Well, well, well.  This is likely to be quickly brushed under the proverbial rug.  If you have followed the case against SSCI Security Director James Wolfe you will note the original indictment against him outlined, obliquely, how Wolfe took custody of the Carter Page FISA application and then leaked it to his concubine at Buzzfeed Ms. Ali Watkins.

The leak of the FISA application was a rather explosive issue not readily identified when Wolfe’s indictment was first presented (June ’18).  It was only possible to connect the dots after the FISA application was released (July ’18) and a comparison on specific dates, times, contacts and chain-of-custody, was possible.

In response to his indictment, Wolfe’s lawyers said they would force Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) members to participate and testify in any trial.  This was a rather stunning approach.  A few months passed and a plea bargain was struck.  Wolfe would plead guilty only to one count of lying to FBI investigators.  The charges of the leaking “top secret and classified” intelligence were dropped.

Wolfe was not ultimately charged with leaking the FISA application.  We sniffed a quid-pro-quo.  We suspected Wolfe was instructed by at least one senator, likely  SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner, to leak the information.  This would explain Wolfe’s extraordinary defense position – and the DOJ response therein.

Think about it.  A gang-of-eight member (Warner), who happened -as a consequence of the jaw dropping implications- to be one of only TWO SSCI members who was notified by the FBI that Wolfe was compromised. The ramifications cannot be overstated.

After the sketchy plea agreement the DOJ filed a sentencing memo, on ONLY the lying aspect, claiming –contrary to the original indictment– their investigation could not prove classified intelligence leaks.  However, the DOJ also argued for a sentence of two years incarceration, far exceeding the judicial sentencing standard for a single count of lying.  Again, rather dubious DOJ positioning.

CTH still believes Wolfe leaked the FISA application to Ali Watkins and the DOJ was in a tenuous position due to the strong likelihood of key and powerful senators being involved.

  Well, yesterday the DOJ filed a response to the Wolfe defense teams’ own sentencing memo (full pdf below), and within the DOJ response they, perhaps inadvertently, posted an exhibit (#13) written by the FBI special agent in charge, which specifically says:

….”because of the known disclosure of classified information, the FISA application”…

“known disclosure”…

I don’t think the DOJ meant to allow or file that.

Here’s the full DOJ responsive filing to the Wolfe defense sentencing memo:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/395775597/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-Ri1zx4Lgs43CF6bIoj4s

.

As a reminder, we know the FISA court delivered the read and return Top-Secret Classified Carter Page application due to the clerk stamp of March 17, 2017.

That stamp date, March 17, 2017, and the content therein, matched the date and details of the original Wolfe indictment:

On that same date, March 17th, 2017, within the text messages of SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner and Lobbyist/Lawyer Adam Waldman – as they were working out details of how to meet covertly with dossier author Christopher Steele, we find Warner going into the Senate Intelligence Committee SCIF.

SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner is a central figure in the scheme to entrap the incoming administration under the auspices of the fraudulent Russia probe.

(Washington, DC – December 14th, 2018) Judicial Watch today released two sets of heavily redacted State Department documents, 38 pagesand 48 pages, showing classified information was researched and disseminated to multiple U.S. Senators by the Obama administration immediately prior to President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

The documents reveal that among those receiving the classified documents were Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), and Sen. Robert Corker (R-TN).

Judicial Watch obtained the documents through a June 2018 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed against the State Department after it failed to respond to a February 2018 request seeking records of the Obama State Department’s last-minute efforts to share classified information about Russia election interference issues with Democratic Senator Ben Cardin (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:18-cv-01381)).

The documents reveal the Obama State Department urgently gathering classified Russia investigation information and disseminating it to members of Congress within hours of Donald Trump taking office.  (read more)

This DOJ deal with James Wolfe is one big, FUBAR, Deep State example of a cover-up operation.  Each side is deploying leverage to avoid accountability the DOJ is trying to preserve and protect multiple institutions.

