Devin Nunes appears on Fox News weekend to discuss the ongoing congressional back-and-forth over funding Wuhan Virus economic relief and specifically funding the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) within the CARES act. Nunes also discusses Beijing’s responsibility for the outbreak and their lies.
Additionally, Representative Nunes discusses the latest revelations within the recently declassified footnotes and classified documents. On this subject CTH will provide additional information later; however, one of the overlooked questions surrounds why media, total media (including Solomon and Herridge), have never questioned participants.
Think about it… Over the past three years there has been a great deal of sunlight onto the specifics of the events. We now know the primary participants in the intelligence operations against Donald Trump. However, not a single media outlet has ever attempted to question: FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, James Baker, Joe Pientka, Bill Priestap, Tashina Guahar, James Crowell, Sally Moyer, Peter Strzok, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Dana Boente or even Fusion-GPS Glenn Simpson or Rod Rosenstein…. Why not?
Amid a series of documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee [SEE HERE] there is a rather alarming letter from the DOJ to the FISA Court in July 2018 that points toward an institutional cover-up. [Link to Letter]
Before getting to the substance of the letter, it’s important to put the release in context. After the FISA Court reviewed the DOJ inspector general report, the FISC ordered the DOJ-NSD to declassify and release documents related to the Carter Page FISA application.
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 FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy, and Dana Boente 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.
This letter justifying the 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 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 is a transparent misrepresentation when compared to the information in the Horowitz report. Hence, the court orders the DOJ to release the July letter so that everyone, including congressional oversight and the public can see the misrepresentation.
The court was misled; now everyone 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 “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…
The Senate Judiciary Committee has just released a bunch of documents, some of which were on the original 2018 congressional request for declassification. The documents are considerably interesting; perhaps even EXPLOSIVE.
The documents include more Papadopoulos transcripts from wired conversations with FBI confidential human source Stefan Halper; and also for the first time less redacted version of all three Carter Page FISA applications. It’s going to take some time to go through this.
The declassification and release includes some seriously interesting documents the DOJ submitted to the FISA court, as far back as July 2018, which completely destroy the prior claims made by Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, James Baker, James Comey, Andrew McCabe and their very vocal media and Lawfare defenders. Here’s one example:
Lisa Page testified to congress, and claimed in media, that the FBI never had any contact with the Steele dossier material until September 2016. However, the DOJ directly tells the FISA court that Chris Steele was funneling his information to the FBI in June 2016.
Not only did Lisa Page perjure herself in her testimony to congress; but ironically the DOJ notified the FISC of the issues with Chris Steele (and his compromised contacts with the FBI officials) in July 2018, that’s before Lisa Page started making her media appearances.
Obviously Lisa Page did not expect this information to come out. It shows she was lying, and/or she never knew the truthful DOJ information to the FISA Court had taken place. This is just the beginning… there’s lots of stuff in the release. [SEE HERE]
There is a lot of new information, explosive information, within this declassification series of documents. CTH will highlight in smaller bites and articles as we can discover and share them…. However, if you are going to review on your own, and I hope you do, feel free to share any significant findings in the comment section and we’ll take a closer look.
No doubt this is coming out as a result of Richard “Ric” Grenell in the position of DNI so he can declassify the documents the Deep Staters have attempted to keep hidden.
The last time the Supreme Court ruled on an issue related to congress not formally adjourning session they left open the door to support Executive Branch invocation of Article II, Section 3, during an “unusual circumstance” or “national catastrophe.”
Today President Trump warned congress he may invoke Article II, sec 3, due to the COVID-19 crisis and his need for administration positions that have been delayed by democrats in the Senate for more than two years.
.
The coronavirus pandemic would seem to qualify as an “unusual circumstance” where recess appointments would be needed, valid and justified. However, senate democrats would likely fight any attempt in court. The Senate has refused to adjourn session since President Trump was inaugurated, and multiple cabinet officials have been blocked from confirmation.
“Leader McConnell had a conversation today with the president to discuss Senate Democrats’ unprecedented obstruction of the president’s well-qualified nominees and shared his continued frustration with the process,” said a McConnell spokesman. “[McConnell] pledged to find ways to confirm nominees considered mission-critical to the COVID-19 pandemic, but under Senate rules that will take consent from Leader Schumer.” (link)
After the prepared remarks from President Trump, he explained why he is now looking strongly at the possibility of triggering the forced adjournment:
.
Success in the courts would be a 50/50 proposition. Generally the courts lean toward supporting the separation of power and there’s ample loony activist judges to support the Democrats. However, that said, the urgency of COVID-19 could very possibly tip the scales in favor of the executive branch during this crisis.
Ultimately the battle is more-or-less political. Democrats and their media allies will weaponize any article II invocation effort to frame President Trump as a dictator. As long as the Democrats have the DNC national media as their ally, public opinion on the issue would be challenging.
With the release of recent transcripts and the declassification of material from within the IG report on the Carter Page FISA, there is a common misconception about why the intelligence apparatus began investigating the Trump campaign. In this outline we hope to provide some deep source material that will explain the origin, and specifically why the those inside the Intelligence Community began using Confidential Human Sources.
During the time-frame of December 2015 through April 2016 the NSA database was being exploited by contractors within the intelligence community doing unauthorized searches.
On March 9, 2016, oversight personnel doing a review of FBI system access were alerted to thousands of unauthorized search queries of specific U.S. persons within the NSA database.
NSA Director Mike Rogers was made aware.
Subsequently NSA Director Rogers initiated a full compliance review of the system to identify who was doing the searches; & what searches were being conducted.
On April 18, 2016, following the preliminary audit results, Director Rogers shut down all FBI contractor access to the database after he learned FISA-702 “about”(17) and “to/from”(16) search queries were being done without authorization. Thus begins the first discovery of a much bigger background story.
When you compile the timeline with the people involved; and the specific wording of the resulting review, which was then delivered to the FISA court; and overlay the activity that was taking place in the GOP primary; what we discover is a process where the metadata collected by the NSA was being searched for political opposition research and surveillance.
