Interesting new developments in the growing story of the FBI and DOJ conducting a surveillance operation against candidate Trump in 2016, to include the use of an FBI and CIA informant.
Contrary to previous reporting, representative Peter King (R-NY) reveals that yesterday Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy were not allowed to see the originating documents during their visit with the DOJ and FBI officials. Representative Trey Gowdy (U-DC) reluctantly admitted moments ago, the statement by Peter King was true.
The DOJ refused to allow Nunes & Gowdy access to the “EC” (electronic communication) document that initiated the FBI counterintelligence operation. Instead, Nunes and Gowdy were given an opaque description of the EC process; and told to come back next week if they wanted to talk more.
Additionally, Peter King reveals the DOJ and FBI are manipulating President Trump, and tricking him to believe declassifying information would endanger sources. WATCH:
Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has just dropped a sunlight grenade into the prosecution of Michael Flynn with a jaw-dropping request letter (full pdf below) to FBI Director Christopher Wray. [Judiciary Link Here]
Within the letter Chairman Grassley outlines a prior briefing from fired FBI Director James Comey to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and contrasts the false presentations of Comey -regarding Michael Flynn- against recently known evidence.
Additionally, Grassley is requesting: ♦the transcription of the phone call(s) intercepted by the FBI between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak; ♦the FD 302’s written by the FBI in their interview with Michael Flynn; ♦and testimony from Special AgentJoe Pientka, likely the second FBI agent who was partnered with Peter Strzok for the Flynn interview.
The name of the second FBI agent was previously unknown, and it’s likely Chairman Grassley outed the name for a very specific reason. This is a BIG shot across the bow.
Previously the Justice Department was refusing to provide any information to the committee pertinent to Grassley’s requests, citing the ongoing investigation. However, the Senator is now outlining his request against the backdrop of the Judge in the Flynn case demanding the Special Counsel turn over all exculpatory information.
Judge Contreras was presiding judge on the initial guilty plea, then “was recused”. Judge Sullivan took over and demanded the DOJ turn over all exculpatory evidence.
Senator Grassley outlines the February 15th, 2017, briefing provided by James Comey to the committee:
[…] Like the Flynn interview itself, that briefing was not transcribed. Also like the Flynn interview, there are notes taken by a career, non-partisan law enforcement officer who was present. The agent was on detail to the Committee staff at the time.
According to that agent’s contemporaneous notes, Director Comey specifically told us during that briefing that the FBI agents who interviewed Lt. General Michael Flynn, “saw nothing that led them to believe [he was] lying.” Our own Committee staff’s notes indicate that Mr. Comey said the “agents saw no change in his demeanor or tone that would say he was being untruthful.”
Contrary to his public statements during his current book tour denying any memory of those comments, then-Director Comey led us to believe during that briefing that the agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe he intentionally lied about his conversation with the Ambassador and that the Justice Department was unlikely to prosecute him for false statements made in that interview. In the months since then, the Special Counsel obtained a guilty plea from Lt. General Flynn for that precise alleged conduct.
It is important to remember – there a widely held belief that Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe told the FBI agents (Strzok and Pientka) to shape their FBI reports of the interview (FD-302’s) to assist a “Flynn lied” narrative.
There is a great deal of debate surrounding the guilty plea as an outcome of a carefully constructed and coordinated plan by FBI and DOJ officials to target Flynn.
The letter continues:
[…] The Department has withheld the Flynn-related documents since our initial bipartisan request last year, citing an ongoing criminal investigation. With Flynn’s plea, the investigation appears concluded.
Additionally, while we are aware that the Special Counsel’s office has moved to delay Lt. General Flynn’s sentencing on several occasions, we presume that all related records already have been provided to the defense pursuant to Judge Sullivan’s February 16, 2018 order requiring production of all potentially exculpatory material. Thus, although the case is not yet adjudicated, the Committee’s oversight interest in the underlying documents requested more than a year ago now outweighs any legitimate executive branch interest in withholding it. So too does the Committee’s interest in learning the FBI agents’ actual assessments of their interview of Lt. Gen. Flynn, particularly given the apparent contradiction between what then Directory Comey told us in March 2017 and what he now claims.
