Quite a bit of attention today to a release of information by Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham [LINK HERE]. However, missed in most reviews is a duplicitous motive for Graham to claim “the primary source for the Steele dossier was likely a Russian agent.”
In essence, Graham is promoting a defense previously explored by James Comey that investigative elements of the FBI were duped by a Russian disinformation campaign; and as a consequence their investigative efforts were done under the most honorable of motives, but they were just tricked by Russians. Ergo, see the Russians did interfere in the election.
That’s the justification narrative, and now Lindsey Graham has positioned everyone to support it; because the alternative is the DOJ and FBI knew it was Russia-centric and were coordinating to achieve a goal provided by the use of that disinformation campaign as purposefully fed by Chris Steele.
Just to drive home the point: the FBI wasn’t duped. The FBI knew all along the Steele Dossier was a bunch of junk nonsense from political opposition research; but they needed it, to underscore the Carter Page FISA…. which they needed to justify the surveillance.
Former FBI Director James Comey and Lindsey Graham are both promoting the same “FBI duped” justification narrative. Now, is it a surprise the only witness agreeing to appear before Graham’s committee prior to the election is… wait for it…. yep, James Comey.
Imagine that.
What a coincidence.
Also, notice this from the recently released series of text messages?
Why didn’t OIG Michael Horowitz write about these controversial text messages in his IG report on FBI conduct during the 2016 election? The report where he couldn’t find any “evidence of investigative bias”….
The Government provided copies of the production with all necessary redactions for public dissemination. These documents evidence stunning government misconduct that mandates the immediate dismissal of this wrongful prosecution. The Government’s redacted production of last evening, September 23, 2020
Did the Weissmann special counsel hide those text messages as part of their control effort over any release from the DOJ and FBI throughout their tenure?
In May of 2017, President Trump did the right thing and fired FBI Director James Comey, the individual at the center of the attempt to overturn the 2016 election results. Comey orchestrated the spying efforts on President Trump and his campaign, which included the FBI improperly applying for four separate Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrants to eavesdrop on campaign aide Carter Page. He also authorized a politically motivated investigation into Lt. General Michael Flynn and encouraged the entrapment of Flynn by his FBI agents in an infamous White House interview.
Clearly, Comey was a disastrous FBI Director; however, the President made a terrible choice when he replaced him with Christopher Wray, a bureaucrat who has not reformed the agency in any meaningful way. He also seems to be incapable of identifying the real threats that are facing the country.
Wray is doing the bidding of the Democrats and following their talking points
In testimony on Thursday before the House Homeland Security Committee, Wray made a series of remarkable claims. He stated that Antifa is not a group but is more of “an ideology or maybe a movement.” He also refused to identify Chinese efforts to interrupt the 2020 election and again focused attention on activities from Russia.
With these remarks, Wray is doing the bidding of the Democrats and following their talking points. Regarding Antifa violence, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY), claimed it was a “myth.”
Nadler has been in his congressional cocoon for too long. Antifa has been active for several years, but since the death of George Floyd on May 25, it has intensified its activities around the country. Millions of Americans have seen the frequent and disturbing video footage of rioting and looting throughout the country. According to U.S. Congressman Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), “there have been more than 550 declared riots, many stoked by extremists, Antifa and the BLM (Black Lives Matter) organization.”
In his comments to Wray at the committee meeting, Crenshaw also noted the rioters have done an extensive amount of damage. He stated that “between one and two billion dollars of insurance claims will be paid out. That doesn’t come close to measuring the actual and true damage to people’s lives, not even close.”
Crenshaw is right as many of our urban areas, such as New York, Washington D.C., Minneapolis, Seattle, Portland among others have been devastated by a series of violent protests. In the past few months, scores of monuments have been destroyed, and significant damage has been done to businesses and public buildings. The group has also attacked innocent civilians and targeted police officers. As Crenshaw asserted in this rebuttal to Wray, Antifa matches the definition of a domestic terrorist organization.
Wray unwilling to acknowledge the obvious
Incredibly, Wray does not believe there is an organization that is directing these numerous riots across the country. He was unwilling to acknowledge the obvious. As Crenshaw explained to the misguided FBI Director, Antifa, “coordinates regionally and nationally, wears a standardized uniform. It collects funds to buy high powered lasers to blind federal officers, builds homemade explosive devices, feeds their rioters since they clearly aren’t working, and then bails out those who’ve been arrested. This is an ideology that has trained its members, makes shield wall phalanxes to attack federal officers. It formed an autonomous zone in an American city and besieged a federal courthouse in another. So, I mean, it just seems to be more than an ideology.”