The motives are all the same….  because the ramifications, if fully exposed, would tear at the very fabric of a democratically elected constitutional republic…

Decide for yourself.

Joe diGenova appears on Fox News with Tucker Carlson to discuss the case against Michael Flynn and calls out the specifics behind the fraud.

.

Byron York and Jonathan Turley also have a reaction to today’s Mueller filings below.

.

Forget the unmentioned brutally obvious political motives and intents behind the operation against Donald Trump for a moment; and focus on the collective Obama activity as if they actually believed the claims they have since presented…

The counterintelligence investigation into candidate, president-elect, and president Donald Trump was predicated on the Obama’s intelligence community believing that campaign officials were colluding, conspiring and otherwise coordinating to take over the office of the presidency, with help from a foreign government.  So why wouldn’t the intelligence services of the United States government conduct wiretaps and full blown surveillance upon that incoming administration?

The John Brennan CIA presented a classified electronic communication, “ec”, origination memo (we are not allowed to see) to ODNI (Clapper) and FBI (Comey); who then opened a full-blown counterintelligence operation against officials within the Trump campaign.

We know this operation was political, but again, ignore that aspect and just look at the issues, details and activity while accepting -at face value- their demonstrably dubious claims.

Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn provided the opening for operational surveillance of the Trump team. We can argue about how they were framed in that regard; however, it is factual that FISA-Title-One surveillance is all encompassing.

The target is validated and defined by the FBI as “an agent of a foreign government”. This legal distinction permits full surveillance: electronic, physical, the works.  Everything is on the table, no limits or boundaries.

FBI Director James Comey told congress (March 20th, 2017) the reason the intelligence community did not disclose their counterintelligence operation against candidate, president-elect and President Trump was “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”  As such the required congressional oversight notifications were bypassed.

Outgoing National Security Advisor Susan Rice documented on inauguration day that a meeting was held on January 5th, 2017, to discuss the Russia concerns with Rice, James Clapper, James Comey and President Obama.  According to Rice President Obama said they were to make sure “everything was by-the-book“.

In the weeks and months that followed, we learn in hindsight the Trump Transition team was under electronic surveillance.  This surveillance also included the capture of all of their transition email accounts, the content was later given -without prior approval- to Robert Mueller by the GAO.  This is not disputed.

Remember, as an outcome of the concern and in combination with the counterintelligence operation, the incoming National Security Advisor, General Michael Flynn, was designated as a national security risk by the intelligence apparatus that he would be part of.  Flynn was under electronic surveillance as part of the Obama authorized operation.

Pause / Repeat:

Why wouldn’t the Obama intelligence apparatus be wiretapping the White House if they believed a foreign adversary was in control of the Trump administration?

I digress, moving on…

On January 27th, 2017, FBI Director James Comey attended a Green Room dinner with President Trump just about a week after the inauguration. This is the meeting where, according to Comey, President Trump asked for “loyalty”.  [This is also the date when Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates confronted White House counsel Don McGahn about Flynn’s interview with the FBI a few days earlier on Jan 24th.]

It would only be a few weeks later [Follow Link] when President Trump remodeled the “Green Room” (presidential dining room) adding a flat screen TV and a chandelier he paid for personally. During the remodel the dining room was “taken down to the studs”, and according to a quote later delivered by Time Magazine:

TIME – […] But few rooms have changed so much so fast as his dining room, where he often eats his lunch amid stacks of newspapers and briefing sheets. A few weeks back, the President ordered a gutting of the room. “We found gold behind the walls, which I always knew. Renovations are grand,” he says, boasting that contractors from the General Services Administration resurfaced the walls and redid the moldings in two days. “Remember how hard they worked? They wanted to make me happy.”

On February 14th, 2017 President Trump and James Comey were again alone was in the Oval Office. February 14th was also the day when the head of the Secret Service, Joseph Clancy, announced his resignation.  Clancy’s resignation was effective March 4th, 2017.

