Prior to March 9th, 2016, the political surveillance and spy operations of the Obama administration were using the FBI and NSA database to track/monitor their opposition. However, once the NSA compliance officer began initiating an internal review of who was accessing the system, the CIA and FBI moved to create ex post facto justification for their endeavors. [Full Backstory]

After the November 8th, 2016, election everyone within the Obama network associated with the Trump surveillance operation was at risk. This is the impetus for the “Muh Russia” collusion- conspiracy narrative that was used as a mitigating shield. Within a few days after the election ODNI James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan began pushing the Russia election interference narrative in the media.

Without notifying anyone, NSA Director Mike Rogers went to Trump tower on November 18th, 2016.  Despite his compartmentalization it appears Rogers identified the NSA database abuse as the likely underpinning for some form of political surveillance.

By mid-December 2016 the Obama administration was deploying a full-court-press using their media allies to promote the Russia conspiracy.  However, despite their public proclamations Clapper and Brennan were refusing to give any specifics to congress.

The hard narrative was that Russia interfered. That was the specific push from within the Obama intelligence apparatus writ large.  All IC officials, sans Mike Rogers (NSA), had a self-interest in pushing this narrative; after all, it was the defensive mechanism to justify their illegal spying operation throughout 2016.  This was their insurance policy.

The media was doing their part; and using the information leaked to them by those who were part of the 2016 operation(s) began battering the Trump transition team every hour of every day with questions about the Russia hacking narrative; thereby fertilizing the seeds of a collusion conspiracy.

On December 29, 2016, the IC produced, and rushed to completion, a ridiculous documentto support the false-premise.  This was called the Joint Analysis Report which claimed to outline the details of Russia’s involvement hacking into targeted political data base or computer systems during the election.  We were introduced to “Grizzley Steepe” and a goofy claim of Russian hackers.

On the same day (12/29/16) President Obama announced a series of sanctions against Russians who were located in Maryland.  This was Obama’s carefully constructed response to provide additional validity to the Joint Analysis Report.  After fueling the Russia conspiracy for several weeks the Obama administration knew this action would initiate a response from both Russia and the incoming Trump administration.

On the day the JAR was released and Obama made the announcement, President-elect Donald Trump and some of his key members were in Mar-a-Lago, Florida.  Incoming National Security Adviser Mike Flynn was on vacation in the Dominican Republic. As expected the Obama action spurred calls between Russian emissary Kislyak and Flynn.

The Obama IC were monitoring Kislyak communications and waiting for the contact.  Additionally, it is suspected Flynn may have been under a FISA surveillance warrant which seems confirmed by the Weissmann/Mueller report. The FBI intercepted, recorded, and later transcribed the conversation.

The media continued to follow the lead from the Obama White House and Intelligence Community (writ large) fueling a narrative that any contact with the Russians was proof of collusion of some sort.   In addition, the communications team of the White House, DOJ, FBI and aggregate IC began pushing a narrative surrounding the obscure Logan Act.

The ridiculous Logan Act promotion was targeted to infer that any action taken by the Trump campaign prior to taking office was interference with the political Obama Russia action, and would be evidence of collusion. That was the plan.  DOJ Deputy AG Sally Yates was in charge of pushing the Logan Act narrative to the media.

The first two weeks of January 2017 was now a merging of two necessary narratives: (1) Russian interference; and (2) the Logan Act. Each deployed against any entity who would counter the Russia narrative story.   The media were running this dual narrative 24/7 against the incoming Trump officials and demanding repeated answers to questions that were framed around this story-line.

On January 3rd, 2017, the new congressional year began.  SSCI Vice-Chair Dianne Feinstein abdicated her position within the Gang-of-Eight, and turned over the reigns to Senator Mark Warner.  Warner was now the vice-chair of the SSCI; and a Go8 member.

On January 6th, 2017, the Obama White House published the Intelligence Community Assessment, and declared:

We assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.  (pdf link)

It is not coincidental the ICA was “high confidence” by Brennan and Clapper; and less confidence by Mike Rogers (NSA).

With the Flynn Dec. 29, 2016, transcript in hand, the DOJ and FBI began aiding the Logan Act narrative with Obama intelligence officials supporting the Russia Conspiracy claims and decrying anyone who would interfere or counter the official U.S. position.

On January 14th, 2017, the content of the communication between Flynn and Kislyak was leaked to the Washington Post by an unknown entity. Likely the leak came from the FBI’s counterintelligence operation; the same unit previously carrying out the 2016 campaign spying operations. [Andrew McCabe is highly suspected]

The FBI CoIntel group (Strzok, McCabe etc.), and the DOJ-NSD group (Yates, McCord etc.) were the largest stakeholders in the execution of the insurance policy phase because they were the epicenter of spygate, fraudulent FISA presentations and the formation of the Steele Dossier.

The media leak of the Flynn conversation with Kislyak was critical because the DOJ/FBI were pushing a political narrative. This was not about legality per se’, this effort was about establishing the framework for a preexisting investigation, based on a false premise, that would protect the DOJ and FBI.  The investigation they needed to continue evolved into the Mueller special counsel.  This was all insurance.

The Flynn-Kislyak leak led to Vice-President Mike Pence being hammered on January 15th, 2017, during a CBS Face the Nation interview about Trump campaign officials in contact with Russians.  Pence was exceptionally unprepared to answer the questions and allowed the media to blend questions about campaign contacts with necessary, and entirely appropriate, transition team contacts.

•Sunday January 15th, 2017 – VP-elect Mike Pence appears on Face The Nation. [Transcript Here]

JOHN DICKERSON: But there’s a distinction between that feeling about the press and legitimate inquiry, as you say, that the Senate Intelligence Committee is doing.

Just to button up one question, did any advisor or anybody in the Trump campaign have any contact with the Russians who were trying to meddle in the election?

MIKE PENCE: Of course not. And I think to suggest that is to give credence to some of these bizarre rumors that have swirled around the candidacy. (link)

*NOTE* The incoming administration was under a false-narrative siege created by the media.  At the time (early Jan, 2017) ‘any contact’ with Russians was evidence of meddling/election-collusion with Russians.  VP-elect Mike Pence poorly answered the question from Dickerson from a very defensive position.

The toxic media environment and Mike Pence speaking poorly during a Face The Nation interview now became a much bigger issue.

Once Vice-President Mike Pence made the statement that Flynn had no contact with anyone from Russia etc. any contradictory statement from Flynn would make Pence appear compromised.  Michael Flynn is now contrast against Pence’s false point without clarification.  As National Security Advisor Flynn was interviewed by the FBI on January 24th, nine days after Pence made his comments.