Additionally, tens-of-thousands of searches were identified by the FISA court as likely extending much further than the compliance review period: “while the government reports it is unable to provide a reliable estimate of the non compliant queries since 2012, there is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015 [to] April 2016 period coincided with an unusually high error rate”.
In short, during the Obama administration the NSA database was continually used to conduct surveillance. This is the critical point that leads to understanding the origin of “Spygate”, as it unfolded in the Spring and Summer of 2016.
It was the discovery of the database exploitation and the removal of access as a surveillance tool that created their initial problem. Here’s how we can tell.
Initially in December 2015 there were 17 GOP candidates and all needed to be researched.
However, when Donald Trump won New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina the field was significantly whittled. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson remained.
On Super Tuesday, March 2, 2016, Donald Trump won seven states (VT, AR, VA, GA, AL, TN, MA) it was then clear that Trump was the GOP frontrunner with momentum to become the presumptive nominee. On March 5th, Trump won Kentucky and Louisiana; and on March 8th Trump won Michigan, Mississippi and Hawaii.
The next day, March 9th, NSA security alerts warned internal oversight personnel that something sketchy was going on.
This timing is not coincidental. As FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer later wrote in her report, “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.” Put another way: attributes belonging to a specific individual(s) were being targeted and queried, unlawfully. Given what was later discovered, it seems obvious the primary search target, over multiple date ranges, was Donald Trump.
There were tens-of-thousands of unauthorized search queries; and as Judge Collyer stated in her report, there is no reason to believe the 85% non compliant rate was any different from the abuse of the NSA database going back to 2012.
As you will see below the NSA database was how political surveillance was being conducted during Obama’s second term in office. However, when the system was flagged, and when NSA Director Mike Rogers shut down “contractor” access to the system, the system users needed to develop another way to get access.
Mike Rogers shuts down access on April 18, 2016. On April 19, 2016, Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson’s wife, Mary Jacoby visits the White House. Immediately thereafter, the DNC and Clinton campaign contract Fusion GPS… who then hire Christopher Steele.
Knowing it was federal “contractors”, outside government with access to the system, doing the unauthorized searches, the question becomes: who were the contractors?
The possibilities are quite vast. Essentially anyone the FBI or intelligence apparatus was using could have participated. Crowdstrike was a known FBI contractor; they were also contracted by the DNC. Shawn Henry was the former head of the FBI office in DC and is now the head of Crowdstrike; a rather dubious contractor for the government and a politically connected data security and forensic company. James Comey’s special friend Daniel Richman was an unpaid FBI “special employee” with security access to the database. Nellie Ohr began working for Fusion-GPS on the Trump project in November 2015 and she was a CIA contractor; and it’s entirely likely Glenn Simpson or people within his Fusion-GPS network were also contractors for the intelligence community.
Remember the Sharyl Attkisson computer intrusions? It’s all part of this same network; Attkisson even names Shawn Henry as a defendant in her ongoing lawsuit.
All of the aforementioned names, and so many more, held a political agenda in 2016.
It seems likely if the NSA flags were never triggered then the contracted system users would have continued exploiting the NSA database for political opposition research; which would then be funneled to the Clinton team. However, once the unauthorized flags were triggered, the system users (including those inside the official intelligence apparatus) needed to find another back-door to continue… Again, the timing becomes transparent.
Immediately after NSA flags were raised March 9th; the same intelligence agencies began using confidential human sources (CHS’s) to run into the Trump campaign. By activating intelligence assets like Joseph Mifsud and Stefan Halper the IC (CIA, FBI) and system users had now created an authorized way to continue the same political surveillance operations.
When Donald Trump hired Paul Manafort on March 28, 2016, it was a perfect scenario for those doing the surveillance. Manafort was a known entity to the FBI and was previously under investigation. Paul Manafort’s entry into the Trump orbit was perfect for Glenn Simpson to sell his prior research on Manafort as a Trump-Russia collusion script two weeks later.
The shift from “unauthorized exploitation of the NSA database” to legally authorized exploitation of the NSA database was now in place. This was how they continued the political surveillance. This is the confluence of events that originated “spygate”, or what officially blossomed into the FBI investigation known as “Crossfire Hurricane” on July 31.
If the NSA flags were never raised; and if Director Rogers had never initiated the compliance audit; and if the political contractors were never blocked from access to the database; they would never have needed to create a legal back-door, a justification to retain the surveillance. The political operatives/contractors would have just continued the targeted metadata exploitation.
Once they created the surveillance door, Fusion-GPS was then needed to get the FBI known commodity of Chris Steele activated as a pipeline. Into that pipeline all system users pushed opposition research. However, one mistake from the NSA database extraction during an “about” query shows up as a New Yorker named Michael Cohen in Prague.
That misinterpreted data from a FISA-702 “about query” is then piped to Steele and turns up inside the dossier; it was the wrong Michael Cohen. It wasn’t Trump’s lawyer, it was an art dealer from New York City with the same name; the same “identifier”.
A DEEP DIVE – How Did It Work?
Start by reviewing the established record from the 99-page FISC opinion rendered by Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer on April 26, 2017. Review the details within the FISC opinion.
I would strongly urge everyone to read the FISC report (full pdf below) because Judge Collyer outlines how the DOJ, which includes the FBI, had an “institutional lack of candor” in responses to the FISA court. In essence, the Obama administration was continually lying to the FISA court about their activity, and the rate of fourth amendment violations for illegal searches and seizures of U.S. persons’ private information for multiple years.
Unfortunately, due to intelligence terminology Judge Collyer’s brief and ruling is not an easy read for anyone unfamiliar with the FISA processes. That complexity also helps the media avoid discussing it; and as a result most Americans have no idea the scale and scope of the Obama-era surveillance issues. So we’ll try to break down the language.
For the sake of brevity and common understanding CTH will highlight the most pertinent segments showing just how systemic and troublesome the unlawful electronic surveillance was.
Early in 2016 NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was alerted of a significant uptick in FISA-702(17) “About” queries using the FBI/NSA database that holds all metadata records on every form of electronic communication.
The NSA compliance officer alerted Admiral Mike Rogers who then initiated a full compliance audit on/around March 9th, 2016, for the period of November 1st, 2015, through May 1st, 2016.