Then comes the hammer:
[…] In addition, please make Special Agent Joe Pientka available for a transcribed interview with Committee staff no later than one week following the production of the requested documents…
Regarding the “widely held belief” that Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe told the FBI agents (Strzok and Pientka) to shape their FBI reports of the interview (FD-302’s) to assist a “Flynn lied” narrative…. evidence of that is within the most recent text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok:
♦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)
♦Why would Page & Strzok be stressed about “THIS” potentially going off the rails if everything was by the book?
BECAUSE IT WASN’T!
It was a conspiracy to entrap Gen Mike Flynn. All Strzok needed was an excuse to speak w Flynn. Everything in the 302 was likely fabricated.
♦February 14th, 2017, there is another note about the FBI reports filed from the interview.
Peter Strzok asks Lisa Page if FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is OK with his report: “Also, is Andy good with F-302?”
Lisa Page replies: “Launch on F 302”.
And we know from their discussions of manipulating FBI reports a year earlier, inside the Hillary Clinton investigation – that Peter Strzok has withheld information, and manipulated information, through use of the 302 reports:
Today, after a briefing session between Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and his counterpart from South-Korea, Secretary Pompeo and Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha held a joint press conference. Serious discussions with resolute heart. WATCH:
.
[Transcript] SECRETARY POMPEO: Good afternoon. It is my honor to welcome Foreign Minister Kang to Washington. It is important to meet with such a critical ally so early in my time as Secretary at this incredibly critical time as well. Our alliance with the Republic of Korea was forged in the crucible of war 65 years ago. Tens of thousands of Koreans and Americans sacrificed their lives in the pursuit of freedom for South Korea.
In the years since, the citizens of South Korea took the hard-earned freedom and transformed their war-shattered country into an economic wonder. The Republic of Korea is now the 11th largest economy in the globe, the sixth largest trading partner of the United States, and a key force multiplier for U.S. leadership in the world. The U.S.-Republic of Korea alliance has been fortified by the trials of history and is unequivocally now stronger than ever. Over 28,500 men and women of the United States Forces Korea serve as the forward-deployed face of the ironclad U.S. commitment to the security of the Republic of Korea, its people, and indeed to the entire region.
The prospect of peace and security in the Korean Peninsula and across the Asia Pacific region is why we have stood shoulder to shoulder for more than six decades. Just yesterday, I returned from Pyongyang, where I had productive discussions with Chairman Kim Jong-un in preparation for President Trump’s summit with him. It was an honor as one of my first actions as Secretary of State to negotiate the safe return of three U.S. citizens and bring them home to freedom. We wish these Americans and their families the best as they reconnect after a very difficult time apart. On behalf of the American people, we say welcome home.
The release of these three citizens helps set the conditions for a successful meeting between President Trump and Chairman Kim. We look forward to our continued preparations with the DPRK to make the summit in Singapore on June 12th a true success for the American and Korean people and for the world. I congratulate South Korea and North Korea on their historic meeting last month. The United States is encouraged by President Moon and Chairman Kim’s stated goal of complete denuclearization in the Panmunjom declaration.
Today, Foreign Minister Kang and I discussed the summit, my trip to North Korea, and the bold step President Trump is about to take when he meets with Chairman Kim. We would not be where we are today without the close and coordinated leadership of Presidents Trump and Moon. The United States and the Republic of Korea remain committed to achieving the permanent, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. If Chairman Kim chooses the right path, there is a future brimming with peace and prosperity for the North Korea – North Korean people. America’s track record of support for the Korean people is second to none.
If North Korea takes bold action to quickly denuclearize, the United States is prepared to work with North Korea to achieve prosperity on the par with our South Korean friends. The United States looks forward to continued close cooperation with our South Korean allies on this issue and many others.
Foreign Minister, thank you for being with me today. It was a pleasure to work with you.
♦FOREIGN MINISTER KANG: Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary, for the very warm welcome. Let me reiterate my congratulations on your becoming the top diplomat of the United States at this historic moment. Secretary Pompeo, you have already been at the center of our joint efforts on North Korea, and I very much look forward to working closely with you.
We spoke on April 28th right after the momentous inter-Korean summit, and today we met just after Secretary Pompeo’s return from Pyongyang. During our meeting, I congratulated him and President Trump for the successful release of the three U.S. citizens, all Korean Americans, from North Korea. This is a promising signal for the upcoming summit between President Trump and Chairman Kim.