•Tuesday January 24th – Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn was interviewed at the WH by the FBI.

During this ambush interview, disguised as a meeting, FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Agent Joe Pientka were contrasting Vice-President-elect Pence’s statements to CBS against the known action of Mike Flynn.  [Flynn has three options: either (1) Flynn contradicts Pence, or (2) he tells a lie; or (3) Flynn explains Pence misspoke, those were his options.]

How Flynn responded to the line of inquiry, and explained/reconciled the difference between Pence’s statement on Jan 15th and what actually took place on December 29th, 2016, is why the FBI ended up with the initial conclusion that Flynn wasn’t lying.

It is within this dynamic where the FD-302 reports, written by Strzok and Pientka, then became the subject of political manipulation by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

The FBI knew the content of the Flynn call with Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in.  The FBI were intercepting those communications.  So when Pence said no-one had any contact on January 15th, the FBI crew IMMEDIATELY knew they had an issue to exploit.

We see the evidence of the FBI knowing they had an issue to exploit, and being very nervous about doing it, in the text messages between Lisa Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok who would end up doing the questioning of Flynn.

The day before the Flynn interview:

♦January 23, 2017, the day before the Flynn interview, Lisa Page says: “I can feel my heart beating harder, I’m so stressed about all the ways THIS has the potential to go fully off the rails.” Weird!

♦Strzok replies: “I know. I just talked with John, we’re getting together as soon as I get in to finish that write up for Andy (MCCABE) this morning.” Strzok agrees with Page about being stressed that “THIS” could go off the rails… (Strzok’s meeting w Flynn the next day)

[We’re not sure who “John” is, but we know “Bill” is Bill Priestap, FBI Deputy Director in charge of Counterintelligence. And “Jen” is Jennifer Boone, FBI counterproliferation division]

So it’s the day before they interview Flynn.  Why would Page & Strzok be stressed about “THIS” potentially going off the rails?  The answer is simple: they knew the content of the phone call between Mike Flynn and Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in, and they were about to exploit the Pence statement to CBS.  In essence they were admitting to monitoring Flynn, that’s why they were so nervous.  They were planning and plotting with Andrew McCabe about how they were going to exploit the phone-tap and the difference in public statements by VP Mike Pence.

There’s a good possibility Flynn was honest but his honesty contradicted Pence’s national statement on CBS; and Flynn likely tried to dance through a needle without being overly critical of VP-elect Pence misspeaking.   Remember, the alternative: if Flynn is brutally honest, the media now runs with a narrative about Vice-President Pence as a national liar.  

•Wednesday January 25th, 2017,  –  The Department of Justice, National Security Division, (at this timeframe Mary McCord was head of the DOJ-NSD) – received a detailed readout from the FBI agents who had interviewed Flynn. Yates said she felt “it was important to get this information to the White House as quickly as possible.”

•Thursday January 26th – (morning) Yates called White House Counsel Don McGahn first thing that morning to tell him she had “a very sensitive matter” that had to be discussed face to face. McGahn agreed to meet with Yates later that afternoon.

•Thursday January 26th – (afternoon)  Sally Yates traveled to the White House along with a senior member of the DOJ’s National Security Division, “who was overseeing the matter”, that is Mary McCord.  This was Yates’ first meeting with McGahn in his office, which also acts as a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF).

Yates said she began their meeting by laying out the media accounts and media statements made by Vice President Mike Pence and other high-ranking White House officials about General Flynn’s activity “that we knew not to be the truth.”

According to Sally Yates testimony, she and Mary McCord presented all the information to McGahn so the White House could take action that they deemed appropriate.  When asked by McGahn if Flynn should be fired, Yates answered, “that really wasn’t our call.”

Yates also said her decision to notify the White House counsel had been discussed “at great length.”  According to her testimony: “Certainly leading up to our notification on the 26th, it was a topic of a whole lot of discussion in DOJ and with other members of the intel community.”

•Friday January 27th – (morning)  White House Counsel Don McGahn called Yates in the morning and asked if she could come back to his office.

•Friday January 27th – (late afternoon) According to her testimony, Sally Yates returned to the White House late that afternoon.  One of McGahn’s topics discussed was whether Flynn could be prosecuted for his conduct.

Specifically, according to Yates, one of the questions *McGahn asked Yates: “Why does it matter to DOJ if one White House official lies to another?” She explained that it “was a whole lot more than that,” and reviewed the same issues outlined the prior day.

[*If you consider that McGahn was trying to thread the needle between Mike Pence’s poorly worded response to CBS, and Michael Flynn’s FBI questioning that came after Pence’s statement, McGahn would see the no-win situation Flynn was in during that inquisition.]

McGahn then expressed his concern that taking any action might interfere with the FBI investigation of Flynn, and Yates said it wouldn’t: “It wouldn’t really be fair of us to tell you this and then expect you to sit on your hands,” Yates claims to have told McGahn.

McGahn asked if he could look at the underlying evidence of Flynn’s conduct, and she said they would work with the FBI over the weekend and “get back with him on Monday morning.”

•Friday January 27th, 2017 – (evening) In what appears to be only a few hours later, President Trump is having dinner with FBI Director James Comey where President Trump asked if he was under investigation. Trump was, but to continue the auspices of the ongoing investigation, Comey lied and told him he wasn’t.

This why the issue of how the FBI agents write the 302 summary of the Flynn interview becomes such an important facet.   We see that dynamic again playing out in the messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok; with Andrew McCabe providing the guidance.

Don’t forget, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was likely the person who leaked the content of the Mike Flynn phone call between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak to the Washington Post.  A massive leak of highly classified information:

Within the case against Michael Flynn, prosecutor Brandon Van Grack later filed a cover letter attempting to explain the reason for the Flynn interview on January 24th, 2017, and a delay in the official filing of the interview notes (FD-302) on February 15th, 2017, and then another edit on May 31st, 2017.

To explain the FBI delay, Van Grack claimed the FD-302 report “inadvertently” had a header saying “DRAFT DOCUMENT/DELIBERATIVE MATERIAL” (screen grab)

What the special counsel appeared to be obfuscating was a process of deliberation within the investigative unit, headed by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, surrounding the specific wording of the 302 report on the Flynn interview.  Likely how best to word the FBI notes for maximum damage.

In late 2018 Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack was attempting to hide the length of the small group deliberations within the FBI. In hindsight it seems he did not want the court to know Andrew McCabe was involved in shaping how the Flynn-302 was written.

However, we know there was a deliberative process in place, seemingly all about how to best position the narrative, because we can see the deliberations in text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok: See below (note the dates):

The text message conversation above is February 14th, 2017.