While the audit was ongoing, due to the severity of the results that were identified, Admiral Mike Rogers stopped anyone from using the 702(17) “about query” option, and went to the extraordinary step of blocking all FBI contractor access to the database on April 18, 2016(keep these dates in mind).
Here are some significant segments:
The key takeaway from these first paragraphs is how the search query results were exported from the NSA database to users who were not authorized to see the material. The FBI contractors were conducting searches and then removing, or ‘exporting’, the results. Later on, the FBI said all of the exported material was deleted.
Searching the highly classified NSA database is essentially a function of filling out search boxes to identify the user-initiated search parameter and get a return on the search result.
♦ FISA-702(16) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (“702”); and the “16” is a check box to initiate a search based on “To and From“. Example, if you put in a date and a phone number and check “16” as the search parameter the user will get the returns on everything “To and From” that identified phone number for the specific date. Calls, texts, contacts etc. Including results for the inbound and outbound contacts.
♦ FISA-702(17) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (702); and the “17” is a check box to initiate a search based on everything “About” the search qualifier. Example, if you put a date and a phone number and check “17” as the search parameter the user will get the returns of everything about that phone. Calls, texts, contacts, geolocation (or gps results), account information, user, service provider etc. As a result, 702(17) can actually be used to locate where the phone (and user) was located on a specific date or sequentially over a specific period of time which is simply a matter of changing the date parameters.
And that’s just from a phone number.
Search an ip address “about” and read all data into that server; put in an email address and gain everything about that account. Or use the electronic address of a GPS enabled vehicle (about) and you can withdraw more electronic data and monitor in real time. Search a credit card number and get everything about the account including what was purchased, where, when, etc. Search a bank account number, get everything about transactions and electronic records etc. Just about anything and everything can be electronically searched; everything has an electronic ‘identifier’.
The search parameter is only limited by the originating field filled out. Names, places, numbers, addresses, etc. By using the “About” parameter there may be thousands or millions of returns. Imagine if you put “@realdonaldtrump” into the search parameter? You could extract all following accounts who interacted on Twitter, or Facebook etc. You are only limited by your imagination and the scale of the electronic connectivity.
As you can see below, on March 9th, 2016, internal auditors noted the FBI was sharing “raw FISA information, including but not limited to Section 702-acquired information”.
In plain English the raw search returns were being shared with unknown entities without any attempt to “minimize” or redact the results. The person(s) attached to the results were named and obvious. There was no effort to hide their identity or protect their 4th amendment rights of privacy; and database access was from the FBI network:
But what’s the scale here? This is where the story really lies.
Read this next excerpt carefully.
The operators were searching “U.S Persons”. The review of November 1, 2015, to May 1, 2016, showed “eighty-five percent of those queries” were unlawful or “non compliant”.
85% !! “representing [redacted number]”.
We can tell from the space of the redaction the number of searches were between 10,000 and 99,999 [six digits]. If we take the middle number of 50,000 – a non compliant rate of 85 percent means 42,500 unlawful searches out of 50,000.
The [six digit] amount (more than 10,000, less than 99,999), and 85% error rate, was captured in a six month period, November 2015 to April 2016.
Also notice this very important quote: “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.” This tells us the system users were searching the same phone number, email address, electronic identifier, repeatedly over different dates.
Specific person(s) were being tracked/monitored.
Additionally, notice the last quote: “while the government reports it is unable to provide a reliable estimate of” these non lawful searches “since 2012, there is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015 [to] April 2016 coincided with an unusually high error rate”.
That means the 85% unlawful FISA-702(16)(17) database abuse has likely been happening since 2012.
2012 is an important date in this database abuse because a network of specific interests is assembled that also shows up in 2016/2017:
Who was 2012 FBI Director? Robert Mueller, who was selected by the FBI group to become special prosecutor in 2017.
Who was Mueller’ chief-of-staff? Aaron Zebley, who became one of the lead lawyers on the Mueller special counsel.
Who was 2012 CIA Director? John Brennan (remember the ouster of Gen Petraeus)
Who was ODNI? James Clapper.
Remember, the NSA is inside the Pentagon (Defense Dept) command structure. Who was Defense Secretary? Ash Carter
Who wanted NSA Director Mike Rogers fired in 2016? Brennan, Clapper and Carter.
And finally, who wrote and signed-off-on the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment and then lied about the use of the Steele Dossier? The same John Brennan, and James Clapper along with James Comey.
Tens of thousands of searches over four years (since 2012), and 85% of them are illegal. The results were extracted for?…. (I believe this is all political opposition use; and I’ll explain why momentarily.)
OK, that’s the stunning scale; but who was involved?
Private contractors with access to “raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to FBI’s requests“:
And as noted, the contractor access was finally halted on April 18th, 2016.
[Coincidentally (or likely not), the wife of Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson, Mary Jacoby, goes to the White House the very next day on April 19th, 2016.]
None of this is conspiracy theory.
All of this is laid out inside this 99-page opinion from FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer who also noted that none of this FISA abuse was accidental in a footnote on page 87: “deliberate decisionmaking“:
This specific footnote, if declassified, could be a key. Note the phrase: “([redacted] access to FBI systems was the subject of an interagency memorandum of understanding entered into [redacted])”, this sentence has the potential to expose an internal decision; withheld from congress and the FISA court by the Obama administration; that outlines a process for access and distribution of surveillance data.
Note: “no notice of this practice was given to the FISC until 2016“, that is important.
Summary: The FISA court identified and quantified tens-of-thousands of search queries of the NSA/FBI database using the FISA-702(16)(17) system. The database was repeatedly used by persons with contractor access who unlawfully searched and extracted the raw results without redacting the information and shared it with an unknown number of entities.
The outlined process certainly points toward a political spying and surveillance operation; and we are not the only one to think that’s what this system is being used for.