Of course, it is much more than a philosophical movement and the FBI should be arresting the primary contributors and organizers of Antifa, but, instead, most of the charges that have been brought against the rioters have been for minor offenses. America is still waiting for the FBI to treat Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, which is what President Trump has declared many times.
While the President may view Antifa as our major domestic threat, FBI Director Wray declared that white supremacists comprise the largest share of racially motivated terrorism in our country. He also warned the committee about the involvement of Russia in the 2020 election. Wray maintained that “we certainly have seen very active, very active efforts by the Russians to influence our election in 2020…to both sow divisiveness and discord and…to denigrate Vice President Biden.”
The President was also troubled by Wray’s focus on Russian electoral interference
Wray’s testimony seemed tailor-made for an upcoming commercial for former Vice President Joe Biden. President Trump was clearly upset at Wray’s comments. Regarding Wray’s view of Antifa, the President said, “The fact is Antifa is a bad group. They’re bad, and when a man doesn’t say that that bothers me. I wonder why he’s not saying that?”
The President was also troubled by Wray’s focus on Russian electoral interference instead of the numerous activities being conducted by the dictatorial communist Chinese regime. According to the President, “the big problem is China, and why he doesn’t want to say that that certainly bothers me.”
The President should not be perplexed by FBI Director Wray’s performance. He is a bureaucrat who is not a reformer. Wray has not made the personnel or policy changes that should have been forthcoming after Comey’s firing. He seems more concerned about maintaining his standing with Democrats in Congress and the media, so he will never validate the President’s viewpoint. On issue after issue, Wray has been a total disappointment.
In his comments to the media, the President noted that he was “looking at a lot of different things” regarding the future of Wray as FBI Director. There should be only one move to consider, firing this FBI Director as soon as possible.
Michael Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell appears with Liz MacDonald to discuss the ongoing corrupt evidence surfacing against a variety of DOJ and FBI officials to include the special counsel effort to scrub their phone records.
Within the interview Ms. Powell highlights the arc of the investigative effort from the origin of ‘Spygate’ through the term of the special counsel led by Andrew Weissmann, and into the Senate effort to cloud and conceal their own participation. WATCH:
.
We at CTH are not going to let this issue go, regardless of whether Bill Barr, John Durham or Bill Aldenberg take direct action to address it.
Newly released records [SEE HERE] from a FOIA show the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel team “accidentally” wiped at least 27 iPhones of data early in 2018. Curiously timed at the same time the special counsel was attempting to cover for their coordination with the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Vice-Chairman Mark Warner.
Mueller’s lead investigator Andrew Weissmann accidentally wiped two phones himself; through a lengthy process of entering the wrong passcode several times over a period of three hours; removing data to show his activity during the special counsel. Weissmann claimed to have entered the wrong password (takes ten attempts) and that erased all the data. Greg Andre, a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department’s criminal division, made the same claim.
Wiping your phone to hide damaging information only works if the other phone you are communicating with wipes the same data. Guess what happened? Yup, exactly that.
James Quarles III who worked with Mueller in private practice at the Washington office of Wilmer-Hale, claimed his iPhone magically erased itself.
Before joining the special counsel team Rush Atkinson worked under Andrew Weissmann in the DOJ’s criminal fraud section where he specialized in financial fraud. Atkinson claims he too entered the wrong password ten times and accidentally erased all the data.
At least twelve other people assigned to the special counsel investigation had similar “phone wiped/erased” issues which blocked the inspector general from his review.
One “accidental” method used repeatedly was to place the iPhone in airplane mode and then lock it without providing the password. Retrieval attempts then erased all data, and returned to factory settings after unsuccessful passcode entries.
As we have previously mentioned the two-year Weissmann/Mueller special counsel, May 2017 through April 2019, was a continuum of the corrupt DOJ and FBI efforts that originated prior to the 2016 election. Many of the internal FBI and DOJ officials just transferred from the Clinton email investigation, into the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, and then into the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel investigation.
The corrupt activity within the special counsel tenure was actually worse than the corrupt activity that preceded it.
To give you an idea how difficult it is to wipe the iPhone, watch this video.
This was not done “accidentally”:
.
