Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte Discusses Fraudulent/Misleading FISA Application…

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte is deeply connected to the investigation on the specifics of the FISA abuse.  The House Judiciary Committee has primary oversight over the FISA Court and the use therein by the DOJ.   Additionally, Bob Goodlatte and FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer have exchanged letters, and inquiries, relating to the FISA application against U.S. Person Carter Page.  We now know Collyer was the original FISC judge who approved the sketchy and misrepresented FISA application.

Earlier today Goodlatte joined Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures to discuss the Carter Page FISA Warrant, all it’s redactions, and plans to proceed. Additionally Chairman Goodlatte discusses John Brennan, James Comey, and Loretta Lynch being sought for questioning on their actions during the 2016 Presidential Election; as well as compliance responses from Peter Strzok, Rod Rosenstein and Lisa Page.

The current DOJ and FBI elements of the intelligence community are only slightly less corrupt internally than they were prior to the Trump inauguration. Institutionally they are still full of corrupt individuals; and administratively they are managed by people concerned about retaining/protecting the institutions – not eliminating the corruption. In our ongoing opinion this institutional emphasis is misplaced and misguided at best, and complicit at worst; likely more the latter.

Alan Dershowitz Discusses Fraudulent FISA Application…

Please permit my indulgence to stand alone and state an entirely different context:

Despite the popular and repeated presentation, the FISA application release was not the result of a FOIA lawsuit; rather, the existence of a FOIA lawsuit provided the opportunity for the release of FISC documents.

Now, here’s uncomfy Alan Dershowitz:


Be careful what you wish for Mr. Dershowitz, you might not like where it ends.

Thank You John Brennan, Sally Yates, James Comey and Ash Carter….

Because WITHOUT THIS we would never have THIS:

And Thank You Dan Coats, yet again….

Despite our frustration, things are progressing.

[…]  in a rather unusual way, an elevated urgency in attack formation by the Scheme Team; their UniParty allies in the DC swamp; and their media advocates writ large; might end up pushing Trump toward a position where he decides to unleash the atomic sledgehammer of truth and declassify material that will finally outline the plot publicly.

One thing is sure, Trump won’t quit the fight; I’m not sure they realize that… yet.  So in an odd way, and specifically because there’s an abundant amount of material available for declassification that can highlight the fraud, I find myself happy to see the increased vitriol.   Example: Think about what would happen if Trump took away the redactions from the April 2017 FISA Court Order/Ruling on the 2015/2016 FISA abuse.

As President Trump noted in his interview with Maria Bartiromo recently, his ‘advisers’ have all recommended he stay away from the ongoing congressional battles against current FBI and DOJ officials.   The one thing that can change the geography of that dynamic is if the schemers (being protected by the career officials) begin taking ground.

One thing is sure, amid the timely coordination between Team Mueller and the former officials the desperation is more visible.  And when an increased desperation is visible, that generally means there’s something closer to the surface that needs to be hidden.  (link)


Andrew McCarthy Discusses The Stunningly Scant and Manipulated FISA Application….

Andrew McCarthy appears on Fox weekend to discuss the released FISA Court application used to obtain and conduct Title-1 active surveillance on U.S. Person Carter Page.

McCarthy’s response is worth watching because he only recently (May) red-pilled himself and realized how corrupt the DOJ and FBI had actually become.  Prior to May of this year he was defending/reconciling every new detail to the benefit of DOJ/FBI.


A Review of the DOJ/FBI FISA Application Release…

Having read, re-read and re-re-read, the recent FISA application release, here’s my take at both the 30,000 ft and granular level.

First, the elevated review is actually more interesting than the granular, which is remarkably odd considering how far we have traveled with this story.

Why publicly release the FISA application?  After all, even with the voluminous redactions, it is very unusual and it would have been exceptionally easy to deny any FOIA request under the auspices of national security.  To highlight this question, consider how stunned Fran Townsend was at the release: “Having run The Justice Dept office responsible for #FISA The release of these documents is irresponsible & will irreversibly weaken counterintelligence & Counterterrorism investigations going forward.

Here is where a similar, I would say parallel, release will be overlooked.  Remember, it was April 2017 when ODNI Dan Coats released the 99-page FISA Court ruling/opinion on the historic 2015/2016 FISA abuse by the FBI and DOJ-NSD.  That release, like this one, while also heavily redacted, seemed out-of-custom for the intelligence apparatus.  Coincidentally FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer is a central figure in both releases.

In the 2017 FISC abuse opinion release, Judge Collyer wrote the ruling.  In this 2018 FISA application release, Judge Collyer was the authorizing FISC authority granting the Title-1 search warrant.  In an odd way, there’s a particular appearance of connectivity here.  For those who are unfamiliar, FISA material is not subject to FOIA; everything connected to FISA and the FISC is considered “classified” at the origination. [Remember that.]

