Tag Archives: John Carlin

Aug 11 2019

Will there Ever be a real Investigation of Epstein’s Death?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law

Re-Posted Aug 11, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

Normally, I would not credit anything an Attorney General ever had to say about any case. However, Attorney General William Barr said Saturday: “I was appalled to learn that Jeffrey Epstein was found dead early this morning from an apparent suicide while in federal custody.” The only reason I credit his statement is the fact that he has consulted with the Inspector General about an investigation after Epstein allegedly hanged himself and was found in his jail cell early on Saturday.

Barr continued to say: “Mr. Epstein’s death raises serious questions that must be answered. In addition to the FBI’s investigation, I have consulted with the Inspector General who is opening an investigation into the circumstances of Mr. Epstein’s death.”

The FBI is questionable and only the Office of Inspector General can be trusted to investigate anything (see an investigation by OIG into the FBI).

Any investigation should NOT BE limited to the claimed suicide of Epstein. The OIG should investigate the MCC and how it is used as a tool by the DOJ to abuse prisoners all the time to ensure they retain their 99% conviction rate with the 1% being simply dead.

Another inmate who spent time in the hole told the NY Post it is impossible to hang yourself in one of those cells. There is nothing to tied sheets to and the ceiling is very low. It is not high enough to hang yourself. The lights are on 23 or 24 hours a day. The frosted glass windows offer no view of the outside world. Even the slot on each cell door is kept shut, meaning that inmates see little beyond their solitary cell.

The conspiracy spin is in full force that the Clintons were behind this one which is yet another in a long list of mysterious deaths. However, only some of the names have been unsealed so far. Prince Andrew was named in court documents unsealed from an alleged Epstein victim who claimed he trafficked her to wealthy men including Prince Andrew, lawyer Alan Dershowitz, former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Wall Street billionaire Glenn Dubin, and foreign heads of state. (The men deny these allegations.) The speculation is that there are other high ranking members of Congress who also might be linked. Obviously, there may be a lot more people interested in his silence than just the Clintons.

The alleged victims no longer get their day in court to testify. So if they were going to describe events at Epstein’s trial, forget that. There will be no trial without charging others. So it would be very interesting if the OIG really investigated the MCC.

Oliver Brown worked in MCC and had the courage to come forward to testify what really goes on in MCC. He appeared in the movie even after the FBI visited him two days before the taping demonstrating that the government was tracking the movie crew. Mr. Brown submitted a declaration under oath that the courts simply passed over to protect what goes on in MCC. He declared:

“I believe that in or about early 2001, though I can no longer be sure of the exact date, I was informed by Mr. Marvin Owens, staff attorney for the MCC, of a conversation he had with an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York.   Owens informed me that, because Mr. Armstrong held a unique status of civil condemnor, the MCC and USAO could not decide what to do with him.  Mr. Owens informed me, in words or substance, that it was decided that, despite the lack of sufficient evidence against Mr. Armstrong to prove a conviction, Mr. Armstrong should remain at the MCC in civil contempt until he relented, gave in or simply broke down and admitted to the crimes he was accused of.”

It took a lot of courage for Mr. Brown to come forward, but nobody would investigate what took place and certainly, no newspaper will ever report the abuse of human rights taking place in MCC.

Here we had exculpatory evidence withheld from the court and a whistleblower coming forward from inside MCC and my requests to the Department of Justice and the Office of Inspector General for an investigation of the tactics employed in MCC have simply been ignored. For this reason, I have little hope that there will EVER be an investigation into what is taking place in the American legal system. William Barr may be shocked, but who will ever carry out an investigation that would discredit the Justice system?

It will take an avalanche of letters from everyone to the White House before a real investigation will ever be carried out. I will be glad to testify if they ever have the guts to really investigate behind the curtain.