The Michael Flynn FD-302 was officially entered into the record on February 15th, 2017, per the report:

The interview took place on January 24th, 2017. The FD-302 was drafted on January 24th, and then later edited, shaped, and ultimately approved by McCabe, on February 14th, then entered into the official record on February 15th.

It was a deliberative document from the outset. Thanks to the Strzok/Page text messages we know the cover letter from the Special Counsel is misleading.  The Feb 15th, 2017, date was the day after McCabe approved it (three weeks after the FBI interview).

May 17th, 2017, Robert Mueller was assigned as special Counsel. Then, the FD-302 report was re-entered on May 31st, 2017, removing the header; paving the way for Mueller’s team to use the content therein.

This level of overt corruption, and corrupt intent within the special counsel, is one of the more brutally obvious reasons why authorizing Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein should be regarded as participating in a political framing against the Trump White House.  

The FBI interpretation of the Flynn interview was the way the DOJ and FBI could control the interview content; and specifically because the only recourse Flynn would have to contradict that FBI interpretation would be to compromise the Vice President… Flynn cannot openly challenge the structure of the narrative within the 302 outline.

See what happened?

Does it all make sense now?

Do you see why there are reports of the second FBI agent, Joe Pientka, saying he didn’t believe Flynn lied to them in the interview. Likely because Flynn didn’t lie; but the McCabe crew jumped on the opportunity to frame a lose/lose. Either Flynn accepts a version of the 302 report where he lied; or, Flynn has to take the position that Vice President Mike Pence lied to the nation in the CBS Face The Nation interview.

See how that went down?

However, after Weissmann and Mueller enter the picture, they need to force Flynn to admit to the construct of the 302 as presented.  For that they need some leverage.

The original authorization for the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller was May 17th, 2017.  The recently released Weissmann report shows there were two additional scope memos authorizing specific targeting of the Mueller probe.  The first scope memo was August 2nd, 2017, OUTLINED HERE, and is an important part of the puzzle that helps explain the corrupt original purpose of the special counsel.

The second scope memo was issued by Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller on October 20th, 2017.  The transparent intent of the second scope memo was to provide Weissmann and Mueller with ammunition and authority to investigate specific targets, for specific purposes.  One of those targets was General Michael Flynn’s son, Michael Flynn Jr.

As you review the highlighted portion below, found on pages 12 and 13 of the Weissmann report, read slowly and fully absorb the intent; the corruption is blood-boiling:

This second scope memo allowed Weissmann and Mueller to target tangentially related persons and entities bringing in Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn Jr.  Additionally this memo established the authority to pursue “jointly undertaken activity“.

The four identified targets within the original July 2016 investigation, “Operation Crossfire Hurricane”, were George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and Carter Page. (See HPSCI report):

General Flynn was under investigation from the outset in mid-2016. The fraudulent FBI counterintelligence operation, established by CIA Director John Brennan, had Flynn as one of the early targets when Brennan handed the originating electronic communication “EC” to FBI Director James Comey on/around July 31st, 2016.

The investigation of General Flynn never stopped throughout 2016 and led to the second investigative issue of his phone call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak:

Page #12 October 20th, 2017, Scope Memo:

The first redaction listed under “personal privacy” is unknown. However, the second related redaction is a specific person, Michael Flynn Jr.

In combination with the October 2017 timing, the addition of Flynn Jr to the target list relates to the ongoing 2016/2017 investigation of his father for: (1) possible conspiracy with a foreign government; (2) unregistered lobbying; (3) materially false statements and omissions on 2017 FARA documents; and (4) lying to the FBI.

This October 20th, 2017, request from Weissmann and Mueller aligns with the time-frame were special counsel team lawyers Brandon L. Van Grack and Zainab N. Ahmad were prosecuting Michael Flynn and cornering him into a guilty plea. 

Getting Rosenstein to authorize adding Mike Flynn Jr. to the target list (scope memo #2) meant the special counsel could threaten General Flynn with the indictment of his son as a co-conspirator tied to the Turkish lobbying issue (which they did) if he doesn’t agree to a plea. Remember: “jointly undertaken activity“.

Forcing a plea for ‘lying to investigators‘ by threatening prosecution for FARA violations was the identical strategy used against both George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn.

The October 20th, 2017, expanded scope memo authorized Mueller to start demanding records, phones, electronic devices and other evidence from Mike Flynn Jr, and provided the leverage Weissmann wanted.  After all, Mike Flynn Jr. had a four month old baby. 

The amount of twisted pressure from this corrupt team of prosecutors is sickening.  A month later, General Flynn was signing a plea agreement:

With the background of Sally Yates involvement outlined, it does not seem coincidental that immediately after President Trump begins discussing the “coup” and “overthrow”  former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates surfaces.

Smug Ms. Yates is interviewed by Hillary Clinton’s primary media mouthpiece, Mrs. Alan Greenspan. This is eight minutes of deliciously paranoid projection and ass-covering; and Little Ms. Sanctimony fears the music stopping without access to an escape pod…

This graphic we created in 2017 shows how the two tracks were created.  The left side is the DOJ and the right side is the FBI/CIA.  The four principle targets used to create the defensive scheme are Manafort, Flynn, Page and Papadopoulos.

Prior to March 9th, 2016, the surveillance and spy operation was using the NSA database to track and monitor their political opposition.  However, once the NSA compliance officer began initiating an internal review of who was accessing the system, the CIA and FBI moved to create ex post facto justification for their endeavors. [Full Backstory]

Everything after March 9th, 2016, is a function of two intelligence units, the CIA and FBI, operating together to coverup prior political surveillance and spy operations.

♦The CIA track took place between March and July 2016, and consisted of using foreign intelligence allies in Italy, the U.K and Australia to create a background illusion of Russian involvement with the Trump campaign.  This operation was based on earlier -more innocuous- contacts from various countries, weaponized and redeployed in what everyone calls “spygate”.  This track successfully culminated in Operation Crossfire Hurricane.

♦The FBI track was domestic-centric, albeit sub-contracted to Fusion GPS and later a former British intelligence officer, and took place between April and October 2016; also to create the illusion of Russian involvement.  This operation is best known around the Steele Dossier and FISA warrant against U.S. person Carter Page.  The FBI track continued with the Mueller investigation into 2017, 2018 and 2019.  Learn More

Obvious political games are afoot when House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler is more interested in the testimony of Attorney General Bill Barr about the Mueller report, while simultaneously ignoring author of the report, Robert Mueller, himself.

Additionally, House and Senate Democrats are refusing to read the classified and fully unredacted Mueller report unless it is made public.  This is all part of their ridiculous games.

