Michael Flynn’s defense counsel, Sidney Powell, calls-in to FBN for an interview to discuss the latest developments in the case against her client. Powell: “There will be more evidence forthcoming. We still have a lot more that they said they will disclose to us.”
Within the latest documents provided by a review from Missouri U.S. Attorney Jensen, it surfaces that Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and the small group were using a Microsoft instant messaging program known as Lync. This suggests there may be more documents forthcoming from alternate communication networks.
Devin Nunes appears for an interview with Lou Dobbs to discuss his perspective on the latest stunning revelations around the Flynn case. Nunes outlines the importance of looking at the big picture and also considering how the same FBI that was investigating Flynn was purposefully leaking to allies in the media.
Nunes is pretty fired-up in this interview about the scale of corruption the recently released documents highlight.
FARA was always the way the Obama Administration IC apparatus, writ large, would legally justify political surveillance. [FARA = FISA] Hence Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, knowing purpose of DOJ-NSD, who ran FARA/FISA operations, would not allow an inspector general.
This is why Flynn had to be removed at all costs.
Obama-era political surveillance was being done through the intelligence apparatus (including FBI contractors) since 2012; with FARA as a justification for FISA abuse when needed. Flynn’s mere existence in the administration would have exposed that background surveillance network.
This afternoon Judge Emmet Sullivan unsealed an additional 11-pages of documents showing more background information about how the FBI was targeting former National Security Advisor General Michael Flynn. [Court pdf Here] Also embedded below.
The release today is even more revealing than the handwritten notes released last night; and specifically President Obama’s “by the book” statement on January 5, 2017, takes on an entirely new light. They may not realize it yet, but this release implicates Obama.
(L-R) Peter Strzok, James Comey, President Obama, Andrew McCabe and Bill Priestap
Within the release we discover an “Electronic Communication” or “EC” from the Washington FBI field office recommending to close the FBI investigation of General Flynn on January 4, 2017, due to “no derogatory information.” However, FBI Agent Peter Strzok immediately responds to the FBI team [main headquarters] saying: “don’t do it yet’… and the plot unfolds.
There are FBI codenames within the release that need some explanation prior to review:
Crossfire Hurricane (CH) is the overall investigation that began in July 2016
Crossfire Typhoon (CT) is George Papadopoulos.
Crossfire Razor (CR) is Michael Flynn.
Cross Wind is still unknown. [Could be a person, or a subset of the case]
Let’s take a walk through the information starting with the FBI electronic communication.
First it is valuable to note three points from the first page:
“DOJSCO” – The Special Counsel Office had this information from the outset. That means everyone in/around the Mueller investigation already knew this information. That also means that Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein was aware of it.
Pay close attention to the dates. This EC was written on January 4, 2017. Dates are critical. When you compare the text messages and emails from Peter Strzok and other participants always refer to the dates to tell the big story.
Note the framework for the investigation itself was centered around Michael Flynn violating FARA (Foreign Agent Registration Act) laws based on a fraudulent premise of Flynn working for Russian interests. The FBI using FARA is a critical point. FARA was used as the primary justification by the DOJ and FBI for all political surveillance.
The FBI Washington Field Office says they are going to close the investigation of General Flynn because there is no derogatory information as a result of multiple investigative inquires:
The EC document then describes their work with Confidential Human Source (CHS) Stefan Halper. Interestingly, Halper lied to the FBI and told them he had attended an event with Michael Flynn in Moscow and was a direct eye-witness. “During the debriefing the CTH relayed an incident s/he witnessed”…. Halper never attended the Moscow event; he lied to the FBI.
The EC notes the FBI is closing this investigation. However, Peter Strzok goes bananas and immediately starts texting FBI officials to keep the investigation open….
Which leads to a 2:22pm message where Peter Strzok notes “7th floor involved”. That means FBI Director James Comey is now engaged on the issue.
James Comey being actively engaged is important. Previously Comey said he was unaware of what they were doing… Additionally this text and activity is January 4, 2017.
The very next day, January 5th, James Comey goes to the White House for a meeting with President Obama and Vice-President Biden.