 

Aug 10 2019

17 More Goldman Sachs’ People Indicted


Armstrong Economics Blog/Banking Crisis

Re-Posted Aug 10, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

Malaysia filed criminal charges on Friday against 17 current and former directors at subsidiaries of Goldman Sachs Group Inc (GS.N) following an investigation into a multi-billion-dollar corruption scandal that led to the demise of state fund 1MDB. Those charged include Richard Gnodde, chief executive of Goldman Sachs International, Michael Evans, president of Alibaba Group Holding Ltd (BABA.N) and a former director at Goldman Sachs (Asia) LLC, and Michael Sherwood, former vice chairman of Goldman Sachs Group. Each charge carries a maximum jail term of 10 years and a penalty of at least 1 million ringgit ($239,000).

An Alibaba spokeswoman said the company was aware of the charges against Evans and would continue to monitor the situation. UAE filed suit against Goldman Sachs where they announced: “This action seeks redress for a massive global conspiracy on the part of the defendants to defraud and injure plaintiffs,” said the lawsuit, which also named former executives from IPIC and its subsidiary Aabar Investments.

The U.S. bank has been under scrutiny for its role in helping to raise $6.5 billion through bond offerings for 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), the subject of corruption and money laundering investigations in at least six countries. It has been alleged that $2.7 billion of the proceeds were diverted and the offering statements filed with the regulators contained statements that were false, misleading or involved material omissions.

The SEC previously charged Goldman Sachs with fraud back in 2007, but of course, did nothing criminal because Goldman Sachs controls the SEC. Now the top adviser in the SEC is Alan Cohen who was head of Global Compliance and would have signed off on the Malaysian deal.

The rumor mill has been hot concerning Malaysia and Goldman Sachs for the past two years. As it was turning into a criminal investigation Lyod Blankfein coincidently decided to step down last year at age 63. That was announced last March when he said he would step down by the end of the year. Then in July 2018, Blankfein said his goodbyes. The London Financial News claimed it was an emotional departure.

Was it really a coincidence that Blankfein stepped down which appeared to be running for the exit door and then within three months the news breaks that he was deeply involved in the corruption scandal in Malaysia. As Bloomberg wrote: “Years before Goldman Sachs Group Inc. arranged bond deals now at the heart of globe-spanning corruption probes, the firm’s then-CEO Lloyd Blankfein personally helped forge ties with Malaysia and its new sovereign wealth fund, according to people with knowledge of the matter.”

Blankfein’s replacement did at least apologize for the conduct but continued to defend the firm.

The US Department of Justice charged the former Goldman bankers Tim Leissner and Roger Ng, as well as Malaysian financier Jho Low in this matter. Malaysia’s new charges were brought under a section of the Malaysian Capital Markets and Services Act that holds certain senior executives responsible for offenses that may have been committed by the firm. What everyone is waiting for is the indictment of Alan Cohen, the former head of Global Compliance since it is normally the compliance officer who does down for the firm. This time, Alan Cohen is at the top of the food chain in the SEC which will result in a major scandal for the Trump Administration.

“The first thing you need to know about Goldman Sachs is that it’s everywhere. The world’s most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.” Rolling Stone’s Matt Taibbi wrote back in July 2009. He is correct, the truth about Goldman Sachs “is that it’s everywhere.” Taibbi’s now-famous phrasing captured Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s (GS) ubiquity which is very hard to deny.

Normally, if a banking firm is charged criminally, it loses its license. That is not the case for Goldman Sachs which many call “Government Sachs” on the street. They have walked on water in the United States and have been also known as the “untouchables” in finance.

Goldman Sachs said the Malaysian charges were misdirected. “We believe the charges announced today, along with those against three Goldman Sachs entities announced in December last year, are misdirected and will be vigorously defended,” a Goldman Sachs spokesman in Hong Kong said.

Goldman Sachs tried to pretend that they were afforded no opportunity to dispute the charges in advance. “Under the Malaysian legal process, the firm and the individual entity directors were not afforded an opportunity to be heard prior to the filing of these charges, which do not affect our ability to conduct our current business globally,” they said. But in the United States, a grand jury is also secret and the target does not get a notice to dispute the charges either.