(Via CNN) […] Nadler, wants to allow all members of his panel at Thursday’s hearing to have one round of questioning of five minutes each, according to the source. He also wants to allow for a subsequent round of questioning of 30 minutes for each side, allowing both parties’ committee counsels to also engage in questioning during their respective turns — which has turned into a key sticking point for the Justice Department.

“The attorney general agreed to appear before Congress. Therefore, members of Congress should be the ones doing the questioning,” said Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec. “He remains happy to engage with members on their questions regarding the Mueller report.”

Nadler also is proposing that the committee should go into closed session to discuss the sections of the report that are redacted.

But Barr has rejected those proposals for additional rounds of questioning, according to the source. The Justice Department has informed Nadler’s office that Barr doesn’t think the committee counsels should be allowed to question him, the source said, prompting the attorney general to threaten to not show up next week if Nadler follows this format, the source said.

A separate source said that the Justice Department made it clear in negotiations: their position is that it’s a congressional hearing, and so only members should do the questioning. Barr also has objected to holding a closed session to discuss the full report. (read more)

Those who participated in the 2015/2016 surveillance and spy operations, which evolved into the 2017 (through today) soft-coup effort, are relying on a defense that Russia ‘hacked’ the 2016 election. This false narrative is how the corrupt administrative state will defend themselves.

Pay close attention to this interview and note how Senator Graham supports that narrative saying: “the Russians hacked into John Podesta’s e-mails, the campaign manager for the Democratic candidate for President. The Russians hacked into Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, the candidate for the Democratic Party.”

This ‘Russia-hacking narrative’ is the DC ‘chaff and countermeasures‘; when combined with their ‘by-the-book‘ justifications, it becomes their unified defense. Once you accept their baseline, it becomes much more difficult to expose their unlawful conduct.

[Transcript] MARGARET BRENNAN: We just heard about this tragic shooting. It was an AR-15-style semi-automatic weapon. Hate crimes seem to be on the rise–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –in this country. What do we need to do to combat this, prevent it?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, I think somebody interdicted the shooter, thank God, and it could have been worse, but in– I think in California you can’t buy a gun until you’re twenty-one. So let’s find out how this guy got the gun, what his motives were and I’m a big supporter of protective orders, allowing local law enforcement to go to a judge if there’s ample evidence somebody is becoming a danger to themselves or others. About fifteen states have such laws. I’m trying to get a national grant program to incentivize states to pass laws to allow local law enforcement to go to judges to take guns out of hands of people that are showing really disturbing signs or danger signs. And I think in Parkland that would have made a big difference, here I don’t know.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, we’ll continue to follow the details as we learn more about what happened there, but I want to talk about what you are preparing for this week.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Attorney General Barr will be answering questions for the first time really in detail about the Mueller Report. I know you’ve said you’re done with it.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Mm-Mm. Pretty much.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But what is it that you’re going to try to focus in on with this hearing?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, he gave a four-page summary. Does the report support his summary? Does the report actually indicate there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians? I think the idea that this President obstructed justice is absurd. He turned over a million documents to the special counsel. Almost everybody around him testified. I can’t think of one thing that President Trump did to stop Mueller from doing his job. He never claimed executive privilege. From my point of view I’ve heard all I need to really know. Now I want to look at it and find out how all this happened.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But on that point of attempting to obstruct justice or not–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Mm-Hm.

MARGARET BRENNAN: the President seems to want to continue to litigate this because he came out this week and said–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yeah, yeah.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –and denied that he had ever thought or told anyone–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yeah, right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –to fire Don McGahn, the White House counsel. But that directly contradicts sworn testimony–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yeah.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –that was in the Mueller Report, where Don McGahn said he almost quit–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yeah.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –he was so pressured to fire the special counsel.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, that’s a–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Who do you believe?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: I– I think it’s just all theater. It doesn’t matter. I don’t care what he said to Don McGahn. It’s what he did. And the President never obstructed–

MARGARET BRENNAN: It doesn’t matter to you–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Oh, God, no. I mean–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –that the President is changing a version of events that perhaps some would say, lying.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: If you’re going to– if you’re going to look at every President who pops off at his staff and, you know, ask him to do something that’s maybe crazy, then we won’t have any Presidents.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But in terms of the firing this was Don McGahn, the White House counsel, being pressured to fire the special counsel.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: But he didn’t.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: And I don’t care–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: I don’t care what they talked about. He didn’t do anything. The point is the President did not impede Mueller from doing his investigation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And it doesn’t–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Case closed.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –trouble you that the President is changing his version of events?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: I don’t– I don’t care what happened between him and Don McGahn. Here’s what I care about. Did Mueller– was Mueller allowed to do his job? And the answer is yes. Name one thing that they did to stop Mueller from doing his job, and if you can’t then there’s no obstruction.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Will you call McGahn to testify?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Not me? No. No, I’m– I’m done.

MARGARET BRENNAN: What about the special counsel?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: I’m not going to re-litigate it. I don’t know how clear I can be, Margaret. It’s over for me. He didn’t collude with the Russians, obstruction of justice in this situation is absurd. I fought hard as hell to make sure Mueller could do his job; I introduced legislation to make sure he couldn’t be fired. It’s over.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But in terms of this report it was not just the obstruction of justice that you seem to be saying you’re over. All the details in here about Russia and what they tried to do, what they did succeed at doing in terms of–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: That’s a–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –accessing computer systems.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: –different conversation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Isn’t that worth–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: A hundred percent.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –a– a conversation? I mean, Senator Marco Rubio came out and said this week he went as far as to say that they had the ability; they were in a position to alter Florida voter rolls back in 2016.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: I– I think that– that’s the point. There’s two things I’m going to look at: what did they do, and are they trying to do it again, and how do we stop them. I think that’s something we all need to focus on. And how did this start. How could–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Is the President focused on that enough, on that–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yeah. He’s got a good team around him–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –doing it again, the threat?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yeah. No, he’s got a good team around him to make sure we harden our infrastructure. But what Marco said was a bit stunning I’ve never heard that before. So what I want to do is make sure that Intel and Judiciary and Homeland Security, the three committees are working together to harden the infrastructure against Russia or anybody else interfering in 2020. And Russia is still up to it. So the takeaway for me is that they were very involved in the 2016 election. They’re coming at us again. I’d like to stop them. And one way to stop them is to make them pay a price.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re talking about this with a level of seriousness that we did not hear from Jared Kushner, senior adviser to the President. I want to play for you some sound when he was speaking this week about the Russia probe when he said it was actually more damaging to have the Mueller investigation. Listen to what he said.