After he was fired James Comey testified to congress on June 8th, 2017, saying he delivered his memos of the meetings with President Trump to his friend at Columbia University, Professor Daniel Richman, on/after May 15th. He said the intent was to initiate a “special prosecutor”:

“I woke up in the middle of the night on Monday night, ‘cause it didn’t dawn on me originally that there might be corroboration for our conversation; there might be a tape.” [Referring to Monday May 15] “And my judgment was I needed to get that out in the public square so I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter. I Didn’t do it myself for a variety of reasons but I asked him to because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel. So I asked a close friend of mine to do it.”

However, the content of the memo was leaked to the New York Times on or before Thursday May 11th for an article that was originally posted at 5:26pm:

Quite simply James Comey lied to congress about when and why he initiated leaking the memos to his friends in the media.  Comey claimed a tweet from President Trump spurred him to share his memo.

The tweet from President Trump (May 12th) was in response to the New York Times article (May 11th) which was quoting from the Comey memo.  So Comey was lying when he said he gave the memo to the New York Times (Via Daniel Richman) on Monday May 15th.

This false motive, claimed by Comey, was highlighted by President Trump’s attorney at the time:

I bring up this example because of the Trump tweet that surrounds it.

President Trump tweeted about a “recording” after reading the New York Times article that was written from the memo account of James Comey; however, the tweet was also made after the Green Room was “taken down to the studs” and remodeled.

Everyone assumed President Trump was talking about a recording that he might have made of the Comey conversation; however, in hindsight given the nature of what is described above – wouldn’t it be more likely the recording was external to the White House; as a part of the surveillance.

“By the book”.

If they truly believed a foreign adversary was in control of the Trump administration; a claim they already made to the FISA court; why wouldn’t the Obama intelligence apparatus be wiretapping the White House?

In hindsight we already know the Trump campaign, Trump transition team and Trump administration were under surveillance.

Tick-tock-bombshell club member John Solomon drops an explosive statement on Sean Hannity.  Oddly, there’s a factual part of his statement CTH agrees with; and a structural part of the background that is almost certain never to reach sunlight.  First, the substance:

(Transcript) […] “In May of 2017 there was a document identified to a small number of people in the United States government. It’s in the possession of the Defense Intelligence Agency.  For eighteen months there’s been an effort to resist declassifying that document; I know that that document contains extraordinary exculpatory information about General Flynn. I don’t believe the president has ever been told about the existence of this document.  One lawmaker discovered it, but was thwarted by the Defense Intelligence Agency in his efforts to disclose it. I think we should all ask for that declassification; get that out; it may enlighten the judge; it will certainly enlighten the American public.”

From the time-frame disclosed we can reasonably infer what this document is; at least what background surrounds it.

♦“In May of 2017”… The document is likely part of an intelligence product that was produced for President Obama’s Daily Briefing (PDB), and contains unmasking information (likely done by Susan Rice) on Michael Flynn as a surveillance target.

♦“One Lawmaker discovered it”… You might remember way back in March 2017 when HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes was taken to the White House SCIF by then white house official Ezra Cohen-Watnick; and that began a series of cascading events.

Critical to watch this brief segment:

.

CTH was closely following in real time; and there were key points by Chairman Nunes:

1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”

2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”

3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”

4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities, or of the Trump team.

“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”

•“Who was aware of it?”
•”Why it was not disclosed to congress?”
•”Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”
•“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”
•“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”

“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”

That was March 22nd, 2017.

Now, unbeknownst to us at the time FISA Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer was writing a report based on NSA/FBI information given to her as part of a background FISA-702 review and reauthorization process.

In April of 2017 that FISC report was delivered to recently confirmed Office of Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats; who also received a supplementary briefing on the background of the content by NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers.   On April 26th that FISC report was partially declassified. [See Here]

Here’s where it all connects.