Back in 2017 when House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was working to reauthorize the FISA legislation, Nunes wrote a letter to ODNI Dan Coats about this specific issue:
SIDEBAR: To solve the issue, well, actually attempt to ensure it never happened again, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers eventually took away the “About” query option permanently in 2017. NSA Director Rogers said the abuse was so inherent there was no way to stop it except to remove the process completely. [SEE HERE] Additionally, the NSA database operates as a function of the Pentagon, so the Trump administration went one step further. On his last day as NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers -together with ODNI Dan Coats- put U.S. cyber-command, the database steward, fully into the U.S. military as a full combatant command. [SEE HERE] Unfortunately it didn’t work as shown by the 2018 FISC opinion rendered by FISC Judge James Boasberg [SEE HERE]
There is little doubt the FISA-702(16)(17) database system was used by Obama-era officials, from 2012 through April 2016, as a way to spy on their political opposition.
Quite simply there is no other intellectually honest explanation for the scale and volume of database abuse that was taking place; and keep in mind these searches were all ruled to be unlawful. Searches for repeated persons over a period time that were not authorized.
When we reconcile what was taking place and who was involved, then the actions of the exact same principle participants take on a jaw-dropping amount of clarity.
All of the action taken by CIA Director Brennan, FBI Director Comey, ODNI Clapper and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter make sense. Including their effort to get NSA Director Mike Rogers fired.
Everything after March 9th, 2016, had a dual purpose: (1) done to cover up the weaponization of the FISA database. [Explained Here] Spygate, Russia-Gate, the Steele Dossier, and even the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (drawn from the dossier and signed by the above) were needed to create a cover-story and protect themselves from discovery of this four year weaponization, political surveillance and unlawful spying. Even the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel makes sense; he was FBI Director when this began. And (2) they needed to keep the surveillance going.
The beginning decision to use FISA(702) as a domestic surveillance and political spy mechanism appears to have started in/around 2012. Perhaps sometime shortly before the 2012 presidential election and before John Brennan left the White House and moved to CIA. However, there was an earlier version of data assembly that preceded this effort.
Political spying 1.0 was actually the weaponization of the IRS. This is where the term “Secret Research Project” originated as a description from the Obama team. It involved the U.S. Department of Justice under Eric Holder and the FBI under Robert Mueller. It never made sense why Eric Holder requested over 1 million tax records via CD ROM, until overlaying the timeline of the FISA abuse:
The IRS sent the FBI “21 disks constituting a 1.1 million page database of information from 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” The transaction occurred in October 2010 (link)
Why disks? Why send a stack of DISKS to the DOJ and FBI when there’s a pre-existing financial crimes unit within the IRS. All of the evidence within this sketchy operation came directly to the surface in early spring 2012.
The IRS scandal was never really about the IRS, it was always about the DOJ asking the IRS for the database of information. That is why it was transparently a conflict when the same DOJ was tasked with investigating the DOJ/IRS scandal. Additionally, Obama sent his chief-of-staff Jack Lew to become Treasury Secretary; effectively placing an ally to oversee/cover-up any issues. As Treasury Secretary Lew did just that.
Lesson Learned – It would appear the Obama administration learned a lesson from attempting to gather a large opposition research database operation inside a functioning organization large enough to have some good people that might blow the whistle.
The timeline reflects a few months after realizing the “Secret Research Project” was now worthless (June 2012), they focused more deliberately on a smaller network within the intelligence apparatus and began weaponizing the FBI/NSA database. If our hunch is correct, that is what will be visible in footnote #69:
How this all comes together in 2019/2020
Fusion GPS was not hired in April 2016 to research Donald Trump. As shown in the evidence provided by the FISC, the intelligence community was already doing surveillance and spy operations. The Obama administration already knew everything about the Trump campaign, and were monitoring everything by exploiting the FISA database.
However, after the NSA alerts in/around March 9th, 2016, and particularly after the April 18th shutdown of contractor access, the Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to create a legal albeit ex post facto justification for the pre-existing surveillance and spy operations. Fusion GPS gave them that justification in the Steele Dossier.
That’s why the FBI small group, which later transitioned into the Mueller team, were so strongly committed to and defending the formation of the Steele Dossier and its dubious content.
The Steele Dossier, an outcome of the Fusion contract, contains two purposes: (1) the cover-story and justification for the pre-existing surveillance operation (protect Obama); and (2) facilitate the FBI counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign (assist Clinton).
An insurance policy would be needed. The Steele Dossier becomes the investigative virus the FBI wanted inside the system. To get the virus into official status, they used the FISA application as the delivery method and injected it into Carter Page. The FBI already knew Carter Page; essentially Carter Page was irrelevant, what they needed was the FISA warrant and the Dossier in the system {Go Deep}.
The Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to give them a plausible justification for already existing surveillance and spy operations. Fusion-GPS gave them that justification and evidence for a FISA warrant with the Steele Dossier.
Ultimately that’s why the Steele Dossier was so important; without it, the FBI would not have a tool that Mueller needed to continue the investigation of President Trump. In essence by renewing the FISA application, despite them knowing the underlying dossier was junk, the FBI was keeping the surveillance gateway open for Team Mueller to exploit later on.
Additionally, without the Steele Dossier the DOJ and FBI are naked with their FISA-702 abuse as outlined by John Ratcliffe.
.
Thankfully we know U.S. Attorney John Durham has talked to NSA Director Mike Rogers. In this video Rogers explains how he was notified of what was happening and what he did after the notification.
“I think the president has every right to be frustrated, because I think what happened to him was one of the greatest travesties in American history. Without any basis uh, they, uh, they started this investigation of his campaign; and even more concerning, actually, is what happened after the campaign; a whole pattern of events while he was President. uh, So I, to sabotage the presidency; and I think that, uh, or at least had the effect of sabotaging the presidency.”
“If people broke the law, and we can establish that, they will be prosecuted”
“The people who abused FISA have a lot to answer for.”
“If people broke the law, and we can establish that, they will be prosecuted”
Those astonishing, and ominous, quotes are from a recent interview US Attorney General William Barr gave to Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, and one can imagine those involved in the FISA abuses are rapidly lawyering up.
Treason is defined in Title 18, section 2381 of the U.S. Code, which states “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000, and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”—(Cornell)
Who, and what penalty?