After the reports of the phone wiping surfaced the republican led Senate Intelligence Committee (SSCI) refused to provide documents to republican senators from their Russia investigation. Citing archaic justification within senate parliamentary rules current Chairman Marco Rubio (R) and Vice-Chairman Mark Warner are refusing to allow Senator Johnson and Senator Grassley to review the evidence the SSCI assembled to create their report on Russian election interference.
The reason and motives for the denial are simple, yet the majority of Americans have no idea…. The SSCI was the legislative entity, both republicans and democrats, who participated in the unlawful effort to remove President Trump from office. The risk of exposure is exactly why Mitch McConnell put Senator Marco Rubio on the committee as chairman to replace Richard Burr. The Senate was participating in the soft-coup.
WASHINGTON DC – The Republican and Democratic leaders on the Senate Intelligence Committee rejected a broad request from two Republican Senate leaders seeking access to the panel’s records to assist in their investigation into the Trump-Russia investigators.
Acting Chairman Marco Rubio of Florida and Vice Chairman Mark Warner of Virginia rejected a late August letter from Senate Homeland Security Chairman Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who said that they “respect the authority” of the Senate Intelligence Committee to protect its interests, adding that “ultimately, we have the right as United States Senators” to access the records.
“We note that your request of the Committee is made pursuant to Senate Rule 26, but fails to account for the unique authorities and obligations invested in this Committee through Senate Resolution 400 and respected over decades of Senate and Committee practice,” Rubio and Warner responded. “Accordingly, we must reject the absolutist interpretation of Rule 26 that you propose. If this Committee elects to share materials that it has collected and generated in the course of its investigation into Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, it will do so pursuant to these long-standing Committee rules, and specifically, the joint agreement of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman.”
Rubio and Warner added: “Independent of whether that agreement is forthcoming, our position on this matter obviously does not preclude you from pursuing your own investigation, using your own authorities, as you see fit, within the confines of your committees’ jurisdictions.” (read more)
I cannot overemphasize the importance of this sunlight avoidance enough.
Back on March 17, 2017, the SSCI secretly received the FISA application used on Carter Page from FBI supervisory special agent Brian Dugan. The ‘review and return’ application was delivered to Senate Security Director James Wolfe, who then placed it in the Senate SCIF to be reviewed by Vice-Chairman Mark Warner (and possibly Chairman Richard Burr). It appears no other senators were informed of this production.
James Wolfe then leaked the FISA application to reporter Ali Watkins. All indications are that Wolfe leaked the application to Watkins as directed by Warner, possibly with Burr’s full knowledge.
FBI Agent Brian Dugan then completed a nine-month leak investigation resulting in James Wolfe admitting to the leak. The leak was Dugan’s FBI equity. Due to the severity of the leak; and specifically because the leak encompassed the FISA application; in/around mid-January 2018 the special counsel in Main Justice was notified of Dugan’s findings and the investigative file was shared with the Weissmann team.
The Weissman team then took apart the investigative file and began running cover for the corrupt background story that included the participation by Senator Mark Warner. Part of that file surfaced when the text messages between Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer Adam Waldman were made public on Feb 9, 2018.
In a pre-planned operation, as soon as the explosive Warner/Waldman texts were released Senator Marco Rubio rushed to the microphones to fraudulently state that Warner had informed the committee during his early spring (2017) contacts with Waldman and Chris Steele. This claim by Rubio was a lie. Rubio was running cover for Warner as part of his own affiliation with the origin of the Fusion-GPS opposition research and the subsequent transfer of information to the Clinton campaign and ultimately through Chris Steele to the corrupt FBI investigative unit. [Later to the Weissmann/Mueller crew]
Rubio’s motive to downplay the ramifications of the Warner effort, and the subsequent Wolfe leak, directly ties to his own involvement with the Fusion-GPS effort. Remember, at the time of this obfuscation (late ’17 and early ’18) no-one yet knew the Fusion-GPS fraudulent story (which became the Steele dossier) was originally funded by the Super-PAC funding the Rubio campaign.
Go look at when the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel deleted their iPhone records and history. The scrubbing took place mid-January 2018 as soon as they realized the previously unknown leak investigation by Washington Field Office FBI agent Brian Dugan had bumped into the special counsel operation that was coordinating with the SSCI.
