Representative Mark Meadows and ¹Byron York had a podcast discussion yesterday that contains some interesting information. [Podcast Available Here]  Much like Byron York himself the hour long conversation targets the DC crustless triangle sandwich & white wine spritzer audience, where York is most comfortable.  That said, Meadows made some interesting comments that flew right over Yorks’ head.

♦ First, Representative Meadows discussed five witness interviews the House did not get to before they lost the majority.  Two of the five people were FBI Agent Joe Pientka, and former FBI Asst. Director for Public Relations Mike Kortan; the other three were unnamed.

Meadows stated Kortan and Pientka were interviewed by Inspector General Horowitz; which is slightly remarkable because: (1) Kortan quit the FBI February 8th, 2018; and (2) Kortan was unlikely to have been much use in the FISA angle of investigation…. Unless Horowitz is going deeper.  Regardless, let’s hope this interview with Kortan did take place.

FBI Asst. Director Kortan is important because he was in the middle of the conversations when media leaks were being strategically deployed to assist Strzok and Team.  Kortan was the guy responsible for leaking information to the media so the FBI could recapture those media reports as evidence in their investigation; ie. the circular investigative material.

Kortan was a close, very close, confidant of FBI Director James Comey.  Essentially Kortan was Comey’s personal PR man; and Comey spent a lot of time cultivating his image… so Kortan was a critical person for sanctimonious Comey and his personal brand image.

As noted:  “After Comey became director in September 2013, Kortan helped facilitate regular on-the-record briefings with beat reporters, a departure from previous directors.” (link)

The role and relationship between Comey and Kortan is what led to Kortan attacking HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes when congress became openly critical of James Comey and the evidence of corruption they were finding in early 2018.

You might remember this public statement from the FBI which was put out AFTER Devin Nunes wrote the January 2018 “Nunes memo” and requested assistance from the White House to declassify it.

This is from Kortan on Wednesday January 31st, 2018:

…”With regard to the House Intelligence Committee’s memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.”…

[Link to Statement]

This official FBI statement was controversial at the time and was quoted extensively for weeks by Nunes’ detractors in the media and inside the DC beltway.  The statement was not approved by FBI Director Christopher Wray.

The statement showed how Mike Kortan had gone rogue against Nunes in defense of his close friend and fellow weasel James Comey.  Asst. Director Kortan was fired the following week.

♦ A second takeaway from the Meadows interview is how FBI Agent Joseph Pientka was never interviewed by the joint House judiciary and oversight committees (Goodlatte and Gowdy).   The reason was simple, Pientka was on Mueller’s special counsel team. Congress was not allowed to interfere in the Mueller probe.  In hindsight this again looks like Mueller & Rosenstein strategically using the investigation itself as a shield from sunlight.

According to Meadows, Inspector General Horowitz has interviewed Joe Pientka; which would make sense because much like Bruce Ohr, despite his obvious duplicitious character, Pientka is still working inside the FBI in some capacity.  Bottom line: if Pientka  wasn’t a corrupt part of the machinery he would never have participated.

♦ A third takeaway from the interview is the scale of documented contacts between DOJ official Bruce Ohr and Dossier launderer Christopher Steele.  According to Meadows there are “63 documented contacts” between Steele and Ohr after the election.

It is likely congressional investigators are including face-to-face, phone, email and texts in the “63 contact” tally.

♦ A fourth takeaway from the interview is a key point often debated and misunderstood by those following the scandal.  Representative Meadows went to specific lengths to tell Byron York that President Trump has never seen a single document that is currently on the list of documents being requested for declassification.

Many people who do not know how the executive branch works have falsely stated that President Trump knows what is in those declassification documents.  He doesn’t.  The Office of the Presidency is a system, not a person.  The system is designed to protect the occupant of the office.  It would be against the direct interests of the President to have full knowledge of the material inside the declassification requests.

The President is reliant upon the trust of advisers to inform him of the value – or lack thereof; along with the legal and political risks therein; without any specific conversation about the content.

In short, President Trump may declassify material as requested, but other than general briefings, he has no idea what material is inside or behind the redactions. Again, understanding this process helps to explain procedural delays, and frustration from those without familiarity with all the roles attached to the executive.

There are other issues discussed in the interview, but the remaining conversation surrounds material of a general nature and most CTH readers are already familiar with the story.  Listen to the INTERVIEW HERE.

[¹] it must be noted that Byron York (self-admittedly) has little to no knowledge of many important details.  York admits he doesn’t know the story of Papadopoulos; doesn’t know anything about the CIA involvement pre-Crossfire Hurricane; and has never immersed himself in the granular details of the issues now more than three years long.  This is a problem because if you listen to the podcast you discover York glosses over key and important aspects.