January 5th is the White House meeting where National Security Advisor Susan Rice, FBI Director James Comey (Crossfire Hurricane), and Deputy AG Sally Yates (Flynn FARA) are talking to President Obama about the status of the Flynn FBI investigation and President Obama says “by the book”.
1/4/17 – FBI wants to close investigation.
1/4/17 – Peter Strzok says no wait… I have a plan.
1/4/17 – James Comey involved. “7th Floor Involved”
1/5/17 – James Comey goes to White House.
1/5/17 – President Obama says: OK, but make sure “by the book”. [Susan Rice Memo]
“President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book“.”
“The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would, “by the book.””
1/6/17 – James Comey briefs President-elect Trump in Trump Tower on the Steele Dossier. [Comey Memos]
1/6/17 – Christopher Steele deletes all files relating to his Trump Dossier.
It doesn’t take an investigative genius to see what took place here.
SIDEBAR on THIS ISSUE: This long forgotten letter from Susan Rice’s lawyer Kathryn Ruemmler (who was also the former White House Counsel to President Obama). Notice that in Ruemmler’s letter she specifically says the January 5th meeting was about Flynn:
[Feb 23, 2018] The memorandum to file drafted by Ambassador Rice memorialized an important national security discussion between President Obama and the FBI Director and the Deputy Attorney General. President Obama and his national security team were justifiably concerned about potential risks to the Nation’s security from sharing highly classified information about Russia with certain members of the Trump transition team, particularly Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
[…] While serving as National Security Advisor, Ambassador Rice was not briefed on the existence of any FBI investigation into allegations of collusion between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia, and she later learned of the fact of this investigation from Director Comey’s subsequent public testimony.
How could Ms. Susan Rice be aware of a “national security compromise”, “particularly surrounding Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn” after a “briefing by the FBI”, if she was “not briefed on the existence of an FBI investigation”? With all of this information, these stories are falling apart.
There is a lot breaking today and we will have MUCH more on breaking developments which includes a release today of the additional 11 pages of information to the Flynn defense team. The release, when put together with all previously released information, clearly and directly implicates President Obama in the Flynn operation.
In the interim, listen to President Trump remark on the current developments:
Jim Jordan appears on Fox News to discuss the unsealed documents released yesterday showing the FBI “small group” framing a case against former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.
Rep. Jordan rightly puts the recent release into context by asking why Robert Mueller and Chris Wray did not bring out this exculpatory information. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team knew Flynn was framed. Rod Rosenstein knew Flynn was framed. Chris Wray and Dana Boente knew Flynn was framed. Yet no-one did anything. WATCH:
Earlier this evening Fox Business News host Lou Dobbs interviewed Michael Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell about the status of the case. Great Interview:
Interesting timing all things considered…. Michael Flynn removed and replaced his prior legal defense counsel, Covington & Burling, after asserting their ineffective and legally conflicted representation. [NOTE: former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is a partner at Covington & Burling.] As a result of Sidney Powell taking over the Flynn defense, his prior counsel was supposed to turn over all client materials and evidence in the case.
After some recent jaw-dropping revelations in the case; which may include evidence highlighting how the FBI participated in framing Michael Flynn; and certainly contains evidence of an unethical prosecutorial agreement with the former defense counsel, to coerce a guilty plea by threatening to arrest Michael Flynn Jr; suddenly today Covington & Burling discover an additional 6,800 pages of evidence they conspicuously omitted.
The timing is very sketchy and Judge Sullivan does not appear amused. After receiving the supplemental notice of case material transfer (full pdf below) Judge Sullivan issues an order to the Covington law firm to re-re-review all of their case files and file a notice of compliance by Monday May 4th.
Judge Sullivan has been very favorable to the position of the justice department throughout the case, but it appears even he is starting to question all of these “unintentional” miscommunications and material coincidences that paint a very challenging picture for the prosecution to explain.
Here’s the filing from the Covington law firm where they attempt to explain their new discovery and why they failed to present this material over the past ten months.
Oh, whoopsie daisy…. There was a “miscommunication“.
.
Ms. Sidney Powell’s outlook on this case appears to be gaining momentum.
Lt. General Michael Flynn’s plea was based on: (1) a framing by the FBI; and (2) a threat against Michael Flynn Jr. if his father didn’t sign the plea.