The special counsel warned Warner; took action to remove specific evidence assembled by Dugan (which included the Warner/Waldman text messages); created a fictitious cover story for the SSCI to use; extracted the Dugan version of the FISA application he used to catch Wolfe (which they later released under the guise of FOIA); then sent a deconstructed (now useless) investigative file back to DC USAO Jessie Liu who had nothing left except to present a DC grand jury with James Wolfe lying to investigators.
That corrupt, unlawful and coordinated cover-up effort lies at the heart of why the SSCI will not share any information with GOP senators today.
Senators Johnson and Grassley were asking for the FISA application in 2018, not knowing the original and first renewal were previously provided to the SSCI on March 17, 2017.
When congress (House Intel, House Judiciary, Senate Judiciary and Senate Homeland Security) were writing to FISA Court presiding judge Rosemary Collyer seeking a copy of the FISA application from the court they had no idea one early copy was already provided to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Chairman Burr and Vice-Chair Warner kept their review and use secret; but the information about their reception came out because James Wolfe leaked it and FBI agent Brian Dugan was awaiting that leak.
FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer never told any of the chairmen about the March 2017 copy of the application that was provided to Brian Dugan to deliver to the SSCI.
Throughout the attempt to remove President Trump from office, which included the impeachment effort, the SSCI was participating and assisting; now they are in cover-up mode. That’s the reason why Mitch McConnell put Marco Rubio in charge of that committee.
There’s a reason why senior staff from Senator Ron Johnson’s committee and senior staff from Chuck Grassley’s committee are asking for SSCI documents. It might not come out before the election, but it will come out…
4. FISC / Senate Judiciary Letter (public release April, 2020 – event date July 12, 2018) The letter from DOJ-NSD (Mueller Special Proseuctors) to the FISC is important.
A very interesting release by ODNI John Ratcliffe [LINK] highlights a June 25, 2020 response from the FISA court to the DOJ. There are five issues queried by the DOJ seeking guidance from the FISC. Each issue points to a specific path being taken by the DOJ in general… and the John Durham probe specifically.
Today, the ODNI, in consultation with the Department of Justice, releases a June 25, 2020, opinion by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) evaluating and approving limited circumstances under which the Government may temporarily retain, use, or disclose information that was unlawfully acquired pursuant to a FISC order. (more)
Important note: We are looking at this in hindsight. The response from the FISC was dated June 25, 2020, so the request for opinion from the court was before June 25th.
The court opinion tells us for the first time, the DOJ is admitting/stating that ALL FOUR of the Carter Page FISA applications were corrupt upon origination. This is a big deal. In previous filing with the court (January 2020) DOJ only refuted the predication for the second and third renewal.
Within the FISC reply we see the DOJ stating all four submissions contained material omissions and violations of “the duty of candor” (ie. lying) by the FBI investigative unit and the DOJ team that assembled the application(s).
As we look closely at the response we see some very specific language that tells a story.
Apparently the DOJ asked the FISA court for guidance on five very specific issues centering around the Carter Page FISA application. The DOJ is asking for legal guidance to assist them in disclosing information in the FISA file & evidence attached to the FISA file.
The five issues all circle around the FBI/DOJ use of the Carter Page FISA application; and, more importantly, the underlying evidence that is attached to the FISA application. The five topics are very interesting:
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material due to FOIA demands. FISC gives legal opinion.
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material due to ongoing and anticipated civil litigation. The FISC gives legal opinion and expands to criminal litigation.
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material to internal investigative units from the FBI inspectors division (INSD). FISC gives opinion and advice.
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of non-minimized information, and/or, minimized information as part of the ongoing Office of Inspector General oversight. FISC gives opinion and guidance.
DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material to John Durham probe, both for criminal prosecution and possible evidence gathering attached to other ongoing investigative needs. FISC gives opinion and guidance.
The opinion from the FISC is only 20 pages long [direct pdf here], and if you skip the citations it’s a pretty straight forward answer from Judge Boasberg to review. I would strongly urge everyone to take a few minutes and read it… carefully…. to see what John Durham was asking.
Pages #6 and #7 talk specifically about the different requirements for retention and distribution and outlines a cautious approach toward distribution. One of the disconcerting parts of this segment seems to be the FISA court subtly guiding the DOJ away from using non-minimized raw FISA material in prosecution of intentional malfeasance. On this issue the court says allowing a target to escape prosecution is part of the penalty upon the DOJ for wrongful assembly.
The court does not consider the DOJ is targeting the “assemblers” for their criminal conduct. Rather the response is general toward criminals who were targets of a FISA application assembled with corrupt intent. A little weird.