People in the FBI and CIA swear allegiance to the United States. Engaging in a pattern of events to sabotage the presidency is adhering to their enemies. It can’t be much clearer, if it can be established that people within the most powerful intelligence agencies broke the law, by definition, they are guilty of treason.
When you strike at the King and fail, the King is obligated to strike back because declining to do so invites further treachery. AG Barr, the King’s spokesperson has laid it bare, those who broke the law will be prosecuted.
It’s beyond ludicrous to suggest that low or mid-level bureaucrats and agents have the power and authority to launch an investigation against the president. Obviously, the investigation was designed and executed from the top down. This means the actions of people like John Brennan, former director of the CIA, James Comey, former Director of the FBI, and Andrew McCabe, former Deputy Director of the FBI will be thoroughly scrutinized.
That the FISA process was abused is no longer in question. According to the Department of Justice’s inspector general, 29 FISA applications from eight different FBI field offices over the past five years were reviewed for accuracy. All of them had issues. [https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/fbis-failure-be-scrupulously-accurate-fisa-information-undermines] Two of the FISA’s against Trump’s former foreign-policy advisor, Carter Page, were found to be invalid.
FISA related indictments are coming but are unlikely to start with those at the top
FISA related indictments are coming but are unlikely to start with those at the top. A solid prosecutorial foundation would be necessary to go after the big names, and that means beginning at the bottom of the pyramid, such as with the FBI lawyer under criminal investigation for altering a document which was used to obtain a FISA against Carter Page.
It will take some time to inform the public about the scope and scale of the attempt against the president. As that knowledge grows, so will the pressure on the leadership involved. If someone like Brennan or Comey is found guilty of treason, how could the penalty possibly be as minor as a fine? The sure to follow multi million-dollar book deals would make a mockery of the process, the president, and the people.
Fact is, the Department of Justice is set to resume Capital Punishment after a nearly two-decade lapse. [https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-government-resume-capital-punishment-after-nearly-two-decade-lapse] Right now, in the middle of criminal investigations of possible treason. Even if it is coincidence, which is doubtful, it must be weighing on the minds of those who face prosecution and makes it likely that they would be more willing to turn against those they once worked under.
Speaking of penalties, because two of the Carter Page FISAs were deemed invalid, it seems that the cases against General Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, and Michael Cohen, all require a second look. Maybe the president expects their sentences to be overturned, which would explain why he hasn’t pardoned any of them.
The Media Will Pay A Price
The mainstream media has ruthlessly and relentlessly attacked Trump from the moment he announced his candidacy. They’ve mocked him, his wife Melania, and his children, including young Barron. For two years they hyped the failed Mueller “Russia collusion” investigation, essentially accusing him of treason. They alleged criminal misconduct to aid the Democrat’s impeachment trial, a fiasco doomed to fail in the Senate right from the beginning. Now, the COVID-19 crisis is being used not only to paint him as incompetent but to accuse him of willfully wanting Americans to die. They have been complicit in the failed coup attempt.
The attempt to take out President Trump is not only a travesty, as Barr stated, it’s one of the greatest scandals in the country’s history. It will become the next, big story. However, If the media remain true to form once the first FISA indictments drop, they can be counted on to trash the process as the personal, political vendetta of a tyrant, discredit AG Barr and the investigators, bury relevant information, and protect the coup plotters, plus themselves, by pinning any wrongdoing on the rank and file.
The level of screeching hatred will be directly proportional to the state of their existential panic. Their credibility will fall as their decibel levels rise, placing it where it truly belongs, below ground.
The mainstream media are dead institutions talking.
The resistance appears to be coming together. In a stunning and historic change of protocol the United States Supreme Court will hold teleconference hearings and will actually live-stream broadcast the oral arguments and questions. Two elements are remarkable.
First, that the Supreme Court would permit a livestream broadcast of any hearing is historic. The purposeful controls of the Court, never allowing video, cameras or live audio broadcasting for their hearings, was always justified around the court never wanting to allow politics and media to shape the serious legal issues being debated.
Secondly, and perhaps not coincidentally, during this live-stream session, the Supreme Court is going to be hearing legal arguments after they consolidated a series of casestargeting the financial and business records of President Donald Trump. The various lawsuits against President Trump are not only going to be heard, they are going to be broadcast. It doesn’t get much more political than that.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Monday it will hold arguments by teleconference in May in key cases, including President Donald Trump’s bid to shield his tax and other financial records.
The court will make live audio of the arguments available for the first time. It had previously postponed courtroom arguments for March and April because of the coronavirus.
The court will hear 10 cases in all between May 4 and May 13. In addition to fights over subpoenas for Trump’s financial records, they include two cases about whether presidential electors are required to cast their Electoral College ballots for the candidate who won their state.
[…] The court has never live-streamed courtroom arguments and only rarely has it made the audio available on the same day. Cameras also are not allowed in the courtroom.
Most federal appeals courts already have moved to allow arguments by phone, though some cases are being postponed or decided without arguments.
The Supreme Court did not indicate when it might decide the cases it will hear in May. The court usually winds up its work for the summer by the end of June, and returns to the bench on the first Monday in October. Another 10 cases that were postponed because of the virus outbreak will be argued in the fall, said Stephen Vladeck, a University of Texas law professor who will argue one of those cases, involving rapes by members of the military.
The justices last met in public on March 9, and have held private conferences by telephone since then. The court has decided seven cases in the past month, and while the justices customarily read a summary of the decision from the bench, all the opinions have been released online.
The justices all remain healthy, court spokeswoman Kathleen Arberg said. (read more)
In December of last year the Supreme Court granted the petition for a writ of certiorari and said they would hear all cases related to attempts to gain President Trump financial records and tax filings.
The Supreme Court issued a stay upon all lower court action and consolidated the cases into one writ. The court will hear arguments in May and release a ruling later in the summer of 2020.
President Trump went to the Supreme Court after the House Financial Services and Intelligence Committees issued subpoenas to Deutsche Bank and Capital One seeking President Trump’s tax records. In his request to the court [Read Here] Trump asked SCOTUS to block the subpoenas on the ground they go beyond the committees’ powers.