You see, it was July 17th (a few days ago) when the Comey, Brennan, Yates, Carter criticisms were on full boil (due to the Trump/Putin presser), when I began to wonder when DNI Coats would reach the point –AGAIN– of saying ‘enough is enough’?  My suspicions were that something was soon to happen… because the ridiculousness of it all was nearing the apex.  Methinks this FISA release is in line with that general disposition.

Anyone who thinks this FISA application release is not a big deal has not followed the details, and does not comprehend what is attested to within the FISA application.  But that’s in the granular…. for now, let’s stick to the 30,000 ft review.

The overall FISA application is ridiculously short on substance, and generally is a long way from providing the evidence needed for Title-1 surveillance authority over a U.S. person.  In fact, the FISA application is very sloppy… almost as if it wasn’t a priority to have a solid and defensible document.  I think there’s a simple reason for that.

After all, the DOJ and FBI never thought anyone would ever be looking at this issue; they thought Hillary Clinton was going to win. To quote the disposition of FBI Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”  Key word: “unlikely“, they never contemplated -until later- the full scope of justification that would be needed…. they were setting up something no-one really thought would need to be utilized…. all of the legal apoplexy and ass-covering came in hindsight.

So when we review the FISA application, it is worth reminding yourself this was a tool, a temporary means to an end, they never thought they would actually need…. so they didn’t spend a great deal of time hammering out the finer points.  The political surveillance was useful, but it was likely never to be known how it was utilized.  Ms. Lisa Page was focused on empowering Hillary Clinton, stupid -albeit useful and obnoxiously arrogant- Pete was in charge of the less-than and likely unneeded insurance.

We begin to get increasingly granular now:



Context:  The current DOJ and FBI elements of the intelligence community are only slightly less corrupt internally than they were prior to the Trump inauguration.  Institutionally they are still full of corrupt individuals; and administratively they are managed by people concerned about retaining the institutions – not eliminating the corruption.  In our ongoing opinion this institutional emphasis is misplaced and misguided at best, and complicit at worst; likely more the latter.

This context frames the very first identifiable issue with the release: why redact the dates?  There appears to be a purposeful set of date redactions in this release.  There is no “sources or methods” reason to redact the dates…. which leads to the second issue: why release a March 17, 2017, copy [see FISC Clerk stamp] of the original October 2016 FISA application material (the only date not redacted):

♦Why did the FISC send the DOJ a copy of the FISA application in March 2017?  This copy was not sent to file a renewal, the first renewal was in January 2017.   So why is the release using a March 17th issued copy from the FISC, to present the original October 2016 application?   Secondly, why are the filing dates for the next three sets of renewal documents all redacted?  [There is a purpose here…. CTH has suspicions]

♦Haphazard/Conflicting construct.  For this first take I defer to Mr. Piddles eloquence:

First, page #2. They say outright: “The target of this application [Page] IS an agent of a foreign power”. Emphasis mine.

Second, page #4. They spell out their definition of a “foreign agent” — basically, somebody who KNOWINGLY engages in clandestine intelligence activities for a foreign power, or who KNOWINGLY conspires with others to do the same.

Then in the very next paragraph they say: “This application targets Carter Page. [According to page #2, a known foreign agent] The FBI believes Page has been the subject of TARGETED RECRUITMENT by the Russian Government …”. As always, emphasis mine.

How the F*CK can Page be a “foreign agent” who KNOWINGLY engaged in activities FOR A FOREIGN POWER, but at the same time be a “target for recruitment” by THE SAME FOREIGN POWER??????

He’s either RECRUITED. Or he’s NOT RECRUITED. He can’t be both. Duh.

WTF? Or maybe all this comes down to what the meaning of the word “is” is. As in Carter Page IS an agent of a foreign power.

A very righteous opinion. Though remember: (1) this was part of the insurance policy aspect the DOJ/FBI never fathomed they would have to justify in detail; and (2) FISA stuff is classified, the DOJ/FBI never thought it would see the light of day.

Remember also, oddly, and damned sure not coincidentally, Carter Page was an FBI asset in March of 2016…. and yet somehow by October the same year he was a foreign agent, acting on behalf of mother Russia, and deserving of a FISA Title-1 Surveillance Warrant to ensure every second of every move was tracked and monitored as if he was an activated terrorist en-route to the detonation site:

(Full Memo pdf)

In 2013 the U.S. Department of Justice, Southern District of New York, announced an indictment against a Russian Operative Evgeny Buryakov.  LINK HERE  In March of 2016 Buryakov pleaded GUILTY: Carter Page was an FBI cooperating asset in 2013, and remained the primary FBI witness through May of 2016 throughout the duration of the Buryakov case.