Pages #11 and #12 hit the topic of FOIA production. The court says “some” FOIA requests might warrant document distribution, but not all. However, on the topic of Carter Page getting his FOIA fulfilled, the court supports expansive distribution to Mr. Page.
I find the arguments and issues in/around page #14 to be especially noteworthy. In this segment the court is responding to the underlying raw evidence that would normally be used to assemble a “woods file”. The court notes the FBI Sentinel system would contain the minimized outcomes (redacted evidence) and this points to a bigger issue. READ:
Note the woods file would be what is in the Sentinel system. The government (Durham Probe) needs “access to the case file” beyond what is in the Sentinel system. Durham wants to see the raw data, the underlying raw intelligence.
Why?
It looks like Durham investigators were already on the trail of the special counsel creating a Woods file…. and/or wants to see if the Steele Dossier is the original substantive documentation that underpins the Woods file. Notice how INSD previously received “hard copies” of documentation that is presumed to be the Woods file.
Regardless of motive or investigative suspicion, someone wants to compare the raw intel to the intel that made it into the FBI/DOJ Sentinel system.
In response to this inquiry Judge Boasberg notes FBI investigators would have access to the minimized information within the Sentinel system; however, insofar as there was additional inquiry into the raw and non-minimized intelligence, a review and distribution would be permissible so long as there was a strong filter team in place to ensure statutes surrounding FISA security were not violated.
Overall, Boasberg gives permission and approval for all six aspects requested. However, he does so with several legal qualifiers and distinctions which the DOJ must observe.
Here’s the full reply and opinion. Strongly suggest the time to review:
Ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, Jim Jordan, discusses the effort by Senator Ron Johnson to subpoena a list of key names from the ‘spygate’ scandal.
Additionally, Jordan discusses the effort by Adam Schiff to create another fake whistle-blower scandal this time using Brian Murphy from the Dept. of Homeland Security. Jordan clarifies some common misinformation.
Former Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard “Ric” Grenell explained last night why DC hates President Donald Trump and the stakes in the 2020 election. WATCH:
Of all the *tells* that have surfaced in the past four years, this is the biggest. This is the one that reveals just how corrupt and duplicitous the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence really is. Do not pass over this information without pausing and evaluating just how explosive this refusal is amid the largest, most corrupt scheme in political history.
The republican led Senate Intelligence Committee (SSCI) is refusing to provide documents to republican senators from their Russia investigation. Citing archaic justification within senate parliamentary rules current Chairman Marco Rubio (R) and Vice-Chairman Mark Warner are refusing to allow Senator Johnson and Senator Grassley to review the evidence the SSCI assembled to create their report on Russian election interference.
The reason and motives for the denial are simple, yet the majority of Americans have no idea…. The SSCI was the legislative entity, both republicans and democrats, who participated in the unlawful effort to remove President Trump from office. The risk of exposure is exactly why Mitch McConnell put Senator Marco Rubio on the committee as chairman to replace Richard Burr. The Senate was participating in the soft-coup.
WASHINGTON DC – The Republican and Democratic leaders on the Senate Intelligence Committee rejected a broad request from two Republican Senate leaders seeking access to the panel’s records to assist in their investigation into the Trump-Russia investigators.
Acting Chairman Marco Rubio of Florida and Vice Chairman Mark Warner of Virginia rejected a late August letter from Senate Homeland Security Chairman Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who said that they “respect the authority” of the Senate Intelligence Committee to protect its interests, adding that “ultimately, we have the right as United States Senators” to access the records.
“We note that your request of the Committee is made pursuant to Senate Rule 26, but fails to account for the unique authorities and obligations invested in this Committee through Senate Resolution 400 and respected over decades of Senate and Committee practice,” Rubio and Warner responded. “Accordingly, we must reject the absolutist interpretation of Rule 26 that you propose. If this Committee elects to share materials that it has collected and generated in the course of its investigation into Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, it will do so pursuant to these long-standing Committee rules, and specifically, the joint agreement of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman.”
Rubio and Warner added: “Independent of whether that agreement is forthcoming, our position on this matter obviously does not preclude you from pursuing your own investigation, using your own authorities, as you see fit, within the confines of your committees’ jurisdictions.” (read more)
I cannot overemphasize the importance of this sunlight avoidance enough.