We know from Collyers report the FISA-702(16)(17) process was extraordinarily abused by verified “contractors” who had access to the FBI/NSA database.  The rate of abuse was 85%. Meaning 85 out of every 100 FISA702 database searches were unauthorized and outside of compliance.

The FISA compliance review period was November 2015 through April 2016; however, Collyer went out of her way to note there was no reason to suspect the rate of unlawful use was confined to that compliance period.  She pointed out there was no reason to suspect a similar rate of abuse did not extend back to 2012.

Look at the redaction blocks, paying attention to where the number of non-compliant searches would be quantified. In the six month period under review there were thousands of unauthorized (non compliant) search queries; with an 85% non-compliant rate.

Those unlawful searches formed the basis for intelligence gathering and later unmasking. It is almost certain part of the system abuse was toward political targeting.

The process of electronic surveillance switched from unlawful (non compliant) to lawful (compliant) *after* FISA warrants were obtained on Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn per the Nunes memo, which was recently confirmed by James Comey:

The explosive Collyer FISA report was delivered to ODNI Coats in late April 2017.  John Solomon mentions May 2017 as the date of the documents that would help to clear Michael Flynn.

It is likely, almost certain, the intelligence community (including DNI and DIA) were in a state of conflict over what to do with the intelligence files opened on the FISA targets.

Some of the intelligence product was lawfully compliant; some of the intelligence product was created without lawful compliance; all of the intelligence product resulted in singular files on each of the targets; and at least some of the intelligence product also included unauthorized unmasking and distribution as Chairman Nunes described on March 22nd, 2017.

As a result, the intelligence community leadership -under the Trump administration, but from no bad action on their part- was in a bit of a pickle.  Let us call this the Flynn docs.

That sounds like the internal classification/declassification argument as a result of the sketchily obtained intelligence product that John Solomon is describing to Sean Hannity:

(Transcript) […] “In May of 2017 there was a document identified to a small number of people in the United States government. It’s in the possession of the Defense Intelligence Agency.  For eighteen months there’s been an effort to resist declassifying that document; I know that that document contains extraordinary exculpatory information about General Flynn. I don’t believe the president has ever been told about the existence of this document.  One lawmaker discovered it, but was thwarted by the Defense Intelligence Agency in his efforts to disclose it. I think we should all ask for that declassification; get that out. It may enlighten the judge; it will certainly enlighten the American public.”

The Flynn docs likely are a product of surveillance on him during the campaign; and more specifically, exoneration evidence during the transition period after the election.

However, declassifying those documents means revealing how that exculpatory documentation was obtained.   Now we are approaching the FISA-702 electronic surveillance process.  See the issue?

The intelligence community cannot, hell, will not, put part of their critical intelligence gathering system at risk simply to provide exculpatory information.

Ask yourself this rather complex question: There has been a great deal of talk about demanding that President Trump declassify a specific set of documents that swirl around “spygate”…. but have you ever noticed that no-one, not once, not a single official, has ever even discussed the need to declassify the Collyer FISA report?

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/349542716/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-72P5FzpI44KMOuOPZrt1

.

Hell, no-one inside Washington DC has ever even mentioned that 99-page report, let alone requested it to be declassified, discussed and the content understood by the American electorate.  From their perspective, the ramifications are heavy on the downside.

The reason is simple.  The unlawful exploitation of the FISA702(16)(17) system was so extreme, 85% non-compliant, we can only imagine what it was used for. {Go Deep}

I recently wrote a twitter thread on the ramifications and likelihood of what was going on behind the use of the FBI/NSA database. –SEE HERE– With an abuse rate of 85% there is no reasonable way to dismiss the probability the system was being exploited for multiple purposes, not just political opposition research.  There’s a ton of money to be made in the sale and exploitation of information.

When FISA Court Collyer notes that federal “contractors”, private individuals outside of government, were the primary abusers of the surveillance database – what do you think they were doing with that information?

If an outsider, with no connections to professional political officials, just happened to win the office of the presidency…. well, what level of risk would all of those database abusers, contractors and political benefactors, be contemplating?