JARED KUSHNER (Tuesday/TIME): Quite frankly, the whole thing’s just a big distraction for the country. And you look at, you know, what Russia did–you know, buying some Facebook ads to try to sow dissent and do it, and it’s a terrible thing. But I think the investigations, and– and all of the– the speculation that’s happened for the last two years, has had a much harsher impact on our democracy than a couple of Facebook ads. Now if you look at the magnitude of what they did and what they accomplished I think the ensuing investigations have been way more harmful to our country.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Is he minimizing the threat to national security?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, I like Jared a lot, but he is leaving out a big detail: the Russians hacked into John Podesta’s e-mails, the campaign manager for the Democratic candidate for President. The Russians hacked into Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, the candidate for the Democratic Party. Can you imagine what we would be saying if the Russians or the Iranians hacked into the presidential team of the Republican Party? So, no, this is a big deal. It’s not just a few Facebook ads. They were very successful in pitting one American against the other during the 2016 campaign by manipulating social media and they actually got into the campaign e-mail system of the Democratic Party. An attack on one party should be an attack on all. The Russians are up to it again. And here’s what I tell President Trump: Everything we’ve done with the Russians is not working. We need more sanctions not less.

MARGARET BRENNAN: More sanctions, now?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Now. Before 2020. Because, clearly, they don’t have the message.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I also want to ask you about some of the remarks you have made in the past because we know as Democrats start talking about the details of the Mueller Report, combing through it and already calling for impeachment proceedings to begin against the President of the United States. Here’s what you said back in January of 1999 when you were helping to lead the impeachment of President Clinton.

REPRESENTATIVE LINDSEY GRAHAM (January 16, 1999): The point I am trying to make is you don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic, if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role. Thank God you did that because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you agree?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: I was a lot younger.

MARGARET BRENNAN: But it sounds like some of what you are characterizing here, saying everything in the Mueller report, it may not be great but it doesn’t reach the level of being able to prosecute.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well a high crime–

MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s different from what you described there, which was to say behavior of a President–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Sure it does.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –the cleansing of an office–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well it– it-

MARGARET BRENNAN: –is important.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: It’s got to be a higher crime a misdemeanor not defined by the prosecution team but by a political body called the House of Representatives approved by the Senate. So there was an article of impeachment against President Clinton for lying under oath about having sex with Monica Lewinsky. I voted against that because I believe a lot of people would lie to protect their family if they were blindsided about an affair. So I didn’t want that to become a higher crime or misdemeanor. What President Clinton did was interfere in a lawsuit against him by Paula Jones and others; hide the evidence; encourage people to lie. So to me he took the legal system and turned it upside down. But it doesn’t have to technically be a crime. What President Trump did here was completely cooperate in an investigation, a million documents, let everybody that the special counsel wanted to talk to be interviewed. Don McGahn was interviewed for thirty hours. I believe the President did nothing wrong. Whether you like him or not I’ll leave that up to you but this–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But even the pressuring Don McGahn–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: See but–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –to fire the special counsel. He may not have done it.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: See that– Okay, if you’re going to let that be the standard of impeachment, that you have an interaction between a White House counsel and a president that– that you find uncomfortable then we’ll have nobody served. So here’s the deal for me: you actually have to do something. Bill Clinton lost his law– law license five years because he did something. But to my Democratic friends, if you agree with the 1999 statement I made–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Mm-Hm.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: –you think this office needs to be cleansed, impeach him. It’s up to you. If you think Donald Trump deserves to be impeached then impeach him. I don’t.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Quickly, before you go, I want to ask you about your old friend Joe Biden–

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yeah.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –the vice president throwing his hat into the ring, President Trump seeming to suggest he’s too old. What do you think?

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Well, yeah, that’s up to the voters to decide. I think President Trump is very vibrant. And I know Joe– Joe Biden. If you travel with Joe Biden, you won’t think he’s too old. Here’s the problem for Joe. Does he fit into the Democratic Party of 2020? I don’t know; he’s a good man. I like him a lot. I disagree with him on– on policy. I hope he doesn’t apologize for the life he’s led because he’s led a good life. But if he starts apologizing for all the policy positions and decisions he’s made throughout his life that will be disappointing. I don’t know how he fits in this party but I do know this:

MARGARET BRENNAN: Mm-Hm.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: He’s a good man and he would be a strong candidate.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Senator Graham, thank you.

SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Thank you.

President Trump calls-in to Sunday Morning Futures for an early interview with Maria Bartiromo from the border.   [Unrelated, POTUS sounds like he’s in his pajamas, while Bartiromo looks like she’s in her pajamas] The topic is the crisis at the border.

The president answer questions about background of the problem; and then starts to discuss what Lindsey Graham is putting together. Additionally, the president discusses the Democrat 2020 candidates.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham gave some brief remarks to local Dallas media discussing his summer agenda for the Judiciary Committee.  Graham notes he does not intend to question Robert Mueller -deferring to AG Barr- which is not surprising considering how lightly Mueller may have been involved in the investigation.

Graham also notes the separation between the legislative branch and judicial branch as a firewall for inquiry into the FISA court.  However, Graham explains his intent to discuss possible FISA abuse (manipulation from the executive branch) with Chief Justice John Roberts. It appears Graham is also waiting for the DOJ inspector general report.

The rather alarming aspect here is the multiple layers of editorial review and approval this had to pass through.  This is not simply an example of bad judgement, this is a clear reflection of the ideology within the publication.  Not a single person involved in the process saw a problem with it, until after it was published.  Quite remarkable.

From the international edition of the New York Times: A blind kippah-wearing President Donald Trump being led around -or leading- a dog depicting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. (enlarged below)

It really is quite stunning actually; regardless of whether you accept the reality of the publication inherently containing an antisemitic bias. Dozens of people involved in the process of constructing the editorial decision, and each of them had to be in alignment with the message.  This is not an error of judgement. This is their view:

After the backlash the New York Times attempts a disingenuous retraction:

(Link to the Editors Note)

An “error of judgment”?

The 2016 anti-Trump effort and 2017 soft-coup was not just an assembly created by Obama officials; there was/are a significant number of mutually aligned republican politicians willfully blind to the effort.

As a consequence, we see the administrative state now holding a vested interest in retaining the originating Russia premise.

With President Trump openly stating “coup” and “overthrow“, those who participated in the coup and overthrow effort now need to protect their involvement by substantiating the background lie they used to carry out the cover-up operation.  Keep in mind the familiar outlets for distribution of the narrative as delivered by those who operate within the intelligence apparatus (“IC”).  Cue the predictable:

New York Times – The F.B.I. director warned anew on Friday about Russia’s continued meddling in American elections, calling it a “significant counterintelligence threat.”