Goldman Sachs has been charged for omitting material facts in the bond offerings, among them that Malaysian financier Low Taek Jho was the operator and key intermediary for 1MDB. Low has been described by Malaysian and U.S. authorities as to the central player in the 1MDB scandal. He has denied wrongdoing and his whereabouts are unknown.

The fees that Goldman received were far above the norm. Dealers were not allowed to compete in bidding for the conversions of currencies.

Categories: Banking Crisis, Corrup
Aug 7 2019

Ukraine & 911


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics

Re-Posted Aug 7, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: I have the deepest and highest respect for your work and your sources.If it was not the CIA orchestrating the Ukraine events who could all the Billions Obama and Nuland spent there have been going to and being used for??Nuland stating USA behind regime change on camera. Chevron Oil sign indicative?

UD

ANSWER: The Ukraine Revolution and 911 have a common thread. In both cases, they were instigated by non-CIA type parties. Yanukovich himself inspired the revolution when he passed a billin parliament with a quick show of hands by his communist loyal MPs contrary to the usual system of electronic voting.

Yanukovich outlawed unauthorized tents in public areas as well as erecting stages or amplifiers in public places. Those who violate the law now face a hefty fine or detention. In addition, he outlawed more than five vehicles in “Automaidan” motorcades which prompted people displays signs I and the 5th car – do not follow.

He then outlawed free speech making it a criminal act to slander any government official, including himself. The penalty was one year of hard labor in prison.

This is what caused the uprising. The Western powers could not have pulled that off. Then Yanukovich brought in Russians for his police from the East and that resulted in the Western Ukrainian police supporting the people.

The US THREATENED the people who were NOT satisfied over the politicians who then stepped up to seize power for they were still part of the same system who claimed to see the light. Without those punitive actions by Yanukovich, the people would not have risen up in such mass. The CIA was not capable of getting Yanukovich to act so irrationally.

In the case of 911, the first World Trade Center bombers drew the twin towers with planes flying into them on the wall of their cell in Manhattan’s MCC.

In both cases, the government did not instigate the events, but they stepped in a used them for political advantage. I really do not care what they may think they did, I was actually advising the people in Ukraine, not the government politicians.

Aug 7 2019

Representative Joaquin Castro “Redflags” Trump Supporters for Immediate Targeting….


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree Hose on August 6, 2019 by 

Democrat Congressman Joaquin Castro, represents a district that encompasses San Antonio, Texas.

Using his twitter account today, Representative Castro posted a list of local donors to the Donald Trump campaign directing his followers to target those ordinary citizens.  [Tweet here]

Pay close attention to this current method of political targeting; and overlay the law of unintended consequences to the current gun control discussion surrounding “redflag” laws.

Ultimately what far-left Joaquin Castro is doing is exactly what will happen when arbitrary rules of defining people for targeting are pushed into law.  History is full of examples where this exact process was used.  None of those examples ended well for those who were defined.

Posting a list on the public square; of ordinary citizens who just hold a different political outlook; and targeting them for confrontation, is just fueling ANTIFA toward violence against those on the list.   This is what cultural progressives mean when they say: “by any means necessary.”

Joaquin Castro’s twin brother, Julian Castro, is one of the Democrat candidates for president, and was previously President Obama’s HUD secretary.  Together Joaquin and Julian personify an ideology that supports political targeting, by any means necessary – including violence, of their political opposition.

Political targeting is exactly what President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder were doing when the DOJ requested the donor contribution lists, “schedule B’s”, from the IRS (Lois Lerner) so they could generate their ‘secret research project‘ targeting list.  These actions are directly, openly, publicly and specifically, the weaponization of government.

This is the long-standing ideology of the of the political left.  It is a short walk from starting a secret research project; creating files through surveillance, generating lists of citizens and posting them in the public square; to eventually making people wear armbands.   The purposes are EXACTLY the same.