Over the past weeks, both Korea and the United States have been engaged in intensive diplomatic efforts regarding North Korea, and we briefed each other on the latest endeavors, including Secretary Pompeo’s visit to Pyongyang and the Korea-Japan-China trilateral summit in Tokyo, which adopted a special statement welcoming the outcome of the South-North Korean summit and expressing the strong hopes for the success of the upcoming U.S.-North Korea summit. In this context, Secretary Pompeo and I discussed preparations for the summit meeting between President Trump and Chairman Kim in Singapore on June 12th. We agreed that the summit would be a historic opportunity for resolving the North Korean nuclear issue and securing enduring peace on the Korean Peninsula. We reaffirmed that our goal is to achieve the complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula.
In this regard, Secretary Pompeo and I agreed the next few weeks will be critical, requiring air-tight coordination between our two countries. As announced, President Moon will visit Washington, D.C. soon to meet with President Trump. The close communication and trust between Presidents Trump and Moon have been the driving force that has brought us to this point of breakthrough for the denuclearization and peace on the Korean Peninsula. So their meeting on the 22nd will be instrumental in preparing for a successful U.S.-North Korea summit.
Secretary Pompeo and I reaffirmed that the ROK-U.S. alliance, which celebrates its 65th anniversary this year, has long served as the linchpin for peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the region. We also reaffirmed that for the last 65 years, the USFK, the United States Forces in Korea, has played a crucial role for deterrence and peace and stability of the region, and we would like to emphasize again that the U.S. military presence in Korea is a matter for the ROK-U.S. alliance first and foremost.
After today’s meeting, I am even more confident that our alliance is as robust as ever and that there is no daylight in our cooperation on the denuclearization and peace on the Korean Peninsula.
Once again, I would like to thank Secretary Pompeo for today’s fruitful discussions and look forward to building a close working partnership relationship with him. And in addition to the upcoming summit meeting in Washington, D.C. on May 22nd, I hope to see him again in Seoul and reciprocate the hospitality very soon. Thank you very much.
MS NAUERT: Thank you. And we have time for two questions total. The first goes to Rich Edson from Fox News Channel. Rich.
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. You just mentioned and have mentioned before, as have the South Koreans, that you are looking for permanent, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization. How does the United States specifically define that? Is it inspections, full facility dismantling? Is it more than that, less than that? And also, you have had more substantive conversations with Kim Jong-un than arguably any other Westerner. What is your impression of him? Do you think he’s rational? And simply, what’s it like to talk to him?
And to the foreign minister, are South Korea and regional allies discussing providing any sanctions relief to North Korea before the summit between President Trump and Kim Jong-un, and what kind of outcome does South Korea need to secure its security, and does that include the maintenance of current U.S. military assets in the region? Thank you very much.
SECRETARY POMPEO: So I have spent more time with Chairman Kim other than perhaps President Moon working on this incredibly important challenge that lays before the world. President Trump and the world have set the conditions for a successful outcome from June 12th and the activities that are necessary to follow there from. You asked about my conversations with Chairman Kim. This question is sort of undignified, “Is he rational?” Yes, we had good conversations, substantive conversations, conversations that involve deep, complex problems, challenges the strategic decision that Chairman Kim has before him about how it is he wishes to proceed and if he is prepared in exchange for the assurances that we’re ready to provide to him if he is prepared to fully denuclearize. And I’m not sure how to define it fully.
It’s pretty clear what that means. It would be an activity that undertook to ensure that we didn’t end up in the same place that we’d ended up before, or multiple passes at trying to solve this conundrum for the world, how to ensure that North Korea doesn’t possess the capacity to threaten not only the United States but the world with nuclear weapons. And so in order to achieve that, it will require a robust verification program and one that we will undertake with partners around the world, which will achieve that outcome in a way that frankly no agreement before it has ever set forth. A big undertaking for sure, but one that Chairman Kim and I had the opportunity to have a good, sound discussion on so that I think we have a pretty good understanding between our two countries about what the shared objectives are.
QUESTION: What’s he like?
SECRETARY POMPEO: I’m sorry.
QUESTION: What’s he like?
SECRETARY POMPEO: We had good conversations. There – it was – there’s some videos that have been released. You can see our conversations were warm. We were each representing our two countries, trying our best to make sure that we were communicating clearly, that we had a shared understanding about what our mutual objectives were. But we had good conversations about the histories of our two nations, the challenges that we’ve had between us. We talked about the fact that America has often in history had adversaries who we are now close partners with, and our hope that we could achieve the same with respect to North Korea.