Back on March 17, 2017, the SSCI secretly received the FISA application used on Carter Page from FBI supervisory special agent Brian Dugan. The ‘review and return’ application was delivered to Senate Security Director James Wolfe, who then placed it in the senate scif to be reviewed by Vice-Chairman Mark Warner (and possibly Chairman Richard Burr). It appears no other senators were informed of this production.
James Wolfe then leaked the FISA application to reporter Ali Watkins. All indications are that Wolfe leaked the application to Watkins as directed by Warner, possibly with Burr’s full knowledge.
FBI Agent Brian Dugan then completed a nine-month leak investigation resulting in James Wolfe admitting to the leak. The leak was Dugan’s FBI equity. Due to the severity of the leak; and specifically because the leak encompassed the FISA application; in/around mid-January 2018 the special counsel in Main Justice was notified of Dugan’s findings and the investigative file was shared with the Weissmann team.
The Weissman team then took apart the investigative file and began running cover for the corrupt background story that included the participation by Senator Mark Warner. Part of that file surfaced when the text messages between Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer Adam Waldman were made public on Feb 9, 2018.
In a pre-planned operation, as soon as the explosive Warner/Waldman texts were released Senator Marco Rubio rushed to the microphones to fraudulently state that Warner had informed the committee during his early spring (2017) contacts with Waldman and Chris Steele. This claim by Rubio was a lie. Rubio was running cover for Warner as part of his own affiliation with the origin of the Fusion-GPS opposition research and the subsequent transfer of information to the Clinton campaign and ultimately through Chris Steele to the corrupt FBI investigative unit. [Later to the Weissmann/Mueller crew]
Rubio’s motive to downplay the ramifications of the Warner effort, and the subsequent Wolfe leak, directly ties to his own involvement with the Fusion-GPS effort. Remember, at the time of this obfuscation (late ’17 and early ’18) no-one yet knew the Fusion-GPS fraudulent story (which became the Steele dossier) was originally funded by the Super-PAC funding the Rubio campaign.
Go look at when the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel deleted their iPhone records and history. The scrubbing took place mid-January 2018 as soon as they realized the previously unknown leak investigation by Washington Field Office FBI agent Brian Dugan had bumped into the special counsel operation that was coordinating with the SSCI.
The special counsel warned Warner; took action to remove specific evidence assembled by Dugan (which included the Warner/Waldman text messages); created a fictitious cover story for the SSCI to use; extracted the Dugan version of the FISA application he used to catch Wolfe (which they later released under the guise of FOIA); then sent a deconstructed (now useless) investigative file back to DC USAO Jessie Liu who had nothing left except to present a DC grand jury with James Wolfe lying to investigators.
That corrupt, unlawful and coordinated cover-up effort lies at the heart of why the SSCI will not share any information with GOP senators today.
Senators Johnson and Grassley were asking for the FISA application in 2018, not knowing the original and first renewal were previously provided to the SSCI on March 17, 2017.
When congress (House Intel, House Judiciary, Senate Judiciary and Senate Homeland Security) were writing to FISA Court presiding judge Rosemary Collyer seeking a copy of the FISA application from the court they had no idea one early copy was already provided to the Senate Intelligence Committee. Chairman Burr and Vice-Chair Warner kept their review and use secret; but the information about their reception came out because James Wolfe leaked it and FBI agent Brian Dugan was awaiting that leak.
FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer never told any of the chairmen about the March 2017 copy of the application that was provided to Brian Dugan to deliver to the SSCI.
Throughout the attempt to remove President Trump from office, which included the impeachment effort, the SSCI was participating and assisting; now they are in cover-up mode. That’s the reason why Mitch McConnell put Marco Rubio in charge of that committee.
There’s a reason why senior staff from Senator Ron Johnson’s committee and senior staff from Chuck Grassley’s committee are asking for SSCI documents. It might not come out before the election, but it will come out…
4. FISC / Senate Judiciary Letter (public release April, 2020 – event date July 12, 2018) The letter from DOJ-NSD (Mueller Special Proseuctors) to the FISC is important.
There are a lot of tenuous characters who report on the machinations of the swamp, Lou Dobbs and Tom Fitton are not part of that media system. In this interview both Dobbs and Fitton deliver brutal honesty, call the baby ugly, and discuss the best approach that President Trump should take to deliver sunlight upon the schemes. WATCH:
.