If Carter Page was an FBI asset and witness, responsible for the bust of a high level Russian agent in 2013, and remained so throughout the court case UP TO May of 2016, how the f**k it is possible that on October 21st, 2016, Carter Page is put under a FISA Title-1 surveillance warrant as an alleged Russian agent?

Conclusion:  He wasn’t.

The DOJ National Security Division and the FBI Counterintelligence Division, knew he wasn’t a Russian agent.  The DOJ-NSD and FBI  flat-out LIED to the FISA court.

Now, go back to the March 2016 DOJ Press Release of the guilty pleading for Evgeny Buryakov, announced from the New York office:

…”Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and John P. Carlin, Assistant Attorney General for National Security, announced”…

Because “FISA Title-I” surveillance authority against a U.S. citizen is so serious (the U.S. government is essentially calling the target a spy), only a few people are authorized to even apply for such surveillance warrants.

One of the four people authorized to make such a filing is the Asst. Attorney General who is head of the National Security Division of the DOJ.  At the time that person was John P Carlin.  The same John P Carlin who worked with the FBI counterintelligence unit, conscripted Carter Page as an FBI asset/witness, gained a guilty plea, then turned around six months later accuses their star witness of being a Russian Spy?

Think about this?

Apply common sense.

Why?  Likely because the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) and FBI Counterintelligence needed to find a legal way to spy on the Trump campaign. The 2016 FISA Title 1 surveillance of former FBI employee Carter Page became that legal way. [“The Insurance Policy”]

In October of 2016, at approximately the same time the DOJ was making the FISA Court filing against Page, and successfully gaining the surveillance warrant, Asst. Attorney General  John P Carlin resigned as head of the DOJ-NSD.    –SEE HERE–  Did Carlin resign in protest? or, did Carlin resign knowing he too had served a larger purpose?

Occam’s Razor: The FISA Title I surveillance authority over Carter Page was cover, most likely retroactive cover, for the DOJ and FBI conducting surveillance on the Trump campaign.  Previous to the October 21st, 2016, FISA Warrant the FBI was limited to using illegal searches of FISA(702)(16)(17) FBI and NSA databases {see here}; and according to the New York Times: “National Security Letters”.

National Security Letters are a type of administrative subpoena designed to allow the FBI to access the records of people suspected of being foreign agents. Section 505 of the Patriot Act expanded the FBI’s ability to use these subpoenas: FBI agents now only have to state that the information sought is “relevant” to a national security investigation in order to obtain sensitive financial, communications and other personal records. The letters are issued by FBI field offices and are not subject to judicial oversight. Recipients of these letters are under a gag order. (link)

The DOJ-National Security Division and FBI Counterintelligence Unit didn’t care about Carter Page because to them he was a useful tool.  It wasn’t Page they needed, per se’, they just needed someone, anyone, who had contact with the Trump campaign that they could apply the label “foreign agent” upon.  After all, it’s only a damn insurance policy etc.

♦ OK, for the next part I’m going to quote Ristvan (and expand):

Read thru the key parts quickly. Several notable facts.
•P. 2 Nunes is correct, the initiating ‘info’ came from State.
•P. 5 The ‘instigator’ was Clapper.
•P. 8. Timing onset suspicions confirmed. The ‘surveillance’ started 3/16, NOT with the official opening of ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ on 7/31/16.
•P. 53 ‘verified in accordance with FBI 4/5/2001 policy.’ NOT. Both Comey and McCabe testified under oath to congress otherwise.
•Pp. 63 and 65. Attested to by Comey and Yates. Both in violation of 18USC1018, felonious false attestation by federal officials.

The heavy redactions do NOT obscure the basic illegality of this FISA application. A BIG DEAL.

Ristvan did a great job boiling down the crux of the issue, and outlining the most damaging aspects.

♦ Page #2: The initiating information came from the U.S. State Dept:

♦ Page #5: The instigator was ODNI James Clapper:

The funny thing is, James Clapper didn’t even know he was in the FISA application…. and you know what,… I believe him.  Why? Because he’s a complete doofus and the people pulling off this FISA fraud/scheme wouldn’t want him to actually be a part of it.  Secondly, Clapper published this in January, 2017:


♦ Page #8  The FISA application shows ‘surveillance’ started March 2016, referencing a meeting with George Papadopoulos -sourced from Christopher Steele- NOT with the official opening of ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ on 7/31/16.

Again, sloppy in hindsight to use Christopher Steele and Stephan Halper for these tenuous at best justifications, but they never anticipated having to justify any of this.

♦ Page #53 ‘verified in accordance with FBI 4/5/2001 policy.’

No, actually, the FBI did not review this verified application for accuracy.  Quite the contrary: Both James Comey and Andrew McCabe testified under oath to congress the content of the Steele Dossier, Chris Steele, FBI source #1, was never verified for accuracy.