This is both the historic and modern Democrat party.

If you don’t think this is already happening, think again.

*David Plouffe was President Obama’s campaign manager.

[*Note the date]

Aug 7 2019

Former FBI Agent Peter Strzok Files Lawsuit Against DOJ and FBI…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on August 6, 2019 by 

Former FBI Agent Peter Strzok has filed a lawsuit in DC federal court seeking reinstatement and back pay as a result of his firing in 2018.

According to the lawsuit (full pdf below) Strzok is claiming his first amendment right to free speech was violated and his fifth amendment right to due process was violated.

Upon initial review, this lawsuit looks like a stunt; motive undetermined, but perhaps related to the pending release of the IG report on FISA abuse where Strzok was a key participant.

A federal civil lawsuit using the DC circuit and the U.S. Constitution as a primary protective assertion does not follow the path of a serious claim for wrongful firing or termination of employment.

Traditionally, and with a genuine claim, wrongful termination actions would go through a formal complaint and review process within the U.S. Department of Labor.  Hiring a lawyer and filing a federal civil lawsuit claiming disingenuous constitutional rights violations reeks of an ulterior motive for publicity; ie. purposeful political value in alignment with Strzock’s allies in Lawfare.   This is a political stunt… 100%

Peter Strzoks lawyers are: Aitan D. Goelman, from Zuckerman Spaeder LLP;  Richard A. Salzman and Julia T. Quinn from Heller, Huron, Chertkof & Salzman PLLC.

Here’s the Lawsuit (Cloudfare pdf here and embed pdf below):

.

It would seem that Peter Strzok has been advised by his Lawfare allies to get out ahead of any potential legal risk associated with his involvement in the Trump campaign 2016 spying and surveillance operation(s), by filing a legal action purposeful to claim retaliation in advance of any consequences from the IG report on FISA abuse.

This lawsuit is frivolous on its face.  However, it can be purposeful as a political tool to frame a narrative against action by the DOJ inspector general; or any criminal referrals therein. [Conspiracy to commit fraud upon FISA court; conspiracy to commit sedition etc]

Financially I would doubt strongly that Strzok is paying for the lawyers; they are likely being compensated by the Lawfare group participants, and a network of political affiliates, who hold a vested interest in protecting themselves from the downstream consequences of sunlight upon their operation.

Additionally, we have long noted the absence of any media engaging with any of the “small group” participants despite the Mueller report and background relevance to stories.  There are no journalist chasing down the former officials for comments…. there are no media satellite trucks in front of their houses… there is no effort to get statements from any of the participants…. Nothing. Zippo. Zilch.

Therefore, a pending lawsuit can also be used as a shield from having to answer questions; if the IG report substance is of a scale that media cannot continue avoiding.

Peter Strzok, James Baker, Andrew McCabe and Lisa Page

Aug 3 2019

Was 9/11 A Plot to Seize Power?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Conspiracy

Re-Posted Aug 3, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: What is your view on the new demands for an investigation that there is “overwhelming evidence” that the buildings were brought down by explosives?

KD

ANSWER: I do not know about the Twin Towers, but I can say that the first World Trade Center bombers drew the World Trade Center on the wall of their cell in MCC with planes flying into it. There is no question that there was a terrorist attack. HOWEVER !!!!!!!! There is evidence, I know PERSONALLY, that the government knew what they were going to do. Do not confuse the fact that there were planted explosives to try to pretend there was not a terrorist attack. They just used the attack as cover.

I focus on building 7, which was never hit by any plane, yet it fell like a pancake and that was indicative of explosives. Curiously, the SEC was there and this is where they kept the evidence for court cases. Gun possession cases should have been dismissed but the prosecutors then showed photos of guns. The joke was that they used the same photo for everyone. Judges just accepted it and pronounced, “Take him away.” That is not the way the law is supposed to work.