[…]  “We recognize that our adversaries are going to keep adapting and upping their game,” Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, said Friday in a speech in Washington, citing the presence of Russian intelligence officers in the United States and the Kremlin’s record of malign influence operations.

“So we are very much viewing 2018 as just kind of a dress rehearsal for the big show in 2020,” he said. (link)

The first way the corrupt officials/politicians need to defend their participatory behavior is to reinforce the underlying premise, Russia was interfering in the election.  Once you accept that fraudulent premise, then it becomes more difficult to fight through the downstream consequences and get to the fraudulent predicate underlying the foundation of the corrupt CIA and FBI investigation.

President Trump seems to be positioning himself for confrontation in combination with the IG report from Michael Horowitz.  So now the participants need to reinforce their cover story. That is: the false position of “why” they participated:

(WaPo) Speaking at the Public Servants Dinner of the Armenian Bar Association, Rosenstein unleashed his sharpest critique yet of those who have attacked his handling of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigative report into Russian election interference and President Donald Trump’s conduct.

[…] “The bottom line is, there was overwhelming evidence that Russian operatives hacked American computers and defrauded American citizens, and that is only the tip of the iceberg of a comprehensive Russian strategy to influence elections, promote social discord, and undermine America, just like they do in many other countries,” Rosenstein said.

Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel in May 2017, and has overseen the investigation since.  (read more)

These approaches are so predictable it becomes almost funny to watch.  The DC-based participants have no choice except to align together in common cause.  Various sects and jackals align for the principle purpose of self defense.

WASHINGTON DC –  John Brennan said Friday he is “absolutely” willing to testify to Congress to rebut President Donald Trump’s claims that the former CIA director took part in a “coup” to undermine his presidency.

Brennan said in an interview on MSNBC, where he is a contributor, that he would “welcome any type of continued investigation of what we did that period of time that we were in government.”  (read more)

Within this Potomac alignment we note: President Obama, Susan Rice, Denis McDonough, Ben Rhodes, John Brennan, Ash Carter, James Clapper, James Comey, Sally Yates, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein, Christopher Wray, David Bowditch, Dana Boente, James Baker, John Carlin, Paul Ryan, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Michael Kortan, Bill Priestap, Andrew Weissmann, Robert Mueller; the 40+ FBI agents; the 19+ Mueller team lawyers; the Clinton campaign officials and lawyers (Perkins Coie); the DNC; Fusion-GPS; U.S. State Department personnel; most of the DC political leadership and committee chairs; the former and current Gang of Eight (sans Nunes); the majority of the DOJ-National Security Division; elements of the U.K, AU and Italian government; approximately 15 to 20 GOP members of the U.S. Senate; and almost all of the DC media apparatus, are aligned in common cause.

This group represents just the tippy-top of the system now at risk from President Trump saying “overthrow” and “coup attempt”. 

The wild card is U.S. Attorney General William Barr.  AG Barr had to outline the Russia interference because he was merely summarizing the Mueller report in his prior addresses; he was not generally making that claim himself.  I guarantee you he is now under unrelenting pressure to do so.

That said, we see a mini-test now for Barr; laid down by that stupid Johnson and Grassley letter.  If Barr ignores the senators, that’s a good sign.  If he responds and tells them ‘no comment’ (or similar) that’s an even better sign.  However, if he cedes to their request and begins justifying the 2016 and 2017 behavior of the DOJ and FBI from the position those officials had no choice, well, then it becomes likely the Attorney General is trying to move beyond the crisis without actually dealing with the underlying corruption.

♦ President Trump can prove the July 31st, 2016, Crossfire Hurricane counterintelligence operation originated from a scheme within the intelligence apparatus by exposing the preceding CIA operation that created the originating “Electronic Communication” memo. Declassify that two-page “EC” document that Brennan gave to Comey.  [The trail is found within the Weissmann report and the use of Alexander Downer – SEE HERE]

♦ Release and declassify all of the Comey memos that document the investigative steps taken  by the FBI as an outcome of the operation coordinated by CIA Director John Brennan in early 2016.  [The trail was memorialized by James Comey – SEE HERE]

♦ Reveal the November 2015 through April 2016 FISA-702 search query abuse by declassifying the April 2017 court opinion written by FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer. Show the FBI contractors behind the 85% fraudulent search queries. [Crowdstrike? Fusion-GPS? Nellie Ohr? Daniel Richman?]  The was a weaponized surveillance and domestic political spying operation. [The trail was laid down in specific detail by Judge Collyer – SEE HERE]

♦ Subpoena former DOJ-NSD (National Security Division) head John Carlin, or haul him in front of a grand jury, and get his testimony about why he hid the abuse from the FISA court in October 2016; why the DOJ-NSD rushed the Carter Page application to beat NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers to the FISA court; and why Carlin quit immediately thereafter. Squeeze this bastard’s nuts in the proverbial legal vice.

♦ Prove the Carter Page FISA application (October 2016) was fraudulent and based on deceptions to the FISA Court. Declassify the entire document, and release the transcripts of those who signed the application(s); and/or depose those who have not yet testified. The creation of the Steele Dossier was the cover-up operation. [SEE HERE]

♦ Release all of the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages without redactions. Let sunlight pour in on the actual conversation(s) that were taking place when Crossfire Hurricane (July ’16) and the FISA Application (Oct ’16) were taking place.  The current redactions were made by the people who weaponized the intelligence system for political surveillance and spy operation.  This is why Page and Strzok texts are redacted!

♦ Release all of Bruce Ohr 302’s, FBI notes from interviews and debriefing sessions, and other relevant documents associated with the interviews of Bruce Ohr and his internal communications. Including exculpatory evidence that Bruce Ohr may have shared with FBI Agent Joseph Pientka. [And get a deposition from this Pientka fella] Bruce Ohr is the courier, carrying information from those outside to those on the inside.

♦ Release the August 2nd, 2017, two-page scope memo provided by DAG Rod Rosenstein to special counsel Robert Mueller to advance the fraudulent Trump investigation, and initiate the more purposeful obstruction of justice investigation. Also Release the October 20th, 2017, second scope memo recently discovered.  The Scope Memos are keys to unlocking the underlying spy/surveillance cover-up. [SEE HERE and SEE HERE]

If the documents within these specific eight bullet-points were released -in full and unredacted form- the Administrative State/Deep State network would be laid bare.

It is unfathomable, genuinely outside of comprehension, how this level of sunlight could forever change and completely reset the structures of U.S. federal government.

The wild card is Attorney General William Barr.

Can’t make this stuff up folks…. as if on cue.