If the reports are accurate it is very likely Judge Sullivan will allow the plea to be removed. If the documents are as strong as outlined the entire case could be dismissed.
Amid stunning new revelations and evidence in the case against Lt. General Michael Flynn, Sean Hannity invites Flynn’s legal counsel Sidney Powell on his show so she can listen to him talk about it.
But seriously… I’m not kidding… watch this bizarre interview. Sean Hannity asks Sidney Powell several times to talk about the case against Roger Stone. What the heck?
Instead of asking questions about the case and her court filings, Hannity goes on to talk about what his sources are telling him about the documents that Ms Powell filed. This is the most odd non-interview you might ever watch. Something is VERY wrong here.
Fox News host Tucker Carlson provided some additional insight into the Flynn documents that were filed with the court last Friday noting the potential for the documents to be unsealed tomorrow. According to an earlier report by Maria Bartiromo the documents relate to notes taken by former FBI legal counsel James Baker; and surround the events that encompassed the FBI interview of General Flynn in January 2017. WATCH:
.
In a supplement to the defense motion to dismiss [pdf here] we discover some of the evidence of prosecutorial misconduct turned over by the DOJ to the Flynn defense. Specifically Lt. General Michael Flynn’s plea was based on: (1) a framing by the FBI; and (2) a threat against Michael Flynn Jr. if his father didn’t sign the plea.
If the reports are accurate it is very likely Judge Sullivan will allow the plea to be removed. If the documents are as strong as outlined the entire case could be dismissed.
Because the exhibits had to be filed under seal, they are heavily redacted; however, Flynn’s defense counsel, Sidney Powell, has asked the court to release & unseal the full content of the exhibits so the world can see the coercion behind the corrupt plea agreement.
The Mueller prosecution team lead by Brandon Van Grack put the agreement and threat in writing, but they also made a deal with the former defense team to hide the terms in an effort to cover-up their misconduct. Coercion to force a plea is unethical and unlawful.
According to the latest court schedule the deadlines are noted below. Michael Flynn’s new motion to dismiss is filing #181; the documents filed under sealed are item #182:
It is possible for the #182 documents to be unsealed prior to any motions on their content. According to Tucker Carlson these documents may be unsealed tomorrow.
Apparently, the seal documents include notes taken by former FBI chief legal counsel James Baker the FBI meeting where agent Peter Strzok and agent Joseph Pientka interviewed National Security Advisor Michael Flynn at the White House.
According to Bartiromo James Baker’s notes are exculpatory in that they show the intent and purpose of the FBI interview was to frame Lt Gen. Flynn.
James Baker was removed from his position December 21, 2017, approximately three weeks after Flynn signed the plea agreement on November 30, 2017.
Baker’s removal from his position as FBI counsel was around the same time when SSCI Security Director James Wolfe (FISA leaker) was removed from his position at the Senate intelligence committee. James Baker remained in his position until he resigned from the FBI on May 4, 2018, right in the middle of what we know were FBI cover-up operations.
When James Baker resigned the James Wolfe indictment was hidden & sealed (since March ’18); the Julian Assange indictment was hidden and sealed (since March ’18); and two months later the FBI lied to the FISA court (July 12, 2018). {Go Deep}
.
One note of caution… There is another “James Baker” in the mix.
Col James Baker was the handler for CIA/FBI operative Stefan Halper. Col James Baker is likely the source of the original Flynn-Kislyak leaked transcript to the Washington Post.
Therefore a possibility exists the “Baker” notes or emails might pertain to Col James Baker, and not FBI Counsel James Baker. We’ll have to wait and see…
Former HPSCI Chairman, and current HPSCI ranking member, Devin Nunes appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss several matters of importance. One of the critical topics touched is the ongoing investigations of Obama era intelligence and political surveillance via the DOJ-NSD FBI, CIA, DNI and State Dept.
Representative Nunes hits the key point when he highlights current redactions and current decisions to classify ongoing investigative documents. It is critically important to accept this reality. There are current intelligence officers and career officials in place hiding material by labeling evidence as classified. A recent example was the December 9, 2019, inspector general report about the manipulation of FISA. [@2:30 to @3:00 of video]
Who is doing these redactions?