You might remember when the December 2017 Page/Strzok text messages were released a similar situation existed with Andrew McCarthy.  McCarthy wrote articles in defense of the DOJ and FBI for six months without ever reading the texts. Then, during the weekend, of Memorial Day 2018 McCarthy read the 600+ pages of texts for the first time.  Thereafter, his entire frame of reference flipped 180° and he began writing critically about ‘Spygate’.

During a rater innocuous podcast discussion panel yesterday, one of President Trump’s personal lawyers Jay Sekulow mentioned the FBI had three FISA applications denied by the FISA court in 2016. [Podcast Here – Note comment at 25:05]   The denials were always suspected; however, until now no-one in/around the administration has ever confirmed.

Jay Sekulow did not expand on his statement and did not explain where the information was derived from; however, if accurate this may explain the backstory to why FISA Judge Rudolph Contreras was recused.  This issue has been nagging many people since the recusal notation in December 2017.

On November 30th, 2017, Mike Flynn signed a guilty plea; ostensibly admitting lying to investigators.  The plea was accepted by Judge Rudolph Contreras; who is also a FISA court judge.  Six days later, December 7th, 2017, Judge Contreras “was recused” from the case without explanation.

(Reuters) The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia judge presiding over the criminal case for President Donald Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has been recused from handling the case, a court spokeswoman said on Thursday.  (read more)

The only two significant things that happened between the initial Mike Flynn plea hearing and the recusal from Judge Contreras was:

#1) The stories about anti-Trump FBI Agent Peter Strzok and his involvement with Fusion-GPS and Christopher Steele (keep this in mind as it pertains to FISC presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer); and

#2) FBI Director Chris Wray appearing before the House Judicial Committee and hearing Representative Jim Jordan demand to see the 2016 FISA application.

In fact, Judge Contreras was recused only a few hours after that House Judicial Committee hearing. The story was memory-holed into the concentric whirlpool of nothingness.  However, if what Jay Sekulow describes is true, and one of the denied FISA applications was against Mike Flynn, some of the issues reconcile.

The first thing to note is the FISA request would have been submitted to the FISA Judges in/around Washington DC.   There are only three possibilities:  Presiding FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer; Judge James Boasberg; and Judge Rudolph Contreras.

(link)

A key point to keep in mind is that FISC Judge Rosemary Collyer was the approver of the rushed FISA application applied against Carter Page in October 2016. Judge Collyer also authored the blistering 99-page FISC opinion against the FBI and DOJ-NSD abuse of the FISA-702(16)(17) system in April 2017.  Contractors doing thousands of “about” search queries, 85% of them being unlawful (non-compliant), and the results shared outside the intelligence community (lacking minimization).

Additionally, Judge Collyer likely knew she was hoodwinked by a lack of honesty from DOJ-NSD head John Carlin, only a day after she approved the Carter Page FISA warrant.  Collyer would also have seen the Page/Strzok text messages about Rudy Contreras as they were released in early December 2017; and Presiding Judge Collyer would have authority to tell Contreras to recuse himself.  Keep all this in mind….

Contreras was the most recent appointment in the summer of 2016 having been designated on May 19th, 2016.  The timing seems pertinent when we look at the text messages from Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.  However, before getting to the text messages also consider this aspect from the book written by Edward Klein (Chapter 3):

Klein’s description in his book aligns with both the content and timeline of the Alfa Bank FISA timeline.  The FISA judge in the book is not mentioned by name; however, from the description in the book as a “he” and the location (“only a few minutes” away), it is almost guaranteed to be Judge James E Boasberg.

Now we jump to the text messages from Lisa Page and Peter Strzok where they discuss how Agent Strzok is actually friends with Judge Contreras.

[Note this text message conversation is around the time just before “Crossfire Hurricane” begins (July 31st, 2016). Also note these text messages were originally hidden and redacted from congress in Dec. 2017 – compare here]

Lisa Page asks Peter Strzok if he was aware “Rudy is on the FISC”?

The conversation is specifically about an investigative need for friendly FISA judges, but Lisa Page and Peter Strzok are concerned about “recusal issues”.

Now, keep in mind all of this sunlight was surfacing in early December of 2017; literally days after Judge Contreras accepted a guilty plea from General Flynn (November 30th, 2017).  Six days later, December 7th, 2017, Judge Contreras “was recused” from the case without explanation.