MS NAUERT: All right. Thank you, Rich. Our next question goes to Yonhap News Agency.
FOREIGN MINISTER KANG: Could I just —
MS NAUERT: Oh, pardon me.
FOREIGN MINISTER KANG: — answer that —
MS NAUERT: Yes.
FOREIGN MINISTER KANG: I think your question about sanctions relief, I think we were very clear that the sanctions remain in place until and unless we see visible, meaningful action taken by North Korea on the denuclearization track. The North Korean leader has committed to denuclearization, and formally so through the Panmunjom Declaration. We very much hope to see further steps, more concrete steps towards denuclearization being produced at the U.S.-North Korea summit. So we’re not talking about sanctions relief at this point.
Your question about what are we looking in terms of for our own security, we are confident of our security through the Korea-U.S. joint security stance, which is why we say the issue of the alliance – any issue of the alliance, including the troop presence in our country, is a matter for our two allies to discuss and not to be put on the table with North Korea.
MS NAUERT: Okay. And our next question goes to Yonhap, to Mr. Lee Seungwoo.
QUESTION: Hello, Secretaries.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Hi.
QUESTION: So I have two questions for each of you. So —
MS NAUERT: We only have time for one, please. Thank you.
QUESTION: Oh, yeah. One for —
MS NAUERT: Yes, one.
QUESTION: Okay. So one for our Minister Kang. Can I say in Korean?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Sure.
FOREIGN MINISTER KANG: Sure.
QUESTION: (Via interpreter) Recently, there was a talk that possibly USFK can be reduced. Was it discussed in your bilateral talks today? And when President Moon visits Washington D.C. before the Pyongyang and Washington, D.C. talks, what kind of coordination did you make in the run-up to this upcoming discussion between Pyongyang and Washington, D.C.?
(In English) (Inaudible) Pyonyang and (inaudible) Kim Jong-un, and our historic summit between President Trump and Kim is fully set up. However, the key issue is dismantling North Korea’s WMD. And I guess there’s a quite a big gap between U.S. and north standpoint. So did you actually discuss the issue with Kim, with – this issue with Kim? And have you two narrowed the differences? And do you think he’s willing to give up his WMD? Thank you.
FOREIGN MINISTER KANG: (Via interpreter) So there was no talk about reducing USFK at all. If there was any talk about USFK, it was only about how solid our alliance is, and any issue, any discussion about USFK or alliance should be discussed as such, between our two nations which are in alliance, and not in North Korea and U.S. talks, which was confirmed by Secretary Pompeo. And May 22nd is the day when U.S. President, the South Korean president will meet again. And along the way, President Trump and President Moon have a close relationship and trust with each other, and it played a key role. So in the run-up to the North Korea and the U.S. summit, discussion between the two leaders will play a key role in preparing and setting the tone for the talks. So we are making our best effort to best prepare for this summit.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Your question was about were details discussed. We had quite a conversation about it. I’m not going to share that here; we’re not going to negotiate the details of the agreement in this setting. We’ll do it in conversations between our leaders and our working teams that are hard at preparing for the summit. I am confident that we have a shared understanding of the outcome that the leaders want – certainly Presidents Trump and – President Trump and Chairman Kim, but I think President Moon as well. I think we have a shared vision for what we hope, when this process is completed, the Korean Peninsula looks like. I think we have a good understanding, and I think there is complete agreement about what the ultimate objectives are.
We began to work through the modalities, how we would achieve that, but I’ll leave conversations about that to another time. So thank you for your question.
MS NAUERT: Thank you, everyone. Have a great afternoon.
Those who are watching the NAFTA negotiations must pay close attention to the activity in the past 36 hours. There is a key video at the bottom. First the backdrop:
As most are aware the NAFTA fatal flaw, the “loophole”, surrounds Mexico and Canada structuring their economic manufacturing policy -and trade deals- through the exploitation of a back-door into the U.S. Market. Understanding this key issue is paramount to understanding President Trump’s approach therein.
Remove the NAFTA “loophole” and there is no longer an incentive for U.S. manufacturers to locate their operations in Mexico or Canada. However, the removal of this loophole also means China, ASEAN nations and the EU lose the same incentive.
There have been hundreds of billions of previous investment by multinational corporations in Mexico and Canada. Every dollar spent was intended to continue this exploitation.
Then came Trump.