After indulging in the exploitation of this system, since at least 2012, how much would they have profited from the sale of unlawfully obtained information? How far would they be willing to go to protect themselves from any legal exposure?

How much money would these corrupt entities be willing to drop to throw a bag over their activity?   Would paying one of the contractors $50,000,000.00 seem unreasonable.

Just sayin’…

•Dianne Feinstein was Vice-Chair of the SSCI in 2016, and her former staffer, Dan Jones, is heavily involved with Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele. [See Here]  By position Feinstein was on the Gang-of-Eight during the 2016 CIA, DOJ and FBI Counterintelligence Operation.  The same Feinstein that arbitrarily released the testimony of Glenn Simpson in 2018 without discussing with anyone [See Here]

Senator Feinstein’s 2016 senior staffer (with Gang-of-Eight security clearance) was Dan Jones.  It was revealed this year that Dan Jones sent Fusion GPS over $50 million to continue work on the Russia Conspiracy angle after the 2016 election toward the ideological goals of removing President Trump. [See Here]

He was not supposed to win!

Tick-tock-bombshell club member John Solomon drops an explosive statement on Sean Hannity.  Oddly, there’s a factual part of his statement CTH agrees with; and a structural part of the background that is almost certain never to reach sunlight.  First, the substance:

(Transcript) […] “In May of 2017 there was a document identified to a small number of people in the United States government. It’s in the possession of the Defense Intelligence Agency.  For eighteen months there’s been an effort to resist declassifying that document; I know that that document contains extraordinary exculpatory information about General Flynn. I don’t believe the president has ever been told about the existence of this document.  One lawmaker discovered it, but was thwarted by the Defense Intelligence Agency in his efforts to disclose it. I think we should all ask for that declassification; get that out; it may enlighten the judge; it will certainly enlighten the American public.”

From the time-frame disclosed we can reasonably infer what this document is; at least what background surrounds it.

♦“In May of 2017”… The document is likely part of an intelligence product that was produced for President Obama’s Daily Briefing (PDB), and contains unmasking information (likely done by Susan Rice) on Michael Flynn as a surveillance target.

♦“One Lawmaker discovered it”… You might remember way back in March 2017 when HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes was taken to the White House SCIF by then white house official Ezra Cohen-Watnick; and that began a series of cascading events.

Critical to watch this brief segment:

.

CTH was closely following in real time; and there were key points by Chairman Nunes:

1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”

2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”

3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”

4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities, or of the Trump team.

“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”

•“Who was aware of it?”
•”Why it was not disclosed to congress?”
•”Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”
•“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”
•“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”

“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”

That was March 22nd, 2017.

Now, unbeknownst to us at the time FISA Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer was writing a report based on NSA/FBI information given to her as part of a background FISA-702 review and reauthorization process.

In April of 2017 that FISC report was delivered to recently confirmed Office of Director of National Intelligence, Dan Coats; who also received a supplementary briefing on the background of the content by NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers.   On April 26th that FISC report was partially declassified. [See Here]

Here’s where it all connects.

We know from Collyers report the FISA-702(16)(17) process was extraordinarily abused by verified “contractors” who had access to the FBI/NSA database.  The rate of abuse was 85%. Meaning 85 out of every 100 FISA702 database searches were unauthorized and outside of compliance.

The FISA compliance review period was November 2015 through April 2016; however, Collyer went out of her way to note there was no reason to suspect the rate of unlawful use was confined to that compliance period.  She pointed out there was no reason to suspect a similar rate of abuse did not extend back to 2012.

Look at the redaction blocks, paying attention to where the number of non-compliant searches would be quantified. In the six month period under review there were thousands of unauthorized (non compliant) search queries; with an 85% non-compliant rate.

Those unlawful searches formed the basis for intelligence gathering and later unmasking. It is almost certain part of the system abuse was toward political targeting.