Justice Ginsburg stayed the lower court decision and ordered the House of Representatives to file a response by Wednesday, December 11, 2019. The cases and issues were then discussed at their private SCOTUS conference. The court decided to take up all the cases.
The underlying House case has several defects and there is a strong likelihood President Trump would win the case:
House Oversight is one of three committees that 26USC§6103(f) requires the IRS to turn over individual returns “upon request”.
They requested (PDJT taxes for 6 years 2013-2018) long before Pelosi announced her impeachment inquiry, way before the House vote on same, to which Pelosi said Sunday, (paraphrased) “We haven’t decided to impeach. We are only inquiring about it.”
The ‘upon request’ is not as absolute as it seems. The request must still be predicated on a legitimate legislative purpose. SCOTUS has held (I skip the rulings, since previously commented on here many months ago) that there are only two valid purposes, both constrained to legislative powers expressly granted by A1§8.
1. An inquiry into making, repealing, or amending an A1§8 law.
2. Oversight of executive administration of an existing law.
With respect to (1), a legitimate legislative purpose would be reviewing real estate tax law for possible changes. BUT then, the request should have come from Ways and Means (Neal) where tax laws originate. AND, it should have included requests for tax returns from other big real estate developers also. Singling out only PDJT is a fatal defect to this purpose.
With respect to (2), after Nixon/Agnew the tax code was amended to require a special IRS audit of annual POTUS and VPOTUS returns, with the results held in the National Archive. Reviewing those special audits by IRS would be a proper Oversight and Reform legislative purpose, BUT ONLY for 2017-2018 after PDJT was inaugurated. The earlier 4 years demanded are a fatal defect to this purpose.
Both these valid points were raised by President Trump and were already on their way to SCOTUS. Now the committee is trying to ‘cure’ these fatal request defects by claiming the returns are necessary for impeachment. This raises four new issues where PDJT can also win.
1. Impeachment is not a legislative purpose within A1§8.
2. Articles of Impeachment have historically been the the province of Judiciary, NOT Oversight.
3. The demand was made BEFORE the impeachment inquiry unofficially started and cannot be retrospectively cured.
4. No tax ‘high crimes of misdemeanors’ have even been alleged. Impeachment fishing expeditions are unconstitutional.
IMO this case has the potential to set a major constitutional precedent about POTUS harassment via political impeachment. The constitutional convention minutes and Federalist #65 both make it clear why ‘maladministration’ (the original third test after treason and bribery, and which WOULD allow for political impeachment) was replaced by ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’. The phrase was borrowed from prior British law, has a specific set of meanings, and DOES NOT allow political impeachment. (link)
The quest for President Trump’s financial records is essentially a legislative and political fishing expedition in an attempt to gain opposition research for their Democrat candidate in the 2020 election. [Joe Biden or other]
Catherine Herridge ponders what could possibly lay behind the remain redactions on footnote #350. We know the overall subject matter relates to U.K. intelligence, Christopher Steele’s primary sub-source, and the overall lack of interest by the FBI to undermine their objective; the investigation of the Trump campaign. [Tweet]
Not to sound overly dismissive to the question, but the remaining redactions, intentionally placed by the CURRENT DOJ, only relate to the specific sources and methods within what we know was an investigative partnership between the FBI and British intelligence.
Who or what the specific agencies are [and I’ll share one possibility below] is essentially irrelevant to the larger story. Unfortunately, the DC administrative state writ large, is attempting to obfuscate the real story by focusing on “Russian disinformation” within the Steele report that was not identified by the FBI.
That DC narrative is a great deflection from the more uncomfortable reality that U.S. intelligence officials purposefully and willfully worked to create, promote and support a dossier they knew from the outset was garbage. They all knew the dossier was junk because the U.S. intelligence apparatus and political operatives provided the material to include within it.
So here’s footnote #350 from the Herridge tweet, modified only by size to use as a template for possible redaction discussion:
And… considering what we know about the subject matter that is discussed in fn350; and considering what is already known from prior research and public document production; here is a rough example of what could be behind the redactions.
Again, in the big picture the redacted material is moot. We know the FBI used U.K. sources to corroborate Christopher Steele’s work product; and we know British agencies informed FBI officials that Steele was unreliable, biased in his views toward Donald Trump as a target, and lacking due diligence as an outcome of his intent.
In reality Chris Steele only used one primary sub-source, in addition to the information he was being fed by Fusion-GPS, Glenn Simpson, Nellie Ohr, democrat allies of Hillary Clinton, U.S. media conscripts, officials of the U.S. intelligence community (FBI, CIA, DOJ-NSD) & finally The U.S. State department. All of these operators participated in the assembly of a political opposition research document without any verification. {Go Deep}
So the part where we ask questions about U.S. agencies not verifying the material inside a dossier they helped assemble, promote and exploit is, well, a little silly. Alas, this is the pretend questioning game the DC machine likes to play.
Meanwhile most people avoid asking why Attorney General Bill Barr classified the IG report footnotes in the first place.
The only material behind the classifications is material that exposes U.S. corruption; U.S. intentional wrong-doing; and the use of intelligence surveillance as a political weapon.
Do you see any “sources or methods” in that redaction?
Of course not….
So why was it there?
The only thing the DOJ was hiding was: the reality of a Primary Sub-source who said his contacts were not viewed by him as a network of sources. That is correct, they were just random people he interacted with as an ordinary part of life…. and they chatted about rumors, gossip, innuendo, theories, and stuff. [Just like it said in the IG report]
Footnote 334, outlining the PSS who gave Steele the majority of information, was embarrassing to the CURRENT institutional interests of the FBI because it showed the prior FBI officials were on a mission; undeterred by truth.
The FBI is a mess of political targeting operations.
That’s what was redacted in the December 2019 IG report, a mere four months ago. Embarrassing stuff that makes the CURRENT institutions of the DOJ and FBI look bad. So they hid it…. again… as they continue to hide damaging and embarrassing material.
Which brings me to the point of AG Bill Barr and his biggest challenge.
The challenge for Attorney General Bill Barr is not investigating what we don’t know, but rather navigating through what ‘We The People’ are already aware of…. And then finding a way to protect the institutions of the DOJ and FBI while getting people to stop demanding action to address the corruption within them.