In terms of investment size and scale of manufacturing, the auto-sector is perhaps the primary industry attempting to position themselves to avoid any reversal of the NAFTA scheme; and it is a self-interested economic scheme. In the short term there are billions at stake; in the longer term there are trillions within the equation.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer is attempting to close the loophole. If he is not successful, the likelihood of President Trump walking away from NAFTA is almost certain. Canada and Mexico are fighting to retain the loophole; they have built their trade and economic model upon it for the past three decades.
Canada and Mexico are fighting to keep importing Asian and EU components into their assembly facilities – to assemble and ship into the U.S. market, without tariffs etc.
Knowing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is on the side of Canada and Mexico, yesterday Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland went to see Speaker of the House Paul Ryan -an ally/benefactor of the CoC- to make direct inquiries about how the legislative timing of a renegotiated NAFTA trade deal would flow through the U.S. congress. The questions surround Trade Promotion Authority (TPA). [Thankfully Paul Ryan is retiring]
Paul Ryan says he needs notice of a Nafta deal by May 17 if the current Congress is going to be able to vote on it, suggesting talks are pushing up against the constraints of American trade law.
The House Speaker, in remarks delivered Wednesday in Washington, said U.S. Trade Promotion Authority regulations mean next week is a deadline for the Trump administration if it wants to pass a new North American Free Trade Agreement before a new Congress is sworn in.
“As the author of TPA, I can tell you, we have to have the paper — not just an agreement, we have to have the paper — from USTR by May 17 for us to vote on it this year, in December, in the lame duck,” he said at an event hosted by the Ripon Society, a Republican policy group, according to video posted online Thursday.
Ryan was referring to the next step of Nafta talks, according to spokeswoman Ashlee Strong. If a deal is reached, the Trump administration would send a letter to Congress giving 90 days notice of its intent to sign a deal and text of a deal must be published 30 days after that. “This is not a statutory deadline, but a timeline and calendar deadline,” Strong said by email.
Negotiators are working to meet that goal, but they won’t sacrifice quality for timing, Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo told reporters on Friday morning outside the U.S. Trade Representative’s office in Washington, where talks are taking place. (read more)
It is presumed, this is the same message Paul Ryan delivered to Chrystia Freeland.
So with all of this carefully in mind, today President Trump meets with the key stakeholders from the auto-sector.
Remember, these corporations have invested billions during the past three decades to exploit the NAFTA (Can/Mex) benefits. Their collective position, CURRENTLY, is antithetical to President Trump’s America-First policy.
These discussions, and the ramifications, contain billions of billions of investment decision-making. President Trump wants these specific corporations to reverse their previous course of action; Trump wants them to change behavior; Trump wants the jobs and manufacturing back in the U.S. Watch and Listen closely:
A recent CNN poll (full pdf below) of how President Trump is handling North-Korea has the moonbats going bananas. A sea change in the behavior of North Korea led to a historic meeting between South Korea and the DPRK. Quite simply, President Trump’s strategic policy worked.
With advancing optimism for peaceful relationships, and against the backdrop of an upcoming summit between President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong-un, CNN took a poll to evaluate opinion. WATCH:
[…] “In keeping with this sea change in the course of events, Americans have swung heavily in favor of Trump’s handling of North Korea.
In November of last year, only 35 percent approved of the president’s handling of the issue, while 58 percent disapproved. In the most recent poll, a majority (53 percent) said they approved of Trump’s engagement with North Korea, while only 35 percent said they disapproved of it.
This represented a powerful 41-point (!!) swing from a negative 23-point approval rating to a positive 18-point approval rating. (read more)
For far too long corporations have caved to the misguided demands of the left with no regard to their conservative customers or suppliers. They are allowed to behave in this manner because they receive little, if any, push back from the right. Thankfully this is changing and those who think Donald Trump has nothing to do with it are amazingly naive.
It’s been reported that Dicks Sporting Goods has hired a team of DC Lobbyists to pressure Congress into more gun control. As is usually the case ‘feel good’ gun control proposals will only affect law abiding gun owners. In response to Dicks action gun manufacturers Springfield Armory, MKS Supplies and Mossberg have announced they will no longer do business with Dicks Sporting Goods. The gun industry is one of countless industries whose constitutional rights are under attack. When possible let’s make these gutless decision makers pay a price.
Jeff Longo
Ruger is another gun manufacturer. Check out their statement in defense of our freedom.