.
There is an ongoing cover-up operation with its origin going back to June, July and August in 2018 led by Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, AAG John C Demers, FBI Director Chris Wray and FBI chief legal counsel Dana Boente. That cover-up continues through today.
Start by reminding yourself of a series of documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 17, 2020. [SEE HERE] Within the release there is a rather alarming letter from the DOJ to the FISA Court dated July 2018. [Link to Letter]
After the FISA Court reviewed the December 9, 2019, inspector general report, the FISC ordered the DOJ-NSD to declassify and release documents related to the Carter Page FISA application. In January the FISA court ordered the DOJ and FBI to release certain materials making them public for the first time.
That FISA court order is what led to the DOJ submitting documents to the Senate Judiciary Committee. That court order is what led to the judiciary committee current document release. The current FISA court is forcing sunlight on the DOJ and FBI.
In the cover letter for this specific release to the Senate Judiciary and Senate Intelligence committees, the DOJ cites the January 7, 2020, FISA court order:
Keep in mind that prior to this release only the FISA court had seen this letter from the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD).
As we walk through the alarming content of this letter I think you’ll identify the motive behind the FISC order to release it.
First, the letter in question was sent by the DOJ-NSD to the FISA Court on July 12, 2018. It is critical to keep the date of the letter in mind as we review the content.
Aside from the date the important part of the first page is the motive for sending it. The DOJ is telling the court in July 2018: based on what they know the FISA application still contains “sufficient predication for the Court to have found probable cause” to approve the application. The DOJ is defending the Carter Page FISA application as still valid.
However, it is within the justification of the application that alarm bells are found. On page six the letter identifies the primary participants behind the FISA redactions:
As you can see: Christopher Steele is noted as “Source #1”. Glenn Simpson of Fusion-GPS is noted as “identified U.S. person” or “business associate”; and Perkins Coie is the “U.S-based law firm.”
Now things get very interesting.
On page #8 when discussing Christopher Steele’s sub-source, the DOJ notes the FBI found him to be truthful and cooperative.
This is an incredibly misleading statement to the FISA court because what the letter doesn’t say is that 18-months earlier the sub-source, also known in the IG report as the “primary sub-source”, informed the FBI that the material attributed to him in the dossier was essentially junk.
Let’s look at how the IG report frames the primary sub-source, and specifically notice the FBI contact and questioning took place in January 2017 (we now know that date to be January 12, 2017):
Those interviews with Steele’s primary sub-source took place in January, March and May of 2017; and clearly the sub-source debunked the content of the dossier itself.
Those interviews were 18-months, 16-months and 14-months ahead of the July 2018DOJ letter to the FISC. The DOJ-NSD says the sub-source was “truthful and cooperative” but the DOJ doesn’t tell the court the content of the truthfulness and cooperation. Why?
Keep in mind this letter to the court was written by AAG John Demers in July 2018. Jeff Sessions was Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein was Deputy AG; Christopher Wray was/is FBI Director, David Bowditch was/is Deputy, and Dana Boente was/is FBI chief-legal-counsel.
Why would the DOJ-NSD not be forthcoming with the FISA court about the primary sub-source? This level of disingenuous withholding of information speaks to an institutional motive.
By July 2018 the DOJ clearly knew the dossier was full of fabrications, yet they withheld that information from the court and said the predicate was still valid. Why?
It doesn’t take a deep-weeds-walker to identify the DOJ motive.
In July 2018 Robert Mueller’s investigation was at its apex. Bob Mueller is a “dear friend” of current AG Bill Barr.
This letter justifying the FISA application and claiming the current information would still be a valid predicate therein, speaks to the 2018 DOJ needing to retain the validity of the FISA warrant…. My research suspicion is that the DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller had already extracted from the fraudulent FISA authority. That’s the motive.
In July 2018 if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were fatally flawed Robert Mueller would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a result of its exploitation. The DOJ in 2018 was protecting Mueller’s poisoned fruit.
If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there’s a strong possibility some, perhaps much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated… and cases were pending. The solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid.