The process of electronic surveillance switched from unlawful (non compliant) to lawful (compliant) *after* FISA warrants were obtained on Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn per the Nunes memo, which was recently confirmed by James Comey:

The explosive Collyer FISA report was delivered to ODNI Coats in late April 2017.  John Solomon mentions May 2017 as the date of the documents that would help to clear Michael Flynn.

It is likely, almost certain, the intelligence community (including DNI and DIA) were in a state of conflict over what to do with the intelligence files opened on the FISA targets.

Some of the intelligence product was lawfully compliant; some of the intelligence product was created without lawful compliance; all of the intelligence product resulted in singular files on each of the targets; and at least some of the intelligence product also included unauthorized unmasking and distribution as Chairman Nunes described on March 22nd, 2017.

As a result, the intelligence community leadership -under the Trump administration, but from no bad action on their part- was in a bit of a pickle.  Let us call this the Flynn docs.

That sounds like the internal classification/declassification argument as a result of the sketchily obtained intelligence product that John Solomon is describing to Sean Hannity:

(Transcript) […] “In May of 2017 there was a document identified to a small number of people in the United States government. It’s in the possession of the Defense Intelligence Agency.  For eighteen months there’s been an effort to resist declassifying that document; I know that that document contains extraordinary exculpatory information about General Flynn. I don’t believe the president has ever been told about the existence of this document.  One lawmaker discovered it, but was thwarted by the Defense Intelligence Agency in his efforts to disclose it. I think we should all ask for that declassification; get that out. It may enlighten the judge; it will certainly enlighten the American public.”

The Flynn docs likely are a product of surveillance on him during the campaign; and more specifically, exoneration evidence during the transition period after the election.

However, declassifying those documents means revealing how that exculpatory documentation was obtained.   Now we are approaching the FISA-702 electronic surveillance process.  See the issue?

The intelligence community cannot, hell, will not, put part of their critical intelligence gathering system at risk simply to provide exculpatory information.

Ask yourself this rather complex question: There has been a great deal of talk about demanding that President Trump declassify a specific set of documents that swirl around “spygate”…. but have you ever noticed that no-one, not once, not a single official, has ever even discussed the need to declassify the Collyer FISA report?

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/349542716/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-72P5FzpI44KMOuOPZrt1

.

Hell, no-one inside Washington DC has ever even mentioned that 99-page report, let alone requested it to be declassified, discussed and the content understood by the American electorate.  From their perspective, the ramifications are heavy on the downside.

The reason is simple.  The unlawful exploitation of the FISA702(16)(17) system was so extreme, 85% non-compliant, we can only imagine what it was used for. {Go Deep}

I recently wrote a twitter thread on the ramifications and likelihood of what was going on behind the use of the FBI/NSA database. –SEE HERE– With an abuse rate of 85% there is no reasonable way to dismiss the probability the system was being exploited for multiple purposes, not just political opposition research.  There’s a ton of money to be made in the sale and exploitation of information.

When FISA Court Collyer notes that federal “contractors”, private individuals outside of government, were the primary abusers of the surveillance database – what do you think they were doing with that information?

If an outsider, with no connections to professional political officials, just happened to win the office of the presidency…. well, what level of risk would all of those database abusers, contractors and political benefactors, be contemplating?

After indulging in the exploitation of this system, since at least 2012, how much would they have profited from the sale of unlawfully obtained information? How far would they be willing to go to protect themselves from any legal exposure?

How much money would these corrupt entities be willing to drop to throw a bag over their activity?   Would paying one of the contractors $50,000,000.00 seem unreasonable.

Just sayin’…

•Dianne Feinstein was Vice-Chair of the SSCI in 2016, and her former staffer, Dan Jones, is heavily involved with Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele. [See Here]  By position Feinstein was on the Gang-of-Eight during the 2016 CIA, DOJ and FBI Counterintelligence Operation.  The same Feinstein that arbitrarily released the testimony of Glenn Simpson in 2018 without discussing with anyone [See Here]

Senator Feinstein’s 2016 senior staffer (with Gang-of-Eight security clearance) was Dan Jones.  It was revealed this year that Dan Jones sent Fusion GPS over $50 million to continue work on the Russia Conspiracy angle after the 2016 election toward the ideological goals of removing President Trump. [See Here]

He was not supposed to win!