Julian Assange EXPOSES Adam Schiff Plan To Take down Trump In an Exclusive Interview | Latest News Julian Assange EXPOSES Adam Schiff Plan To Take down Trump In an Exclusive Interview Please Subscribe Here… (Real Footage of JFK Assassination
THIS JUST IN: April 2018 was the best month in history in government income. Maybe Trump’s economics work after all? Want even more Right Angle each week? Become a member at BillWhittle.com! https://www.billwhittle.com/subscribe Right Angle is brought to you by the paying members of BillWhittle.com and by donations from viewers like you! Show your support by making a donation at: https://www.billwhittle.com/donate
•On July 31st, 2016 the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign. They did not inform congress until March 2017. •At the beginning of August (1st-3rd) 2016 FBI Agent Peter Strzok traveled to London, England for interviews with UK intelligence officials. •On August 15th, 2016 Peter Strzok sends a text message to DOJ Lawyer Lisa Page describing the “insurance policy“, needed in case Hillary Clinton were to lose the election.
Recently there has been a great deal of interest in the origination OF the 2016 FBI counterintelligence operation, and how the FISA court was later used to gain Title-1 surveillance warrant against U.S. person Carter Page; part of that operation.
The current line of inquiry surrounds the originating “EC” or “electronic communication” that was generated by CIA Director John Brennan and passed on to FBI Director James Comey. The EC initiated the FBI Counterintelligence Operation.
Specifically, House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes has asked about a redacted name within the “EC”, which has led to the DOJ and FBI claiming to release the name would compromise the individual.
All of these inquires, and refusals, center around the origination authority for the FBI Counterintelligence operation. The origination led to the FISA warrant. Remember that.
Chairman Nunes sent Main Justice a classified letter asking questions. DOJ responded saying they would not comply with providing information (letter) The Washington Post claimed Nunes was looking for information on an FBI/DOJ ‘source’: “a U.S. citizen who has provided intelligence to the CIA and FBI.” Additionally, this “source” was later also described by WaPo as a witness for Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation.
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said the Nunes inquiry was appropriate. With Ryan’s support, Chairman Nunes threatened to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt of congress for non-compliance with valid congressional oversight. DOJ responded saying they’d like a private meeting. Yesterday that meeting took place. Outcome? Sketchy.
In addition to everyone here, Wall Street Journal Author Kimberly Strassel also smells the familiar aroma of a cover-up deployed by administrative state officials inside the DOJ and FBI. The DOJ is refusing to allow public inquiry into the source John Brennan used to create the “EC”. Additionally, the Deep State media advocates, writ large, are working furiously to attack Chairman Devin Nunes for his inquires.
Obviously the compliant media, Democrats and second-tier DOJ/FBI officials don’t want anyone to discover the source of the 2016 counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign. Their defensive shield is to claim national security, and ambiguous/undefined threats to ‘sources and methods‘ if CIA Director Brennan’s “source”, was identified.
Well, you know what happens next. Internet researchers smell blood in the Deep State swamp…. People start digging into the details.
Here’s what is already known about the source from leaks: •a “top secret intelligence source” of the FBI and CIA, •who is a U.S. citizen and who was •involved in the Russia collusion probe. Revealing the source “might damage international relationships. This suggests the “source” •may be overseas, •have ties to foreign intelligence, or both.”
“I believe I know the name of the informant, but my intelligence sources did not provide it to me and refuse to confirm it. It would therefore be irresponsible to publish it.”
Consider me irresponsible.
The needle on my give-a-damn-meter broke off around the time the Page/Strzok texts were published. The intelligence apparatus is still actively trying to destroy a constitutionally elected president. The IC and their co-dependents within the FBI and DOJ are the ones hiding information to protect themselves. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Some brilliant research was already assembled by various people who have looked deeply into this story {HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE} the trail is transparent and Brennan’s FBI/CIA source appears is quite obvious. I’m just going to connect their well researched dots.
Remember the Peter Strzok trip to London? The source of John Brennan’s “EC” is likely FBI and CIA operative Stefan Halper a foreign policy expert and Cambridge professor with connections to the CIA and its British counterpart, MI6.
There are about two dozen check-references to identify who the ‘source’ was in providing the underlying intelligence to CIA Director John Brennan; who then wrote the “EC” for the FBI; which started the 2016 Counterintelligence Operation.