Vice President Mike Pence responds to Senator Grassley and Senator Johnson’s speculation that FBI agents wanted to use Pence’s chief of staff to infiltrate President-elect Trump’s transition team in 2016:

“I was deeply offended to learn that two disgraced FBI agents considered infiltrating our transition team by sending a counter intelligence agent to one of my very first intelligence briefings only 9 days after the election,” Pence said in a statement to Axios. “This is an outrage and only underscores why we need to get to the bottom of how this investigation started in the first place.”

“The American people have a right to what happened and if these two agents broke the law and ignored long-standing DOJ policies, they must be held accountable.” (more)

Next up: Deep State (IC) deploys Washington Post and New York Times remind everyone how intense the 2016 Russian election interference was…. In 3, 2, 1..

Yesterday Senators Johnson and Grassley opened the door for the DOJ and FBI to justify the post-election investigation of President Donald Trump, based on a premise of a possible FBI counterintelligence operation ran against the office of the Vice-President, Mike Pence. And lickety-split the outrage voices jumped right to work. Predictable.

Discussions, conversations and displays of evidence outlining the efforts of the intelligence community, to defend against the potential of a compromised President, are exactly what the previous administration officials want to see.  This is the conversation President Obama, Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes and Denis McDonough would be happy to discuss.

Think of the worst or most shocking possibility you can imagine for what might have taken place.  Wiretaps on the White House? Enlisted assistance from staffers? Bugs placed in the cufflinks of Donald Trump?  So what?  From their position all of these efforts were undertaken because they were dealing with the possibility of a U.S. President who might be under the control of a foreign government.  This is the conversation they would enjoy.

From their ‘by-the-book‘ perspective the officials who ran the counterintelligence operation against President Trump have no fear of discussions about what they did in their post-election defense of the constitution (that’s how they will sell it). No fear.

Discussions of seemingly outrageous activity, via lots of blockbuster revelation, is in their interest.  All of their actions easily justified from the standpoint of a possibility the inbound President was compromised.  “We were riddled with anxiety”, they say.

There’s no risk to them in discussing their action, any action, undertaken from the basis of their premise.  Recruiting incoming administration people to conduct surveillance and report back to the FBI? Justified under this premise.  There is no upper limit.

Again, think of the most shocking revelation you can possibly imagine, none of it concerns them so long as they can justify it from their pre-constructed premise that Trump was a Russian asset.  For this premise, there is no rule book. Everything is ‘by-the-book‘ because there is no book.  It’s the perfect Alinsky play.

The participating officials within the DOJ, FBI or intelligence apparatus simply reference the possibility of President Trump as a Russian asset and every jaw-dropping headline reaches a crescendo only to fizzle into the ether of nothingness when an official says: “Yeah, so what?”

This is exactly what those officials want to see happen as they tell the story of their unprecedented heroic efforts to ensure all angles of possibility were covered.

These participating officials would like nothing more than a dozen congressional hearings where they can explain to the viewing public how honorable they were in trying to deal with the possibility of such an unprecedented threat… Oh, how the summer of headlines will be gleefully cheered by the adoring media.  You think this conversation worries the participants?  Not a smidgen.

The entire time all of these blockbuster outrages are being debated and analyzed in granular detail, you know what’s not being discussed?… The originating predicate.

Discussing the consequences, regardless of how ‘shocking‘, or ‘jaw-dropping‘, or ‘unimaginable‘, plays right into the hands of the participating members of the fraud and scheme.  These are discoveries they welcome. These are discoveries to be planted.  This is where they want the focus. This is Chaff and Countermeasures.

What they don’t want to discuss is the origination of ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ in July 2016.  What they don’t want to discuss is Fusion-GPS and the creation of the Steele Dossier.  What they don’t want to discuss is how the fraudulent premise was established.

What they don’t want to discuss is the exploitation of the NSA database for political surveillance. That’s what they don’t want to discuss… And every time attention starts to head in that direction, they’ll throw out another entirely justifiable headline-grabbing detail of their post election activity.

Shiny things; like the wife of Pence’s chief-of-staff worked with Peter Strzok.

Must be urgent, right?

[…] Fox News has learned the texts, initially released in 2018 by a Senate committee, are under renewed scrutiny, with GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley and Homeland Security Committee chair Ron Johnson sending a letter Thursday night to Attorney General Bill Barr pushing for more information on the matter.

Oh, wait, so they sat on them because?…..

Chaff and Countermeasures.

This is how the DC game is played.  Senators Johnson and Grassley laid the first shiny distraction on the table; and based on the responses, boy howdy, does the outrage game work well.  Inquiry immediately follows the distraction.

Oh, how quickly we forget our references for this DC strategy:

Where’s the Graham-Grassley letter to Gina Haspel?

Dear Director Haspel: “Hey, so, CIA, how’d Crossfire Hurricane start? What did you get through the Counterintelligence Mission Center?  Can you spare a few minutes to note the contacts from  GCHQ, and that meeting between Robert Hannigan and John Brennan?”

Huh, funny that.

Where’s the Burr-Warner letter to Paul Nakasone?

Dear Gen. Nakasone: “Can you provide us a little more information about why the NSA dropped database “about queries”?  Maybe outline the contractors that were of such concern they had to be restricted from access…. and, oh, their current status?”

Too soon? Three years.

The outrage trap must be avoided….

The issue(s) surround President Obama and high-ranking Obama intelligence officials, notably: John Brennan, James Comey, James Clapper and Sally Yates intentionally lying and/or misrepresenting issues to president-elect Donald Trump and the transition team in/around the transition period and after the January 20, 2017, inauguration.

Some of the misinformation stems from intelligence officials telling direct lies (ex. telling President-elect, and President Trump he was not under investigation). Other aspects were lies of omission surrounding the Steele Dossier during the January 6th, 2017, intelligence briefing session with the President-elect in Trump Tower.

In essence, there were many misleading and false statements, with varying scales of severity, during the period from November 9th, 2016, through mid-May 2017 when President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey.

James Comey wrote all about the unorthodox investigative methods they were forced to use in unseen memos currently withheld…. awaiting shiny thing timing:

(FBI Declarations about Comey Memos)

The FBI, DOJ, ODNI, CIA and intelligence officials were intentionally not being direct and honest with President Trump and key members of his new administration. Obviously their lack of honesty was a serious issue, and in some cases had serious ramifications.

The expressed finding by Robert Mueller’s two-year probe of ‘no Trump-Russia collusion, no Trump-Russia conspiracy, and no Trump-Russia obstruction’ has led to some hindsight reviews where anger surfaces about the now visible deception.  However, there is a trap laid here and Democrats are hoping outraged voices will walk straight into it. Some are already getting very close.