Tom Fitton is exactly correct. There needs to be a criminal investigation of Andrew Weissmann and the entire special counsel crew for their conduct in 2017, 2018 and 2019.
The corrupt FBI and DOJ activity in 2015/2016 pales in comparison to the corrupt activity within the special counsel when they held the reigns in Main Justice.
Stories of a top aide to USAO John Durham, Nora Dannehy (good Irish family), leaving the investigative unit have hit the media narrative cycle. However, here’s a slightly different perspective about her departure you won’t see anywhere else.
CONNECTICUT – Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, a top aide to U.S. Attorney John H. Durham in his Russia investigation, has quietly resigned from the U.S. Justice Department probe – at least partly out of concern that the investigative team is being pressed for political reasons to produce a report before its work is done, colleagues said. (read more)
That highlighted narrative segment is horse-pucky.
Unbeknownst to Ms. Dannehy, we met, we crossed paths in DC. It was an serendipitous outcome of putting my physical presence in a position to interact. From our encounter Ms. Dannehy seemed to be a functionary of the investigative process; located in DC as an outcome of her task assignment.
Dannehy, very familiar with the DC national security networks; and carrying a top-secret clearance level; had a role to play where she reached into compartmented silos, retrieved information, conducted interviews and then sent the raw data along with summaries back up the investigative pipeline. Ergo, she seemed to be an investigative “functionary.”
Although she was/is obviously a badge carrying member of the Orange-Man-Bad committee (most of them cannot hide that inherent disposition), she seemed competent and detached emotionally from the work. That said, obviously this ‘Durham’ investigation touches on several ‘third-rails’ that could negatively impact the financial prospects of any DC insider if their assigned role undermined the position of the administrative state that functions to pay the network. Did that play a role? If I were a betting man….
♦ Here’s the way it looks to me. The Durham probe, actually more like the Aldenberg probe, has slightly shifted direction. Additional inquires are now being made into the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel conduct. That explains why the ‘Woods File’ story surfaced; and that explains why the iPhone scrubbing FOIA info was produced; it’s an insiders control-game and it continues.
With any slight shift toward questioning the unquestionable, stuff happens. Mueller, and his DC enabled career of “public service”, is a protected entity (a third rail of sorts). Any shift into the disposition of that enterprise is a disconcerting and troubling shift for all of those who operate within the DC administrative state.
It’s a weird inside the bubble dynamic. Any review of the individual elements within the bubble brings out a certain level of defensive angst from every element inside the bubble. The system protects itself. Any slight defect or investigative penetration of the membrane is considered a risk. [Think: ‘first rule of fight club‘ etc.]
If, as I suspect, a series of investigative paths starts to merge upon the operation of the special counsel, any networked official who is dependent on the system is going to want to avoid participating…. Especially if their private sector financial attachment is connected to their ability to reenter the bubble to engage the trough; just like Ms. Dannehy.
In this scenario a bail-out from assignment only reflects an individual choosing to stop traveling in the rabbit hole out of a sense of self-preservation. That outlook doesn’t define any time-frame within the investigation; nor does it attribute a coming interim report as a consequence of the investigative travels so far. It’s simply a functionary making a decision to exit and retain private sector access to the same system. Nothing more.
As anticipated Judge Sullivan’s court appointed amicus, John Gleeson, a special directive prosecutor appointed by the court, files his brief today [pdf here] arguing the DOJ is attempting to corrupt the court by filing an unopposed motion to dismiss.
The amicus filing itself is based on the severe anti-Flynn sentiment carried by the Lawfare community and their allies in the DC network. Accordingly, Gleeson having presented himself as a member of this resistance effort, pontificates shallow conspiracy theories about the DOJ bending to political pressure in their decision to drop the case.
As defense attorney Sidney Powell previously shared: …”The defense and the government have agreed we will file no further briefs at all after amicus files whatever diatribe he plans to file. The only document that matters is the government’s motion to dismiss, which stands on its own and must be granted under ALL precedent. Everything amicus files is improper and should even be stricken–were the law being followed.”
It is unknown what Judge Sullivan plans to do with this amicus brief; however, the scheduled hearing for oral argument before the court is September 29th.
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
In essence, Graham is promoting a defense previously explored by James Comey that investigative elements of the FBI were duped by a Russian disinformation campaign; and as a consequence their investigative efforts were done under the most honorable of motives, but they were just tricked by Russians. Ergo, see the Russians did interfere in the election.
Centinel2012 