Stefan Halper checks off every single box: √Currently overseas. √Current/Former CIA operative. √Current/Former source for FBI. √Anti-Trump motive. √Formerly put together this exact type of operation. √Connections to UK spies/intel community/politicians. √Connection to Australian spies/intel community. √Connection to Alexander Downer. √Political operative. √Wanted Clinton to win 2016 election. √Connects to Carter Page. √Connects to George Papadopoulos. √Connects to John Brennan. ETC.
Two months ago Chuck Ross of The Daily Caller took a deep dive on how Stefan Halper interacted with George Papadopoulos and Carter Page. Halper was way too sketchy, and he was trying to initiate contacts with low-level Trump campaign aides. [SEE HERE]
DAILY CALLER – Two months before the 2016 election, George Papadopoulos received a strange request for a meeting in London, one of several the young Trump adviser would be offered — and he would accept — during the presidential campaign.
The meeting request, which has not been reported until now, came from Stefan Halper, a foreign policy expert and Cambridge professor with connections to the CIA and its British counterpart, MI6.
Halper’s September 2016 outreach to Papadopoulos wasn’t his only contact with Trump campaign members. The 73-year-old professor, a veteran of three Republican administrations, met with two other campaign advisers, The Daily Caller News Foundation learned. (Please Keep Reading)
Stefan Halper posesses a very specific set of skills from all of his prior work within politics and the intelligence community. Halper was in contact with every official and entity in the set-up; and Halper was in the right places at the times when all of these set-up meetings and issues took place.
So, what did he do?
Simple, his job was to locate then dirty-up anyone he could convince: 1) to meet with him; 2) engage in his requests; and 3) engage contacts he set up. Halper was setting up a classic operation to use unknown “useful idiots” to give the appearance of Russian allies/actors.
Halper provided the underlying imaging, the optics needed for the “EC” referral; which Brennan then used to trigger James Comey; who originated the FBI Counterintelligence Operation.
The fraudulent origin, in combination with the October FISA warrant needed for surveillance gathering, would drive the insurance policy that Peter Strzok described to Lisa Page.
Neither Carter Page or George Papadopoulos would need to be an active participant in the scheme. They could be simply (UI) useful idiots. Hence:
[…] Papadopoulos questioned Halper’s motivation for contacting him, according to a source familiar with Papadopoulos’ thinking. That’s not just because of the randomness of the initial inquiry but because of questions Halper is said to have asked during their face-to-face meetings in London.
According to a source with knowledge of the meeting, Halper asked Papadopoulos: “George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?” (more)
Some people have called Page and/or Papadopoulos “moles”, but that’s really not what it appears they were. The better description is “tools”. Once Stefan Halper dirtied them up, they gave the appearance of being involved in a vast Russian conspiracy.
It was the appearance that mattered in order to generate the foundation for: the counterintelligence operation; and the subsequent FISA surveillance warrant; and the Vast Russian Conspiracy narrative; and ultimately the post-election Special Counsel investigation. In total, this was the Peter Strzok “Insurance Policy“.
As House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes has begun working backward; and with the Inspector General looking at the ‘small group’ operatives and publicizing the motives; the deep state operatives inside the DOJ and FBI obviously don’t want sunlight going all the way back to the individual(s) at the beginning of the operation. There is a risk there. Hence, they try to hide behind ‘National Security compromise’ etc, and an ideological media willing to assist in keeping it all hidden.
Chairman Nunes has requested the documents be unredacted to the HPSCI. The DOJ/FBI are claiming if they unredact the originating documents, they will likely be leaked by congress and compromise the sources therein.
Additionally, Chairman Nunes published the HPSCI Report on Russian Active Measures; and in doing so the DOJ and FBI redacted his report for the public. Nunes objected to the redactions.
In part of the report the HPSCI describes the origin of the FBI 2016 Counterintelligence Operation. The DOJ and FBI redacted the paragraph where Nunes outlined who was targeted at the start.
If my analysis is accurate, there were FOUR initial targets of the FBI counterintelligence operation who were connected to the Trump campaign. Here’s what I think those redactions are hiding:
The DOJ didn’t redact Carter Page because he was already ‘outed’ in the House FISA memo. However, I believe the current DOJ redactions are hiding George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort and Rick Gates.
Those would be the July 2016 targets outlined by the originating EC (electronic communication) from John Brennan when the FBI Counterintelligence operation began.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 