We are once again stuck in this stupid place where DC pretends the previous CIA, FBI and DOJ officials were duped by “Russian disinformation”, while we roll our eyes at them because we know the truth; and we know that they know the truth; but their pretense is supported by a willfully blind media.
AG Bill Barr has to keep feeding the purveyors of investigative hope-porn as a method to keep the pitchforks at bay, while simultaneously trying to figure out how to do nothing of substance so he can preserve the institutions. Remember, the DC system operates on an entirely different legal principle when it comes to internal investigations within the bubble.
As a result we get AG Barr saying “if John Durham can find evidence of criminal conduct”; where “criminal” in DC is defined around a DC-exclusive legal theory of “intent” that doesn’t apply anywhere else in the country. [examples: see Hillary Clinton; or see IG Horowitz saying he couldn’t find intent.]
If John Q Public violated a law, the FBI would break down our door in a no-knock raid and use the violation as leverage to get us to break. The FBI would not sit around debating whether John intended to violate the law; they’d deal with that aspect after the raid and the pressure on us to fork over $250,000 in a legal effort to defend ourselves. [example: see Roger Stone]
But in the DC-tier of justice, where administrating the law is subject to the internal rules that don’t apply outside the bubble, everything must be filtered through “intent”. When intent is transparently obvious, the DC legal theory moves to the second filter where collateral damage to the institutions must be weighted. [example: see James Wolfe]
AG Bill Barr has no intention on prosecuting any former individual or entity, regardless of their political hierarchy and/or level of participation, in the matrix of the coup effort against Candidate/President Trump…. unless the DC-exclusive legal hurdles are met.
(1) There must be clear intention that cannot be excused by the coup participant behind obtuse justifications. If the corrupt participant says they had to follow-up and investigate because the Trump-Russia ramifications were so enormous (ie. the justification trap); and there’s nobody to refute that, then it’s over.
(2) There must be no collateral damage to the institutions of government. No executive agency or branch of government can be compromised by the truthful prosecution of an individual from within it. If the consequences are severe enough to damage an entire institution, then it’s over.
The current DOJ redactions and lack of declassification of a host of known material (including the scope memos), is directly related to #2, the need to preserve and protect people (Rosenstein) and the institutions (DOJ/FBI/Congress).
Think about the argument: Are we debating what lies behind redactions on current DOJ documents from the AG Bill Barr agency; and simultaneously believing that AG Bill Barr is going to deliver some form of justice from inside the institution of the DOJ?
The Bill Barr Dept. of Justice is currently engaged in an ongoing effort to cover/redact details that are embarrassing to the institutions; but the same Bill Barr Dept. of Justice is going to prosecute those who embarrassed the institutions?…
There’s something akin to a Stockholm Syndrome in the ability of people to rationalize away two mutually exclusive facets of DOJ behavior. And no, the redactions have nothing to do with U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation. Look at them again if needed.
In the fulsome picture, U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr is trying tonavigate.
…The challenge for Attorney General Bill Barr is not investigating what we don’t know, but rather navigating through what ‘We The People’ are already aware of… And finding a way to tamp down the inquisition…
[@4:10 of Video] INGRAHAM – What can you tell us about the state of John Durham’s investigation? People have been waiting for the, the final report, on what happened with this, what can you tell us?
BARR – “Well I think a report y’know, may be, and probably will be, a by-product of his activity; but his primary focus isn’t to prepare a report, he is looking to bring to justice people who were engaged in abuses if he can show that there were criminal violations; and that’s what the focus is on. And, uh, as you know, being a lawyer yourself, building these cases, especially the sprawling case we have between us that went on for two or three years here, uh…, it takes some time, it takes some time to build the case. So he’s diligently pursuing it.”
“My own view is that, uh, the evidence shows that we’re not dealing with just mistakes or sloppiness, there was something far more troubling here; and we’re going to get to the bottom of it. And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”
INGRAHAM – “The president is very frustrated, I think you, you obviously know that; about Andrew McCabe, uh, he believes that people like McCabe and others just were able to basically flout the laws, and so far with impunity.”
BARR – “I think the president has every right to be frustrated, because I think what happened to him was one of the greatest travesties in American history. Without any basis uh, they, uh, they started this investigation of his campaign; and even more concerning actually, is what happened after the campaign; a whole pattern of events while he was President. uh, So I, to sabotage the presidency; and I think that, uh, or at least had the effect of sabotaging the presidency.”
INGRAHAM – “Will FISA abuses be prevented going forward given what happened here where FISA judges were not given critical pieces of information; material facts about evidence that informed the governments’ okaying of surveillance on American citizens.”
BARR – “You know I think it’s possible to put in a regime that will make it very hard, either to willfully circumvent FISA, or to do so sloppily without due regard for the rights of the American person involved. And also to make it very clear that any misconduct will be discovered and discovered fairly promptly.”
“So I do think we can put in safeguards that will enable us to go forward with this important tool.. uh.. I think it’s very sad, uh, and the people who abused FISA, have a lot to answer for. Because this was an important tool to protect the American people, they abused it, they undercut public confidence in FISA but also the FBI as an institution: and we have to rebuild that.”
Sens. Charles E. Grassley and Ron Johnson, both committee chairs and top investigators, said last week that since the Steele Dossier was funded by the Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign, this means that the Democrats were actively responsible for spreading Russian disinformation, which plunged the country into political turmoil for much of the last three years. They are jumping on the Coronavirus scam and using this for political purposes.
We are in a downward spiral when it comes to politics. The risk of the Democratic Party splitting is rising. There are going to be reasonable Democrats who will start to distance themselves from the evil being masked by political rhetoric
There are multiple stories today about the declassification of three footnotes from within the DOJ IG report on the Carter Page FISA application. Many voices are calling the declassification of those three footnotes “bombshells”, and “the beginning of the great reveal“; however, that’s not accurate. [Neither Is This From Congress] Exactly the opposite is true… the release today is purposeful misdirection.