This is not simply a hunch, because that motive also speaks to why the FISC would order the current DOJ to release the letter.
Remember, in December 2019 the FISC received the IG Horowitz report; and they would have immediately noted the disparity between what IG Horowitz outlined about the FBI investigating Steele’s sub-source, as contrast against what the DOJ told them in July 2018.
The DOJ letter (July 2018) is a transparent misrepresentation when compared to the information in the Horowitz report (Dec 2019). Hence, the court orders the DOJ to release the July 2018 letter so that everyone, including congressional oversight and the public can see the misrepresentation.
The court was misled; now everyone can see it.
We can see it.
The content of that DOJ-NSD letter, and the subsequent disparity, points to an institutional cover-up; and as a consequence the FISC also ordered the DOJ to begin an immediate sequestration effort to find all the evidence from the fraudulent FISA application. The proverbial fruit from the poisonous tree…. And yes, that is ongoing.
Moving on… Two more big misstatements within the July letter appear on page #9. The first is the DOJ claiming that only after the application was filed did they become aware of Christopher Steele working for Fusion-GPS and knowing his intent was to create opposition research for the Hillary Clinton campaign. See the top of the page.
According to the DOJ-NSD claim the number four ranking official in the DOJ, Bruce Ohr, never told them he was acting as a conduit for Christopher Steele to the FBI. While that claim is hard to believe, in essence what the DOJ-NSD is saying in that paragraph is that the FBI hoodwinked the DOJ-NSD by not telling them where the information for the FISA application was coming from. The DOJ, via John Demers, is blaming the FBI.
The second statement, equally as incredulous, is at the bottom of page nine where the DOJ claims they had no idea Bruce Ohr was talking to the FBI throughout the entire time any of the FISA applications were being submitted. October 2016 through June 2017.
In essence the claim there is that Bruce Ohr was working with the FBI and never told anyone in the DOJ throughout 2016 and all the way past June 29th of 2017. That denial seems rather unlikely; however, once again the DOJ-NSD is putting the FBI in the crosshairs and claiming they knew nothing about the information pipeline.
Bruce Ohr, whose wife was working for Fusion-GPS and assisting Christopher Steele with information, was interviewed by the FBI over a dozen times as he communicated with Steele and fed his information to the FBI. Yet the DOJ claims they knew nothing about it.
Again, just keep in mind this claim by the DOJ-NSD is being made in July 2018, six months after Bruce Ohr was demoted twice (December 2017 and January 2018). If what the DOJ is saying is true, well, the FBI was completely off-the-rails and rogue.
Neither option speaks well about the integrity of either institution; and quite frankly I don’t buy the DOJ-NSD spin. Why? The reason is simple, the DOJ is claiming in the letter the predication was still valid… if the DOJ-NSD genuinely didn’t know about the FBI manipulation, they would be informing the court in 2018 the DOJ no longer supported the FISA application due to new information. They did not do that. Instead, in July 2018, they specifically told the court the predicate was valid, yet the DOJ-NSD knew it was not.
The last point about the July 2018 letter is perhaps the most jarring. Again, keep in mind when it was written Chris Wray is FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy and Dana Boente is FBI chief legal counsel.
Their own FBI reports, by three different INSD and IG investigations; had turned up seriously alarming evidence going back to the early 2017 time-frame; the results of which ultimately led to the DC FBI office losing all of their top officials; and knowing the letter itself was full of misleading and false information about FBI knowledge in/around Christopher Steele; this particular sentence is alarming:
“The FBI has reviewed this letter and confirmed its factual accuracy?”
Really?
As we have just shared, the July 2018 letter itself is filled with factual inaccuracies, misstatements and intentional omissions. So who exactly did the 2018 “reviewing”?
This declassification release raises more questions than any other in recent memory. Perhaps AG Bill Barr will now start asking some rather hard questions to FBI Director Christopher Wray.
Here’s the Full Letter. I strongly suggest everyone read the 14-pages slowly. If you know the background, this letter is infuriating…
It is not accidental the fraudulent letter to the FISA court was written on July 12, 2018.
This is the exact same timeframe when the DOJ and FBI were involved in two other operations, two cover-up operations, to protect their prior activity.
