediately before last month’s high-profile public testimony, according to two sources familiar with the matter — as Republicans question whether the meetings amounted to coaching a witness.

[…]  Republicans have raised concerns with the sessions, with Ohio Rep. Mike Turner sending a letter to Cohen’s team on Wednesday demanding answers.

Turner specifically asked for confirmation of Cohen’s contacts, if any, “with Democratic Members or Democratic staff of SSCI [Senate Select Committee on Intelligence], COR [House Committee on Oversight and Reform], or HPSCI [House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence] prior to his appearances before House and Senate committees last week” — as well as the lengths of such contacts, their locations and who exactly was involved.

“These questions are important for the public to understand whether or not they were watching witness testimony, a public hearing, or well-rehearsed theater,” he wrote.

During last month’s seven-hour public hearing before the House Oversight Committee, Cohen hesitantly acknowledged, under questioning from Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan, that he had spoken with Schiff “about topics that were going to be raised at the upcoming hearing.”  (read more)

.

All of this is carefully designed. None of this is organic. All of the participants have networked contacts, and media, acting as intermediaries (like Lawfare) to provide arms-length plausible deniability to the larger political scheme.

These plans and schemes are all professional Democrats spend time thinking and talking about. This is what they do. This is all they do. This is their purpose in life; nothing else matters.

The structural impeachment schedule will ultimately lead to House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler.  Professional political Democrats would not be using “impeachment” in the constitutional sense of the process (high crimes and misdemeanors); but rather weaponizing the process –as a tool itself– to: •target the executive office; •diminish the presidency (“isolate”/”marginalize”, Alinsky rules); •and position themselves for 2020.

It is good to see Jim Jordan and Mike Turner beginning to put the sunlight on the corrupt Democrat operation.  This is how the Democrats can be nullified; expose the scheme.

The best defense is a good offense.

The republicans might be in the minority position but they have a distinct advantage.  We have the opposition’s playbook in front of us…. we know what they are going to do; we know what the sequence of plays is; and we know generally the timeline they will be using…

That’s valuable information.

Team MAGA can easily crush this.  Just use their same playbook against them:

Tripwire Reference Information:

• Predicting the severity of the Democrat House ‘resistance‘ (Nov ’18)
• Sequencing the Resistance Approach. (December ’18 Predictions)
• Speaker Nancy Pelosi New Rules.
• Outline of how Horowitz is currently handicapped.
• FBI refuses to allow Witness Trascript Releases.
• Mueller Grand Jury term extended.
• Jordan, Collins and Meadows try to expose the scheme.
• Deputy AG Rosenstein outlines Mueller Report Timing.
• Lisa Page Leaked Transcripts outline former FBI plans
• Michael Cohen scheduled as expected.
• Why Pelosi/Schumer don’t want William Barr report.
• Chairman Nadler sends demand letter to AAG Matt Whitaker
• Schiff and Cummings organize/coordinate witness lists.
• Chairman Nadler delivers ridiculous witness list.

Judicial Watch has received documents from a previous FOIA request to the DOJ which highlight the extent of the communication between DOJ official Bruce Ohr and the FBI.

While there was prior knowledge of the role of Ohr as an FBI intermediary between Fusion-GPS, Chris Steele and the FBI during the original counterintelligence investigation, the new documents show Ohr continued in his role well into Mueller’s appointment.

In essence, after the FBI claimed to have broken off formal use of Chris Steele; and long after Robert Mueller took over the investigation; Ohr remained an intermediary between Chris Steele and Robert Mueller’s special counsel team.

Obviously this begs the question: if the special counsel was simply investigating the truth of the dossier, why would Robert Mueller want/need an intermediary as opposed to directly being in contact with, and questioning, the dossier author directly?

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 339 pagesof heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Justice which reveal that former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr remained in regular contact with former British spy and Fusion GPS contractor Christopher Steele after Steele was terminated by the FBI in November 2016 for revealing to the media his position as an FBI confidential informant.

The records show that Ohr served as a go-between for Steele by passing along information to “his colleagues” on matters relating to Steele’s activities. Ohr also set up meetings with Steele, regularly talked to him on the telephone and provided him assistance in dealing with situations Steele was confronting with the media.

[…]  The documents also show that Nellie Ohr sent numerous emails and reports to Bruce Ohr and other Justice Department officials on Russia issues.

“These smoking gun documents show that Christopher Steele, a Hillary Clinton operative and anti-Trump foreign national, secretly worked hand-in-glove with the Justice Department on its illicit targeting of President Trump,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

“These documents leave no doubt that for more than a year after the FBI fired Christopher Steele for leaking, and for some 10 months after Donald Trump was sworn in as president, Bruce Ohr continued to act as a go-between for Steele with the FBI and Justice Department. The anti-Trump Russia investigation, now run by Robert Mueller, has been thoroughly compromised by this insider corruption.”  (read more)

Tom Fitton’s likely accurate (highlighted) statement above; showcasing a compromised intent;  would explain why Mueller’s team would need an intermediary.