Everyone seems to be overlooking the obvious… Why were these footnotes classified four months ago when the report came out? Who classified them? There are no protected “sources or methods”; and the only reason for the redactions was to protect the corrupt interests of the DOJ.
With that said, I find no reason to celebrate the un-redaction of redacted information that should never have been classified in the first place. Factually, the information revealed by the footnote declassification was already well known. Worse still, the interpretation of the information within the footnotes is propaganda, purposeful ‘misinformation’.
Additionally, if these declassified footnotes are an example of a new DOJ shift to allow sunlight; as in: some newly discovered interest in truthfulness; then why are the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages still redacted? Why is the Susan Rice memo on inauguration day still redacted? And, more importantly, more tellingly, why is the DOJ still hiding the ‘scope memos’ that authorized Mueller’s investigation?
Nope. What was released today was an example of the state moving in a very specific way to protect itself. I’ll explain after we first review what happened today: [h/t Catherine Herridge]
Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson wanted four footnotes declassified (unredacted) from the IG report on FISA: fn-302, fn-334, fn-342* and fn-350.
Footnote 342 is still fully redacted; however the others were mostly unredacted today.
♦Footnote 302 Before
Footnote 302 After
♦Footnote 334 Before
Footnote 334 After
♦Footnote 350 Before
Footnote 350 After
As a result of the declassification, the media and congressional takeaway is this:
The “central and essential” evidence used to justify invasive surveillance of an American citizen in the FBI’s probe into Russian interference was, itself, an example of Russian interference, according to once-secret footnotes declassified at the urging of two U.S. Senators. (link)
According to these interpretations, which are fully supported by the DOJ and FBI, the former administration officials were duped, tricked, into believing Russian disinformation that was seeded into the Chris Steele dossier.
That interpretation is the official U.S. Government position.
That interpretation is also pure nonsense. Here it is again:
[…] The footnotes reveal that, beginning early on and continuing throughout the FBI’s Russia investigation, FBI officials learned critical information streams that flowed to the dossier were likely tainted with Russian Intelligence disinformation. But the FBI aggressively advanced the probe anyway, ignoring internal oversight mechanisms and neglecting to flag the material credibility concerns for a secret court. Despite later intelligence reports that key elements of the FBI’s evidence were the result of Russian infiltration to undermine U.S. foreign relations, the FBI still pushed forward with its probe. (more)
That is not just a wrong interpretation; it is an intentionally wrong interpretation.
That interpretation comes from interests of the U.S. government, all sides; and it is intended to help protect and insulate the institutions of U.S. government.
The truth is the CIA and FBI worked to plant disinformation in the Steele dossier. The CIA/FBI did not get duped by Russian Disinformation. The CIA/FBI knowingly and willfully solicited Russian disinformation to be channeled to Chris Steele.
The current DOJ, current FBI, and current political class (both parties), do not want to reveal that U.S. intelligence agencies worked with Russian actors to seed disinformation into the Steele Dossier that could then be laundered and returned to the U.S. intelligence apparatus for exploitation – via political surveillance – using FISA.
♦ FACTS – In addition to working in collaboration with Fusion-GPS and Nellie Ohr (CIA), Christopher Steele was simultaneously employed by Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska. Our current DOJ and FBI are well aware of this; so too is congress.
Oleg had hired Christopher Steele at the same time Steele was working with Nellie Ohr and Fusion GPS to write the Trump dossier. [LINK] Also WATCH:
.
In September of 2016 Deputy Director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, and two FBI agents approached Deripaska in New York – again asking for his help. This time the FBI request was for Deripaska to provide dirt on Paul Manafort and the Trump campaign.
Later the New York Times tried to spin that request, by saying the FBI was trying to “flip” Deripaska to be a source for them. [LINK]
And then there was Anastasia Vashukevich, Oleg’s female companion, who was traveling with Deripaska at the time, and coincidentally talked about overhearing conversations about Trump, Moscow, hookers and Pee tapes between Oleg and ?? [Likely Steele] Funny how those same claims were in the debunked dossier.
And lets not forget our coup-plotter pal, Senator Mark Warner, and his “would rather not have a paper trail” conversations with Oleg’s lawyer (Adam Waldman) [LINK]…
So no, the FBI didn’t “ignore likely Russian disinformation.” The entire CIA/FBI network was based around CREATING Russian disinformation [or at least the impression therein].
The reality is that Christopher Steele was working for Oleg Deripaska, and Deripaska provided material, ridiculous material like hookers, pee-tapes etc, that Steele -while working in collaboration with Bruce Ohr’s wife Nellie Ohr (CIA)- put into his silly dossier and gave to the FBI….. who then used that nonsense to gain a surveillance warrant against the Trump campaign. That’s Oleg’s REAL STORY.
Christopher Steele, working for Deripaska and Fusion-GPS, was simply the tool to get the CIA/FBI constructed intelligence products into useful position/channels. It was an intelligence laundry operation…. all feeding into Chris Steele and then coming out in his dossier. There was no “ignoring” it, because the CIA/FBI was manufacturing it.
The FBI used the dossier as evidence for the FISA warrant against the campaign. Some of the information used in the dossier was from U.S. intelligence to Chris Steele. The FBI knew all along the Russia intelligence part was bullshit; that is the reason the FBI ignored any warnings about the validity or provenance of the dossier.
The FBI knew the dossier was junk, they were not duped. That’s why the FBI “ignored” warnings…. They were only ignoring what they already knew.
They were ignoring all of this because the goal changed after the November 8, 2016, election. In January 2017 the goal to get rid of Trump was now centered around creating the special counsel.
The special counsel would then use the pre-existing FISA surveillance authority to conduct intelligence operations against the administration. The DOJ/FBI needed to hand Mueller the tools to investigate Trump; that’s why they kept renewing the FISA warrant despite the collapse in provenance. This was all by design.
No-one participating was unaware of the background of their participation. No-one was duped; no-one was a victim of Russian disinformation. Everyone knew the operational goals and objectives to target Trump. Everything was done purposefully and with specific intent, including Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein…
…And that’s why we cannot see the expanded scope memos.
The current DOJ and FBI are protecting themselves and their institutions.
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