At 12:15pm on January 20th, 2017, Obama’s outgoing National Security Advisor Susan Rice wrote a memo-to-self. Many people have called this her “CYA” (cover your ass) memo, from the position that Susan Rice was protecting herself from consequences if the scheme against President Trump was discovered. Here’s the email:

On January 5, following a briefing by IC leadership on Russian hacking during the 2016 Presidential election, President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director Jim Corney and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates in the Oval Office. Vice President Biden and I were also present.

President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book“.

The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.

From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.

[Redacted Classified Section of Unknown length]

The President asked Corney to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Corney said he would.

Susan Rice ~ (pdf link)

As stated, many have looked at this as a “CYA” memo, but that’s not what this is.

This is a justification memo, written by an outgoing National Security Advisor Susan Rice to document why there have been multiple false and misleading statements given to the incoming President Trump and all of his officials.

This is not a “CYA” memo, this is a justification memo for use AFTER the Trump-Russia collusion/conspiracy narrative collapsed; if the impeachment effort failed.

The “By The Book” aspect refers to President Obama and Susan Rice being told by CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director James Comey, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, that President Trump was the subject of an active counterintelligence investigation to determine if he was under the influence of the Russian government.

Even the timing of the memo, written 15 minutes prior to the end of the Obama administration, is ex-post-facto useful as evidence of the author’s intent.

Put aside the nonsense aspect to the origination of the investigation for a moment; that part doesn’t apply here…. Accept their position ‘as if’ it is substantive.

We are talking about Brennan, Comey, Clapper and Yates telling President Obama and NSA Susan Rice that President-elect Trump is under a counterintelligence investigation where the suspicion is that Donald J Trump is an agent of a foreign power.

Under that auspices (fraudulent though it may be) the incoming President is a counterintelligence investigation target. A potentially compromised Russian asset. Under this auspices all of the officials would be permitted to lie and mislead their target, so long as they did so “By The Book.”

That’s their justification for a lengthy series of lies and false statements.

That’s why FBI Director James Comey can lie to the President and tell him he’s not the target of the ongoing Russia investigation. That’s the justification for keeping the accusations inside the Steele Dossier (remember, the Dossier is evidence) from the President-elect. That’s the justification for all of the officials to lie to President Trump, and even mislead the media if needed.

The Susan Rice email is one big Justification Letter; setting the stage for all of the participants to have a plausible reason for lies to anyone and everyone.

Call out John Brennan for telling Harry Reid about the Steele Dossier during his gang-of-eight briefing, but not telling Go8 member Devin Nunes about it. Brennan escapes by saying Nunes was on the Trump transition team; and briefing a conflicted politician on the dossier would have compromised the FBI investigation. See how that works?

Call out James Comey for lying to President-elect Trump during the January 6th Trump Tower meeting…. Comey escapes by saying Trump was a target of the FBI investigation for potential compromise as a Russian asset; informing the target of the evidence against him would have compromised the investigation. See how that works?

Every lie, every omission, every false and/or misleading statement, must first be filtered through the “By The Book” prism of Trump being considered a Russian asset. This is the justification trap democrats are waiting to exploit for maximum damage and diminishment of counter attack.

The “By the Book” justification, where every action could have been taken because Trump might have been an actual Russian operative, is the weapon under the camouflage tarp as the radical left lures-in their political opposition. They shrug their shoulders and say in condescending voice: ‘well, we didn’t know; we had to be prudent‘, etc.

Getting outraged about the Obama administration’s lies, misstatements and fabrications can backfire if you don’t first think about it from their constructed frame-of-reference.

The ‘By-the-Book’ framework is based on a false-premise; but the action, just about any action, taken to mislead (even undermine) the incoming administration is excusable under this carefully crafted justification memo. That’s exactly why Susan Rice wrote it; and each of the participating members knows they can use it, when needed.

The way to get around the legal and political defense inside this justification memo is to ignore the activity of those protected by it and go directly to the origin of how they created that false premise in the first place:

♦ President Trump can prove the July 31st, 2016, Crossfire Hurricane counterintelligence operation originated from a scheme within the intelligence apparatus by exposing the preceding CIA operation that created the originating “Electronic Communication” memo. Declassify that two-page “EC” document that Brennan gave to Comey.  [The trail is found within the Weissmann report and the use of Alexander Downer – SEE HERE]

♦ Release and declassify all of the Comey memos that document the investigative steps taken  by the FBI as an outcome of the operation coordinated by CIA Director John Brennan in early 2016.  [The trail was memorialized by James Comey – SEE HERE]

♦ Reveal the November 2015 through April 2016 FISA-702 search query abuse by declassifying the April 2017 court opinion written by FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer. Show the FBI contractors behind the 85% fraudulent search queries. [Crowdstrike? Fusion-GPS? Nellie Ohr? Daniel Richman?]  The was a weaponized surveillance and domestic political spying operation. [The trail was laid down in specific detail by Judge Collyer – SEE HERE]

♦ Subpoena former DOJ-NSD (National Security Division) head John Carlin, or haul him in front of a grand jury, and get his testimony about why he hid the abuse from the FISA court in October 2016; why the DOJ-NSD rushed the Carter Page application to beat NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers to the FISA court; and why Carlin quit immediately thereafter. Squeeze this bastard’s nuts in the proverbial legal vice.

♦ Prove the Carter Page FISA application (October 2016) was fraudulent and based on deceptions to the FISA Court. Declassify the entire document, and release the transcripts of those who signed the application(s); and/or depose those who have not yet testified. The creation of the Steele Dossier was the cover-up operation. [SEE HERE]

♦ Release all of the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages without redactions. Let sunlight pour in on the actual conversation(s) that were taking place when Crossfire Hurricane (July ’16) and the FISA Application (Oct ’16) were taking place.  The current redactions were made by the people who weaponized the intelligence system for political surveillance and spy operation.  This is why Page and Strzok texts are redacted!

♦ Release all of Bruce Ohr 302’s, FBI notes from interviews and debriefing sessions, and other relevant documents associated with the interviews of Bruce Ohr and his internal communications. Including exculpatory evidence that Bruce Ohr may have shared with FBI Agent Joseph Pientka. [And get a deposition from this Pientka fella] Bruce Ohr is the courier, carrying information from those outside to those on the inside.

♦ Release the August 2nd, 2017, two-page scope memo provided by DAG Rod Rosenstein to special counsel Robert Mueller to advance the fraudulent Trump investigation, and initiate the more purposeful obstruction of justice investigation. Also Release the October 20th, 2017, second scope memo recently discovered.  The Scope Memos are keys to unlocking the underlying spy/surveillance cover-up. [SEE HERE and SEE HERE]