They might have made this affirmation on the application; but in answering questions about the dossier that underpins the application they stated exactly the opposite.

♦ Pages #63 and #65.  This FISA application is attested to by FBI Director James Comey and Asst Attorney General Sally Yates.  Both swear on the authenticity of the information  in violation of 18USC1018, felonious false attestation by federal officials.

•On page #15 they attest the FBI is unaware of any derogatory information about Source #1 Christopher Steele.  However, they knew when they filed this application that Chris Steele was shopping the information to the media and talking to Fusion GPS, his employer, and to media outlets.

•The FBI knew the Clinton Campaign was paying for the dossier yet they never informed the court of the political motive behind Christopher Steele.

•The FBI knew they were using media articles (page 21, 22, 24) that were entirely the outcome of their own leaks to the media.  On page #23 the FBI correctly states their opinion that Chris Steele was *not* the source of one of the articles; however, they only knew that because the FBI *was* the source of the article. They cited their own leaks as confirmation for the original application.

There is one original application in October of 2016, and three subsequent renewals (Jan, April, June, 2017).  Each is valid for 90 days.  Curiously the June 2017 renewal was filed a month earlier than needed.  This is the one signed by Rod Rosenstein.  Why the rush?

Additionally, other than a February 2017 letter to the DOJ by Carter Page about Hillary Clinton, there is nothing new in the three follow-ups which would legally validate any reason to renew or continue the intrusive surveillance.

We suspect the final renewal (Rosenstein/McCabe) a month early was due to the IG conducting his investigation in the background and discovering the motives and text messages with Lisa Page and Peter Strzok.

It is likely Rosenstein/Mueller rushed to extend the FISA knowing bad news was inbound from the IG that might disrupt plans for the insurance policy.





Coins of the Siege of Masada


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; I tried to search to see if the Romans ever issued any coins to announce the victory over Masada. I did not find any mention of Masada and coins whatsoever. I assumed if anybody knew it must be you. Were there any coins to commemorate that event?



ANSWER: No. The battle for Masada was necessary politically. The Judaean War was already declared to be a victory with the destruction of the Temple and conquest of Jerusalem in 70AD. Masada fell three years later in 73AD. The Roman governor of Judaea, Lucius Flavius Silva, headed the Roman legion X Fretensis and laid siege to Masada. The Tenth Legion was created by Octavian in 41/40BC and was created during the Civil War at that point in time. The Tenth Legion was very distinguished for it was named after the Tenth Legion formed by Julius Caesar and its symbol was that of a bull which was the holy animal of the goddess Venus, which was supposed to be the goddess of the Julian clan. The Tenth Legion fought against Sextus Pompey but later it also fought with Octavian against Marc Antony and Cleopatra.

Flavius Silva wanted a truce. But there were factions in the Roman Senate that used Judaea as a political tool of power against the new emperor Vespasian (69-79AD) who had won the Civil War after Nero’s death. Like the press today who seem to be begging for war by constantly painting Russia as the enemy, the exact same process was taking place in Rome. This forced Vespasian into going after Masada. They were using the Jews as a sign of weakness just as CNN uses Russia against Trump today. It was the political opponents of Vespasian who forced him to deny a truce and to lay siege to Masada. The press in the USA also created the Spanish-American War. Today, we have CNN leading the charge to create World War III because their champion Hillary lost the election.

You will find Vespasian coins in all metals announcing the victory over Judaea in 70AD. There were no coins to proudly announce the victory over Masada three years later. The only coins you can attribute to the siege of Masada are bronze coins of the former Emperor Nero (54-68AD) counter-stamped with “X” which was Legion X that was stationed in Judaea during the conquest. These two coins counter-stamped “X” are quite rare. They obviously cannot be prior to Nero and the coins were not new when counter-stamped. Legion X Fretensis and V Macedonica were sent to Alexandria, Egypt in 66AD in preparation for an invasion of Ethiopia planned by Nero. However, both of these legions were diverted to Judaea to suppress a revolt that was beginning on a large scale. Following the death of Nero in 68AD, another civil war broke out. Vespasian was then compelled to go to Rome the following year where he seized power. His son, Titus finished the suppression of the revolt in Judaea. Legion X Fretensis remained in Judaea and completed the siege of Masada. Therefore, these coins counter-stamped “X” must be post-66AD and that places them in Judaea. Consequently, the only coins that we can attribute to the possible siege of Masada are those of Nero counter-stamped “X” for Legion X Fretensis.

I have been to Masada and I climbed it rather than taking the cable car. It sits at the base of the Dead Sea. By the time I reached the top, I looked like Moses. My hair was pure white filled with the salt that is carried by the wind over the Dead Sea. My hair was so thick, I could not even get your fingers in it at all.