I’ll bet you a donut Presiding FISC Judge Rosemary Collyer; knowing all of the sketchy DOJ and FBI actions that had taken place in the past eighteen months; and seeing the FBI text messages about her FISA court surface; told Judge Rudy Contreras he could not participate in a legal case were he approved a dubious FISA warrant that was now being used as evidence against the accused, Flynn.   That’s why Contreras “was recused”.

If my suspicion is correct, and I’m more than 90%+ sure on this, the transcribed intercept of Michael Flynn’s communication with Ambassador Kislyak, which was leaked to media, was based on an extended FISA warrant (renewal) where General Michael Flynn was the ongoing surveillance target.

When were the FISA warrants issued?

(HPSCI – LINK Page #12)

Here’s the Evidence We Need:

♦ Prove the July 31st, 2016, Crossfire Hurricane operation originated from fraud by exposing the CIA operation that created the originating “Electronic Communication” memo. Declassify that two-page “EC” document that Brennan gave to Comey.

♦ 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.

♦ 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?]

♦ 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.

♦ 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.

♦ 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]

♦ 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.

Yes, they were spying.

Release this material, and the entire corrupt construct is exposed….

President Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani appears on Fox News today to outline the case for a spying and surveillance conspiracy against candidate Trump; and then later the same group moved to frame president-elect and President Trump for the non existent crime of collusion.

Bloomberg News has an interesting story today describing remarks delivered by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. According to Jennifer Jacobs the DAG told the audience at a private Metropolitian Club lunch the Mueller Report will highlight the primary investigative focus of “Russian Cyber Crimes”.

If this report is accurate, and CTH believes it is, this goes a long way to explaining why U.K. authorities moved now to throw a bag over Julian Assange. First the report:

(Bloomberg) Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said Friday that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report describes Russian cybercrimes during the 2016 election.

The report, which is expected to be released soon, will clear up questions about the Russian campaign to interfere in the election President Donald Trump won, Rosenstein said in a speech given to a private group at the Metropolitan Club of Washington, according to three people in attendance.

Rosenstein joked that his last day at the Department of Justice will be “one of these days,” the people said. He also said that it will take the U.S. some time to extradite WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange from the U.K. in order to prosecute him.

He declined to speak to reporters outside the club. (link)

As AG William Barr shared in his letter to congress, the aggregate of the Mueller report has two facets for Russian Interference: (1) “Disinformation” from the IRA (Internet Research Agency); and, (2) “Computer hacking operations”:

In order for Mueller and Rosenstein to maintain the ‘Vast Russia Conspiracy Narrative’, which is tenuous at best, it is absolutely necessary to maintain the premise that Russia hacked -or attempted to hack- into the DNC servers.  Further, to maintain this premise the special counsel must inject WikiLeaks as the distribution hub for the Russian effort.

This Mueller/Rosenstein Russia narrative builds upon the Joint Analysis Report (JAR December 2016), and the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA January 2017).  Both of those documents are sketchy, with the JAR being abject nonsense and the ICA being a political document stating specifically that Russian President Putin was trying to help Trump win the election.

Rosenstein’s comments to the Metropolitan Club gives us some insight into how dependent Mueller’s report is to maintaining this baseline of Russia interference:

(LINK)

Additionally, these comments by Rosenstein highlight the U.S. intelligence community need to throw a bag over Julian Assange; IF they are going to retain the premise that Mueller needs to justify the CIA/FBI predicate for the counterintelligence operation.

Mueller and Rosenstein’s special counsel was an extension of the original counterintelligence operation.  Mueller and Rosenstein need to preserve the predicate in order to avoid questions around why they continued and extended a fraudulent probe.

If Assange can disprove the Russia DNC hacking claims by the CIA (Brennan), ODNI (Clapper) and FBI (Strzok and Comey), which are more likely fraudulent justifications to execute the Trump campaign surveillance operation, then Assange becomes a risk that must be controlled/removed.  The timing here is not ‘suspicious’ but rather ‘conspicuous’.

To maintain the claim the DNC was ‘hacked by Russians‘ Julian Assange must be made public enemy #1.  We should expect to see current elements within the intelligence apparatus pushing hard to frame this Assange narrative through the New York Times (FBI), Washington Post (CIA), and CNN (State Dept./ODNI).

The amount of media pressure to originate the “Russian Interference” narrative in early 2017 was off the charts.   The media will have to double-down exponentially because they are tied directly to this claim.

It will be interesting to see if AG William Barr goes along with the focus on cybercrimes as the impetus for Mueller’s investigation.  This is where the need to preserve the integrity of the institutions comes into play; there will be massive pressure on Barr to go along.