The position of Bill Barr today is a direct result of decisions made by the DOJ in the summer of 2018. The events surrounding the leaking of the FISA warrant used against U.S. person Carter Page, and the 2018 DOJ decision not to prosecute SSCI Security Director James Wolfe for those leaks, was the fork in the road moment for the DOJ.
This was the point of no return…
This is when every downstream action had to be taken to cover-up these decisions…
Everything since has been designed to protect three specific cover-up operations…
In the summer of 2018 Attorney General Jeff Session was recused, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein was in charge and the Mueller investigation was ongoing. That was when the DOJ made a decision not to prosecute SSCI Security Director James Wolfe for leaking classified information (The Page FISA Warrant).
As a result of people at the highest level of power and authority making a decision to protect themselves and the gross abuses of power by current and former DC officials and politicians…. DC-based U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu signed-off on a plea deal where Wolfe plead guilty to only a single count of lying to the FBI.
If the DOJ had pursued the case against Wolfe for leaking the FISA application, everything would have been different. The American electorate would have seen evidence of what was taking place in the background effort to remove President Trump. We would be in an entirely different place today if that prosecution or trial had taken place.
Three events revealed the Wolfe issue and highlight the cover-up:
EVENT ONE – On February 9th, 2018, the media reported on text messages from 2017 between Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Mark Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer, a lobbyist named Adam Waldman.
EVENT TWO – Four months after the Mark Warner texts were made public, on June 8th, 2018, another headline story surfaced. An indictment for Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Security Director James Wolfe was unsealed on June 7th, 2018.
EVENT THREE – Slightly less than two months after release of the Wolfe indictment, another headline story. On July 21st, 2018, the DOJ/FBI declassified and publicly released the FISA application(s) used against former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.
♦ Later on December 14th 2018 a fourth albeit buried public release confirmed everything. The FBI filed a sentencing recommendation proving it was the Carter Page FISA that was leaked by Wolfe:
So on July 12, 2018, the DOJ and FBI were lying to the FISA court; and telling the court there was reasonable justification for the Carter Page FISA warrant, when they knew that was false. At the same time the DOJ and FBI were debating what to do about SSCI Security Director James Wolfe leaking the FISA application.
But wait it gets worse….
Simultaneous to the decision to mislead the court; and simultaneous to the decision-making regarding Wolfe; there was yet another (a third) DOJ cover-up effort that was also necessary to retain the origin of the Russia-collusion fraud.
To further understand the decision-making of Rosenstein/Liu, as to why they hid the James Wolfe leak it is important to note the DOJ in the Eastern District of Virginia was creating the cover-story to block sunlight on the origin of how Wikileaks gained the leaked DNC emails.
On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA. From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:
On Tuesday April 15th 2019 more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….
The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.
How does this all connect?
What does it mean?
James Wolfe was confronted about his leaking by the FBI in December of 2017. At the same time the FBI were investigating Wolfe and the SSCI, the FBI was also investigating Wikileaks and Julian Assange. This matters because it shows what the mindset was within the DOJ in late 2017 and early 2018.
In both examples, Wolfe and Assange, the actions by the DOJ reflect a predisposition to hide the much larger background story:
• A prosecution of Wolfe would have exposed a complicit conspiracy between corrupt U.S. intelligence actors and the United States senate. Two branches of government essentially working on one objective; the removal of a sitting president. The DOJ decision protected multiple U.S. agencies and congress.
• A non-prosecution of Assange would have exposed a complicit conspiracy between corrupt U.S. intelligence actors and a host of political interests who created a fraudulent Russia-collusion conspiracy with the central component of Russia “hacking” the DNC. If Assange were allowed to show he received the DNC emails from a leaker, and not from a hack, the central component of the Russia interference narrative would collapse. The DOJ decision protected multiple U.S. agencies and Robert Mueller.
As soon as Robert Mueller was going to release his Russia report, the EDVA shut down Assange with the DOJ indictment; in a similar way the DOJ shut down Wolfe with a weak plea agreement.
Again, the key takeaway here is the timing. Both DOJ operations were taking place at the same time (Fall 2017 through spring/summer 2018). Both hold a similar purpose.