Today there was a much hyped congressional hearing, spearheaded by sub-committee chairman Mark Meadows, into issues surrounding the Clinton Foundation and the possibility of IRS tax avoidance schemes. The backstory is of particular importance because the hearing is being framed by the ‘tick-tock-boom club‘ as something it was not.

There is a policy within the IRS that any person can report fraudulent tax filings, or the lack thereof, by any American taxpayer – toward any individual or group that is avoiding the payment of taxes. The IRS has a process to receive “tips” and claims from anyone to their investigative unit.  If the tip ends up in the IRS being able to secure missing tax payments, the tipster can get a percentage reward based on the amount of the taxes the IRS can recover.  The reward percentage is from 10% to 30% of the recovered amount.

Mr. Lawrence W. Doyle and Mr. John Moynihan, are the proprietors of a firm called MDA Analytics.  They are two ‘tipsters’, financial bounty hunters, calling themselves ‘whistle-blowers’, who have researched the Clinton Foundation and informed the IRS that based on their research the foundation owes back taxes.  They duo are hopeful to receive an IRS award based on their estimation of missing tax payments of between $400 million and $2.5 billion. In addition to their patriotic duty, this is the financial motivation behind Mr. Doyle and Mr. Moynihan.

If the IRS were to agree with Mr. Doyle and Mr. Moynihan, the two “financial investigators” would likely gain substantial financial rewards.  As an outcome of their financial motive Mr. Doyle and Mr. Moynihan consider their investigative material to be of proprietary value.  They’ve done all the leg-work and they are hesitant to give the material to any other party that might exploit some of their information for a similar purpose or intent; so they guard their research closely (also didn’t give it to congress).

In 2017 Mr. Monynihan and Mr. Doyle submitted their Clinton Foundation tax research to the IRS in hopes the IRS would agree to millions, perhaps billions, of missing tax payments by the foundation; and by extension they would get paid.  However, in August of 2018 the IRS informed them there was no IRS case.  Mr. Doyle and Mr. Moynihan are appealing that decision by the IRS office.

Understanding that politics is likely part of the issue; and in an effort to give ammunition to their multi-year endeavor; Mr Doyle and Mr. Monynihan gave portions of their documents to journalist John Solomon. Mr. Solomon then began a lengthy process of reconfirming the investigative material given by Doyle and Moynihan.

Part of John Solomon’s research effort involved sharing the material with Representative Mark Meadows who chairs a sub-committee within the oversight committee that might have jurisdiction on tangentially related matters of government corruption.

Against the backdrop of several years of questions and suspicions around the sketchy Clinton finances, representative Mark Meadows recognized the political value of the research in addition to the factual concerns that might possibly be present.

Additionally, in the background of the timing; during the period when the IRS received the material from Monynihan and Doyle; there was presumably an investigation started into the Foundation opened by the Jeff Sessions DOJ through U.S. Attorney John Huber.  So Representative Meadows called a hearing to overlap inquiry about a DOJ investigation into the Foundation with testimony from Mr. Doyle and Mr. Monynihan.

Summary: Two guys did extensive research into the Clinton Foundation and believe they have found tax violations.  If correct the financial bounty hunters would gain millions.  The IRS looked at the material and disagreed. The two guys then turned to John Solomon; who in turn went to Mark Meadows; and against the possibility of an open DOJ investigation of Clinton, Meadows scheduled a hearing.  That hearing is what took place today.

Do not take my word for it.  Watch the last 20 minutes of the hearing for a perfect summary of findings, motives and current, well, rather goofy, status.  This video is prompted to begin at 02:18:40… [Prompted just hit play – WATCH ]