BREAKING: DOJ Releases 412 Pg FISA Application Used Against U.S. Person Carter Page….

The U.S. Department of Justice and FBI have released the 412 page FISA application used to gain a Title I surveillance warrant against U.S. Person Carter Page in 2016 while he was working as a low-level unpaid adviser for the campaign of Donald Trump.  [The full pdf is available here – and embedded below]

The October 2016 application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to wiretap Mr. Page, along with several renewal applications — was released to The New York Times and several other news organizations that had filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits to obtain them.  [Link to source pdf here]

The application is heavily redacted, but there’s enough information available to seriously impact the prior narratives as written by the media.  As we review the content carefully, CTH will have much more on this in the coming hours/days.  However, here’s the FISA application – please add your comments on the content therein:



There is a ton of new information within this version of the application. More later…


Perspective Over the Madness – The Media are Just as Complicit In The DOJ Corruption and FISA Abuse…

We shared a discussion thread several months ago about how the media are enmeshed within the story of the DOJ and FBI corruption. The media engagements with the parties swirling around the FBI, DOJ and Clinton-Steele Dossier are so pervasive they cannot reasonably report on any aspect of the story without exposing their own duplicity.

Michael Isikoff highlighted that point in February when he admitted his reporting was being used by the DOJ and FBI to advance the political objective.  Additionally, FBI investigator Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page were shown in their text messages to be leaking stories from the Clinton Investigation, the Trump investigation and the Mueller investigation to journalists at Politico, The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post. –SEE HERE

FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was busted by the Inspector General for leaking stories to the media and then lying about it to INSD and IG investigators.  FBI Director James Comey admitted to leaking stories to the New York Times, and even hired his friend Andrew Richman (off-the-books), gave him access to FBI and NSA databases, and then leaked information to Richman along with another friend Benjamin Wittes at Lawfare blog.

Lest we forget, the IG report on how the FBI handled the Clinton investigation revealed that dozens of FBI officials were actually taking bribes from the media for information:

IG REPORT – We identified numerous FBI employees, at all levels of the organization and with no official reason to be in contact with the media, who were nevertheless in frequent contact with reporters. Attached to this report as Attachments E and F are two link charts that reflect the volume of communications that we identified between FBI employees and media representatives in April/May and October 2016. We have profound concerns about the volume and extent of unauthorized media contacts by FBI personnel that we have uncovered during our review.


[…] We do not believe the problem is with the FBI’s policy, which we found to be clear and unambiguous. Rather, we concluded that these leaks highlight the need to change what appears to be a cultural attitude among many in the organization.  (link to pdf – page Xii of executive summary)


This is an IG fact-based criticism of the institution of the FBI, not simply a few rogue officials within it.

But wait…. Perspective:

More recently it was revealed that Andrew Weissman, Robert Mueller’s #1 special counsel prosecutor, was coordinating investigative efforts with the full support of four AP reporters who were giving Weissman information to use in his court filings and search warrants.

Nuts; simply, well, nuts.

(Source Link – pdf Page #5)

Additionally, Christopher Steele has stated in U.K. court records the person in charge of the Clinton Campaign’s opposition research firm, Glenn Simpson from Fusion GPS, arranged and coordinated for Mr. Steele to talk to several journalists (CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Yahoo News and Mother Jones) while Mr. Steele was also the primary source of information for the FBI investigators (including Strzok and Page):

(Source – page #8)

Make sure you read that full response from Christopher Steele above to see the scope of the media engagements he was conducting.

As more evidence surfaces the relationship between journalists, Fusion-GPS, Chris Steele and the media’s DOJ/FBI sources begins blending together. The FBI was using media reports, which were based on Fusion-GPS pitches, to bolster its investigative documents to the FISA court.  It is an intelligence laundry operation:

According to the U.K records, Christopher Steele reports this September 2016 meeting with Isikoff was arranged by Glenn Simpson. According to Michael Isikoff on his February podcast, he met Christopher Steele at a Washington, D.C. hotel in Sept. 2016. They were joined by his “old friend” Glenn Simpson, the founder of opposition research firm Fusion GPS, who Isikoff now defines as a “private investigator.”

So Christopher Steele was meeting with journalists, the journalists were writing articles; the FBI was leaking to media and simultaneously citing those same articles as underlying evidence to support their counterintelligence investigations; and all of this was used to validate the investigative documents the FBI was receiving from Christopher Steele; who, along with the leaking FBI officials, was also the source of the media articles.

FUBAR! This is exponentially bonkers.

This is a circle of information, all coming from Glenn Simpson at Fusion GPS, who was the opposition research firm being financed by Hillary Clinton, along with FBI officials who were using their own strategic leaks to validate their own investigation.