What we can see from both DOJ operations is an intentional effort by Main Justice not to expose the epicenter of a multi-branch effort against the White House.
Some people within the FBI were obviously participating along with people within the DOJ. However, not all Washington DC FBI agents/officials were involved. We know there were genuine investigators, at least in the Wolfe case, because their investigative evidence shows Wolfe was leaking classified information. If they did not present the investigative evidence that proves Wolfe leaked, quite simply we wouldn’t have it to show you.
Unfortunately, in hindsight we can see something internally within the DOJ happened because the FBI evidence against Wolfe was buried. Some high-level group inside the DOJ in Washington DC, in the Summer of 2018, was making decisions on what NOT to do.
These two events highlight corruption within the DOJ that existed despite the presence of AG Jeff Sessions, and apparently with the participation of DAG Rod Rosenstein.
The decisions in the Wolfe case are critical. That’s the fork in the road. If the Wolfe prosecution had continued it would have undoubtedly surfaced that key government officials and politicians were working together (executive and legislative).
The ramifications of the Wolfe case are stunning. Had the prosecution continued it’s very likely a seditious conspiracy would have surfaced.
♦ I often field a question: If you know this; if all of this information is in the public sphere; then why didn’t any member of the media cover it?
Here’s the answer: They couldn’t….
…..At least they couldn’t cover it and still retain all of the claims they had been making since March 2017 when journalist Ali Watkins gained a fully non-redacted copy of the Carter Page FISA application and first renewal.
Politico, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC and The Washington Post are all implicated in the James Wolfe leak to Ali Watkins. They had the FISA information since March 2017, yet those media outlets were disingenuously falsifying their reporting on the actual content of the FISA application despite their actual knowledge.
Remember all of the media denials about what Devin Nunes wrote in the “Nunes memo”? Remember the media proclaiming the Steele Dossier was not part of the FISA application?
How was the media fifteen months later (July 2018) going to report on the Wolfe leak to Watkins without admitting they had been manufacturing stories about its content for the past year-and-a-half?
It was in the media’s interest NOT to cover, or dig into, the Wolfe story.
Additionally, from both the DOJ and Media perspective, coverage of the Wolfe leak would prove the senate intel committee (SSCI) was, at a minimum, a participating entity in the coup effort. That same SSCI is responsible for oversight over the CIA, FBI, DOJ-NSD, ODNI, DNI, and all intelligence agencies.
Worse yet, all officers within those agencies require confirmation from the SSCI (including Chair and Vice-Chair); and any discussion of the Wolfe leak would highlight the motive for ongoing corruption within the SSCI in blocking those nominations (see John Ratcliffe).
Stunning ramifications.
There was a clear fork in the road and the DOJ took the path toward a cover-up; which, considering what the DOJ was simultaneously doing with Mueller and the EDVA regarding Assange, is not entirely surprising.
Was that decision wrong? Oh hell yes, it was corrupt as heck. .
Were the decisions done with forethought to coverup gross abuses of government? Yes.
Where the DOJ is today is directly connected to the decisions the DOJ made in 2017 and 2018 to protect themselves and internally corrupt actors from discovery.
It is often said: “the coverup is always worse than the crime.” This is never more true than with these examples, because where we are today… now miles down the path of consequence from those corrupt decisions… is seemingly disconnected from the ability of any institutional recovery. That’s now the issue for Bill Barr.
If Bill Barr wanted to deal with the issue he would not be telling President Trump to stop talking about the corruption; instead he would be holding a large press conference to explain to the American people about that fork in the road.
That type of honest sunlight delivery means taking people back into the background of the larger story and explaining what decisions were made; with brutal honesty and without trepidation for the consequences, regardless of their severity and regardless of the friends of Bill Barr compromised by the truth.
Here’s a big reason why Bill Barr should take that approach: We Know.
We know; the DOJ trying to hide it doesn’t change our level of information.
Regardless of whether Bill Barr actually admits what surrounds him, there are people who know…
We know….
You know….
AG Bill Barr shouting at President Trump ‘don’t tweet‘ like the Wizard of Oz doesn’t change the fact the curtain has been removed.
Turn around Bill, it’s time to come clean.
…”Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”..
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 