Nellie Ohr and Chris Steele were the authors of the Clinton-financed dossier.  The dossier was the primary evidence for the entire corrupt investigative enterprise.  The dossier is the lynch-pin of evidence that validated the Title-1 FISA warrant used against Carter Page and all campaign officials therein.

As a direct result of the origination, Mueller’s later mandate from Rosenstein is based on that dossier. As a result, inside that dynamic there is a motive for Mueller’s team to stay away from discovering anything that might invalidate the dossier if they wanted to: (a) continue the appearance of legality for the prior exploitation; and (b) continue extending the investigation that is dependent on the dossier.

If things went sideways, direct contact with the central witness and dossier author removes plausible deniability.  Indirect contact, via an intermediary (Bruce Ohr), allows retention of plausible deniability and continuance of dossier use.

The document pdf file is here.  CTH is reviewing the information overnight tonight.

ADD: This is the same reason why Christopher Steele and Glenn Simpson are not on the witness list of people and entities announced by House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler.

Judge TS Ellis sentenced former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort to 47 months in prison for tax evasion and bank fraud.  The sentence is considerably less than federal prosecutors had sought. The judge said he believed the recommended sentence of 19-24 years would be “excessive”.

(Via Associated Press) 6:59pm EST –  Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort has been sentenced to 47 months in prison for tax and bank fraud related to his work advising Ukrainian politicians.

Judge T.S. Ellis III imposed the sentence Thursday, capping the only jury trial following indictments stemming from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

A jury last year convicted Manafort on eight counts, concluding that he hid from the Internal Revenue Service millions of dollars he earned from his work in Ukraine. (link

It does not appear accidental that each time Justin from Canada starts finding himself in trouble, serious trouble; the same person happens to show up.   In June 2017, Justin was being challenged with a new NAFTA trade agreement… and former President Obama showed up while delivering a speech to the Board of Trade in Montreal.

Fast forward to today…  March 2019 – the Canadian economy has halted; Justin from Canada is embroiled in a growing bribery, corruption and obstruction of justice scandal around SNC-Lavin; and immediately after he loses two cabinet ministers… former President Obama shows up to deliver a speech to the Board of Trade in Vancouver:

During a question and answer session with Vancouver Board of Trade President Iain Black at the Vancouver Convention Centre in Canada, Obama went into a diatribe about the dangers of rising populism amid national politics. [LINK]

Serendipitous domestic timing for an Obama visit, as the ideological political-wagons are circling to defend Justin from Canada.

Coincidentally, nudge-nudge/wink-wink/say-no-more… say no more… after a coaching/not-coaching session, Justin from Canada has agreed to a heavily controlled press conference on the obstruction scandal tomorrow at 8:00am.

OTTAWA (Reuters) – A former top aide to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau denied on Wednesday inappropriately pressuring a Cabinet member to help a major company as Trudeau planned to address a scandal that is threatening his prospects in an October election.

Allegations that Gerald Butts, who resigned last month as Trudeau’s principal private secretary, and other officials tried to help construction company SNC-Lavalin Group Inc avoid a corruption trial are fueling the crisis that has cost the Liberal government two senior Cabinet ministers.

Some nervous Liberal lawmakers complain Trudeau’s office has taken too long to respond to a scandal that deepened last week when former Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould said she and her staff had been subjected to persistent pressure.

Trudeau will take questions about the matter at an 8 a.m. (1300 GMT) news conference in Ottawa on Thursday.  “He will speak directly to the issues,” spokeswoman Eleanore Catenaro said, giving no details of what Trudeau might say.

Butts told the House of Commons justice committee he had one short conversation on Dec. 5 with Wilson-Raybould about SNC-Lavalin.

“I did not and I do not see how our brief discussion on that file constituted pressure of any kind,” Butts said. (read more)

Curiouser, and curiouser….

CTH would be remiss if we did not note the prior timing.

Immediately following Obama’s 2017 meeting with Justin from Canada (pictured above), the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland began making NAFTA demands for “gender equity” and a domestic trade position allowing Canada to continue their prior arrangements with China for imported component goods.

Three months later U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer finally had enough.  The U.S. broke off trilateral negotiations with Canada and started the process for creating the USMCA through bilateral talks with Mexico.  The 2018 success therein obviously frustrated the ideological Wall Street handlers behind both Justin and Barack.

The global-ideological money behind Obama is the same global-ideological money behind Trudeau.  Now external to the political reigns of power, Obama is diminished to the role of messenger.  Obviously Justin is in trouble. The controller’s message is to protect their investments…