Think about the scale of the reporting, and reporting on reporting, of anonymous leaks, false leaks, lies from “people with knowledge of the matter”, “government officials involved in the matter”, “people familiar with the matter”, “government sources” etc. all going in one unified and semi-coordinated direction – against the aggregate Trump administration.

Now, it actually gets even more convoluted.

Christopher Steele has sworn under oath that he met with multiple journalists (at least eight organizations) in September, mid-October, and late-October 2016: “at Fusion’s instruction“. (pdf page #7)

Overlay upon that sworn admission with what Glenn Simpson (Fusion-GPS) told the House Intelligence Committee while also under oath about his involvement in sharing information derived from Christopher Steele:

(Testimony – pdf link, page #147)

…”without my knowledge and against my wishes”?


FBI Director James Comey admits to leaking his ‘memos’ to the New York Times. FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was busted for leaking and lying about it.  FBI #2 Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Attorney Lisa Page are caught in their text messages leaking to Politico, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post.

…. AND the FBI is caught, in at least one FISA application, using Yahoo media reports provided by them AND their investigative source Christopher Steele to establish a basis for FISA “Title I” surveillance; the most intrusive and wide-open search and surveillance authority possible.

The Clinton Campaign is paying Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research against Donald Trump. In addition to Glenn Simpson pushing that opposition research into the media, Fusion GPS is also providing that opposition research –including information from contacts with media– directly to the FBI:

(pdf link – page #4)

… In addition to using the Fusion-GPS opposition research to underpin their counterintelligence investigation, the FBI then turn around and leak the same opposition research information to the media to create secondary support for their counterintelligence investigation.

Tell me again how the media can possibly write about this now?

The problem is not just corruption with the U.S. Justice System, the DOJ and the FBI; the problem is corruption within the media.

We’re talking about thousands of hours of media TV pundits, thousands more columns written, and almost every scintilla of it based on originating intelligence sources -from the larger intelligence system- that are now being exposed as duplicitous and conspiratorial in the scale of their malicious intent.

This larger story-line has traveled in one direction. The narrative has only traveled in one direction. Each thread converging on codependent trails for collective stories all going in one direction. One big engineered narrative endlessly pushed. Think about how far the collective media have traveled with this story over the past eighteen months?

Hell, twenty-something-year-old  “journalists” were so committed to the resistance narrative they were even sleeping with their sources to get any little engineering angle possible.

Now, over a period of several months, it has become increasingly obvious the collective journey, using all that expended effort, was going in the wrong direction.

The media have fully invested themselves in eighteen months of narrative distribution in only one direction. Not a single MSM entity has questioned their travel as a result of false leaks or false sources in the totality of time they have covered the DOJ and FBI story.

Nothing within their collective need to will-an-outcome will change the media’s proximity to facts when the truthful story behind the DOJ and FBI corruption is finally exposed. The media are so far away from the place where this story ends, they have no inherent capability to even begin to travel in the opposite direction, toward the truth.

The only way they could align with the truth is to admit that virtually every scintilla of their reportage over the past 18 months was inherently false or manipulated by the “sources” distributing the material for their reporting.

There’s not a single media outlet capable of doing that.

Think about a New York Times, CNN, New Yorker, Wall Street Journal, Mother Jones, Yahoo News or Washington Post journalist now having to write an article deconstructing a foundation of two-years worth of lies they participated in creating.

Do we really think such a catastrophic level of corrupted journalism could reconstitute into genuine reporting of fact-based information?



Peter Strzok Statements About Weiner/Abedin Laptop Conflict With DOJ Inspector General Claims About Weiner/Abedin Laptop…

Former DOJ/FBI Attorney Lisa Page testified to a closed joint-committee on July 13th and July 16th. Has anyone else noticed how democrats are not demanding a release of the Page transcript?

With the exceptional help of John Spiropoulos we investigate a conflict completely ignored by media and congress. Peter Strzok, the FBI’s lead Investigator in the Clinton email investigation, never intended to investigate the laptop before the election. The evidence, in his own words, is in the report by the Inspector General. In addition, the IG report includes a jaw dropping contradiction regarding the investigation of the laptop. Strozk says one thing; the FBI’s computer experts say another. It calls into question the entirety of the laptop investigation.  WATCH:


There is a great deal of inconsistent application of law surrounding the DOJ/FBI investigative authority during 2015 and 2016. There is also a great deal of fatigue surrounding discussion of those inconsistent applications. Contradictions, inconsistency and obtuse justifications are as rampant in our midst as the political narratives shaping them. Perhaps that’s by design.

Reading Chapter 11 of the IG Report reinforces an acceptance that not only is there a need for a special counsel, but there is a brutally obvious need for multiple special counsels; each given a specific carve-out investigation that comes directly from the content of the Inspector General report. This issue of the handling of the Weiner/Abedin laptop screams for a special counsel investigation on that facet alone. Why?

Well, consider this from page #388 (emphasis mine):

Midyear agents obtained a copy of the Weiner laptop from NYO immediately after the search warrant was signed on October 30.

The laptop was taken directly to Quantico where the FBI’s Operational Technology Division (OTD) began processing the laptop. The Lead Analyst told us that given the volume of emails on the laptop and the difficulty with de-duplicating the emails that “at least for the first few days, the scale of what we’re doing seem[ed] really, really big.”

Strzok told us that OTD was able “to do some amazing things” to “rapidly de-duplicate” the emails on the laptop, which significantly lowered the number of emails that the Midyear team would have to individually review. Strzok stated that only after that technological breakthrough did he begin to think it was “possible we might wrap up before the election.” (pg 388)

The key takeaway here is two-fold. First, the laptop is in the custody of the FBI; that’s important moving forward (I’ll explain later). Also, specifically important, FBI Agent Peter Strzok, the lead investigative authority in the Hillary Clinton MYE (Mid-Year-Exam), is explaining to the IG how they were able to process an exhaustive volume of emails (350,000) and Blackberry communications (344,000) in a few days; [Oct 30 to Nov 5]

Note: “OTD was able “to do some amazing things to rapidly de-duplicate” the emails on the laptop.

OK, you got that?

Now lets look at the very next page, #389 (again, emphasis mine):

[…] The FBI determined that Abedin forwarded two of the confirmed classified emails to Weiner. The FBI reviewed 6,827 emails that were either to or from Clinton and assessed 3,077 of those emails to be “potentially work-related.”

The FBI analysis of the review noted that “[b]ecause metadata was largely absent, the emails could not be completely, automatically de-duplicated or evaluated against prior emails recovered during the investigation” and therefore the FBI could not determine how many of the potentially work-related emails were duplicative of emails previously obtained in the Midyear investigation. (pg 389)

See the problem? See the contradiction?

Strzok is saying due to some amazing wizardry the FBI forensics team was able to de-duplicate the emails. However, FBI forensics is saying they were NOT able to de-duplicate the emails.

Both of these statements cannot be true. And therein lies the underlying evidence to support a belief the laptop content was never actually reviewed. But it gets worse, much worse….

To show how it’s FBI Agent Peter Strzok that is lying; go back to chapter #9 and re-read what the New York case agent was saying about the content of the laptop.

The New York FBI analysis supports the FBI forensic statement in that no de-duplication was possible because the metadata was not consistent. The New York FBI Weiner case agent ran into this metadata issue when using extraction software on the laptop.

CHAPTER 9: The case agent assigned to the Weiner investigation was certified as a Digital Extraction Technician and, as such, had the training and skills to extract digital evidence from electronic devices.

The case agent told the OIG that he began processing Weiner’s devices upon receipt on September 26. The case agent stated that he noticed “within hours” that there were “over 300,000 emails on the laptop.”

The case agent told us that on either the evening of September 26 or the morning of September 27, he noticed the software program on his workstation was having trouble processing the data on the laptop. (pg 274)

The New York Case Agent then describes how inconsistent metadata within the computer files for the emails and Blackberry communications, made it impossible for successful extraction. The FBI NY case agent and the Quantico FBI forensics agent agree on the metadata issue and the inability to use their software programs for extraction and layered comparison for the purposes of de-duplication.

Both NY and Quantico contradict the statement to the IG by FBI Agent Peter Strzok. However, that contradiction, while presented in a factual assertion by the IG, is entirely overlooked and never reconciled within the inspector general report. That irreconcilable statement also sheds more sunlight on the motives of Strzok.

Next up, there were only three FBI people undertaking the October Clinton email review. To learn who they are we jump back to Chapter #11, page #389.

The Midyear team flagged all potentially work-related emails encountered during the review process and compared those to emails that they had previously reviewed in other datasets. Any work-related emails that were unique, meaning that they did not appear in any other dataset, were individually reviewed by the Lead Analyst, [Peter] Strzok, and FBI Attorney 1 [Tashina Gauhar] for evidentiary value. (pg 389)

Pete Strzok, Tash Gauhar and the formerly unknown lead analyst we now know to be Sally Moyer. That’s it. Three people.

This is the crew that created the “wizardry” that FBI Director James Comey says allowed him to tell congress with confidence that 1,355,980 electronic files (pg 389), containing 350,000 emails and 344,000 Blackberry communications were reviewed between October 30th and the morning of November 6th, 2016.

Three people.

Pete, Tash, and Sally the lead analyst. Uh huh.


The Inspector General just presents the facts; that’s obviously what he did. Then it’s up to FBI and DOJ leadership to accept the facts, interpret them, and apply their meaning.

No bias?

But FBI is committed to bias training?


There is an actual hero in all of this though. It’s that unnamed FBI Case Agent in New York who wouldn’t drop the laptop issue and forced the FBI in DC to take action on the laptop. Even the IG points this out (chapter #9, page 331):

We found that what changed between September 29 and October 27 that finally prompted the FBI to take action was not new information about what was on the Weiner laptop but rather the inquiries from the SDNY prosecutors and then from the Department. The only thing of significance that had changed was the calendar and the fact that people outside of the FBI were inquiring about the status of the Weiner laptop. (pg 331)

Those SDNY prosecutors only called Main Justice in DC because the New York case agent went in to see them and said he wasn’t going to be the scape goat for a buried investigation (chapter #9, pg 303) “The case agent told us that he scheduled a meeting on October 19 with the two SDNY AUSAs assigned to the Weiner investigation because he felt like he had nowhere else to turn.” … “The AUSAs both told us that the case agent appeared to be very stressed and worried that somehow he would be blamed in the end if no action was taken.”

On October 20, 2016, the AUSAs met with their supervisors at SDNY and informed them of their conversation with the Weiner case agent. The AUSAs stated that they told their supervisors the substantive information reported by the case agent, the case agent’s concerns that no one at the FBI had expressed interest in this information, and their concern that the case agent was stressed out and might act out in some way. (pg 304)

Why would the New York Case Agent be worried?

Consider Page 274, footnote #165:

fn 165: No electronic record exists of the case agent’s initial review of the Weiner laptop. The case agent told us that at some point in mid-October 2016 the NYO ASAC instructed the case agent to wipe his work station. The case agent explained that the ASAC was concerned about the presence of potentially classified information on the case agent’s work station, which was not authorized to process classified information.

The case agent told us that he followed the ASAC’s instructions, but that this request concerned him because the audit trail of his initial processing of the laptop would no longer be available. The case agent clarified that none of the evidence on the Weiner laptop was impacted by this, explaining that the FBI retained the Weiner laptop and only the image that had been copied onto his work station was deleted. The ASAC recalled that the case agent “worked through the security department to address the concern” of classified information on an unclassified system. He told us that he did not recall how the issue was resolved.

Now watch embed tweet video:



  • There were only three people in the Mid-Year-Event team granted authority to physically do the Clinton email review.
  • They were: FBI Agent Peter Strzok, FBI Attorney-1 Tashina “Tash” Gauhar, and an Sally Moyer, the lead analyst.
  • FBI Agent Peter Strzok says they were able to cull the number of emails through the use of “some amazing things to rapidly de-duplicate” the emails.
  • The New York FBI case agent assigned to the Weiner investigation, a certified Digital Extraction Technician, as well as the FBI forensics team in Quantico say it was impossible to use the conflicted metadata to “de-duplicate” the emails.
  • Someone is lying.
  • FBI Director James Comey said his investigative unit used some form of “wizardry” to review the content of the Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner laptop.
  • The Inspector General makes no determination as to who is telling the truth; and never asked the question of whether an actual review of the laptop emails took place.
  • The FBI still has possession of the Abedin/Weiner laptop.




⇑ These Cannot Both Be True ⇓


The Media Complete Ignores Putin’s Request to Interrogate US Officials About Interfering in Russia

What is interesting about the Trump & Putin press conference is how the Western Media focuses on the claims of Russian interference in the US election and refuse to report any involvement of the New York Banks attempt to take over Russia by blackmailing Yeltsin. Putin says very clearly that Mueller can go to Russia and interrogate who he wants, provided that Russia is allowed to go to the US and interrogate those who were involved in Hermitage Capital including Bill Browder.


The entire subject of the Documentary film with additional footage is available on Amazon. This film on my case was all about the attempt to take over Russia by blackmailing Yeltsin and to stick in a puppet of the New York Bankers. The film was banned in the USA yet it has appeared on TV in Europe, Asia and even in Canada. Why did NetFlix refuse to show it? Because there was the entire question of Hermitage Capital which Safra controlled the majority and tried to get me to invest $10 billion. This is the entire center of Bill Browder’s political involvement behind Hermitage Capital for which he managed to get Congress to create the Maginsky Act to try to get his money back.

It is interesting how one-sided this election interference has been staged. Now we have Democrats demanding to interrogate Trump’s translator to see what he said privately. Perhaps it is time for Trump to take Putin at his word and let him interrogate Americans in the USA and Mueller to go to Russia and let it all come out once and for all. To produce the Forecaster, they had to have INSURANCE against libel and slander. Before Loyd’s of London would write the insurance for the film, documentary proof of ALL ALLEGATIONS had to be submitted. You cannot make a documentary film without the proof these days, yet it was banned in the USA