I had tapes that would have put the whole New York banker crew in prison if we had a real government. There were tapes covering every manipulation they pulled off from rhodium to platinum and silver. It was the platinum manipulation that I had a tape of where they admitted to bribing to a Russian minister to “recall” their platinum to take an inventory. They forced platinum to rally, then the Russian minister announced they found “more” platinum to ensure the price would crash after they flipped their positions. Even Ford Motor Company was looking into suing over that manipulation.

All the evidence I had documenting each player and what they did was seized and vanished. My requests for documents were never honored. One is supposed to be entitled to discovery. There is no rule of law. You cannot win against the bankers. When I asked a New York lawyer why the bankers are never prosecuted, he smiles and laughed. His response: “You don’t shit where you eat!”

We will never have a secure financial market until someone is ready to clean up the corruption in New York City.

There is no question that 9/11 was the event that destroyed the constitution. We lost all of our privacy and rights ever since.

 

Jul 24 2019

Scheme Team Ploy – Mueller asked Barr for Letter Outlining Testimony Restrictions….


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on July 23, 2019 by 

The media has been apoplectic in selling outrage over the U.S. Department of Justice sending a letter to Robert Mueller with guidelines for his testimony.   House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler appeared on morning TV shows today to decry the hubris of the letter calling it “incredibly arrogant” of Bill Barr to send such instructions.

However, in the background, for those who watch these manufactured events, you can see that everything around this “letter” was staged.  Everything around this letter was intentionally designed by the Lawfare group; which includes Jerry Nadler’s staff.

Yes, it is revealed today…. the Lawfare staff of Chairman Nadler -who are coordinating with Mueller’s staff- requested the letter to set-up a manufactured narrative before the testimony.  Essentially, team Nadler and team Mueller requested the letter, so that Nadler could decry it.  That’s the textbook definition of manufacturing outrage:

(Reuters) House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said Mueller did not need to follow the instructions contained in the letter.

“He does not have to comply with that letter. He doesn’t work for them. And that letter asks things that are beyond the power of the agency to ask even if he still worked for them,” Nadler said in a CNN interview.

“I think it’s incredibly arrogant of the department to try to instruct him in what to say,” Nadler added. “It’s part of the ongoing cover-up by the administration to keep information away from the American people.”

A spokesman for Mueller, Jim Popkin, said the letter had been received but declined further comment. (Link)

See what they are doing?

Notice how the Mueller “spokesman” doesn’t refute the narrative?

See the scheme?

This is what Lawfare does folks.  This is all they know to do; and the media selling the narrative is all just part of the plan…. It’s ridiculous in the extreme.

Here’s the Letter:

.

It’s all a staged performance folks…. all of it.

Jul 24 2019

As Predicted – Mueller Will Not Testify Alone – Handler Aaron Zebley Now Added…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on July 23, 2019 by 

The schemes of Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler are predictable. As we said three months ago, Robert Mueller would not be allowed to testify without a handler. Small group participant Aaron Zebly will now join Mueller for his testimony.  This has always been the plan, but strategically announced today.

Remember, Mueller’s team is working closely with Nadler’s team; they are part of the same purpose. They are all part of the same network. The impeachment objective is a group effort from inside government & outside (Lawfare). These are not separate groups.

The pre-planning was why Chairman Nadler hired Lawfare Group members to become committee staff. Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired Obama administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link).  All these participants are within the Lawfare network. Aaron Zebly is just another key player in the coordinated group.

WASHINGTON – Former special counsel Robert Mueller has made a last-minute request to have one of his longtime aides appear as a witness during his highly-anticipated testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, one congressional source told NBC News on Tuesday.

Mueller has requested that Aaron Zebley appear with him when he testifies on Wednesday about his report on Russian interference in the 2016 election and collusion and obstruction by President Donald Trump.

The ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, said the move would plunge the hearing into “chaos” and may not be in compliance with House rules.

“This apparent stunt is unsurprising in light of the Democrats’ repeated attempts to circumvent, misrepresent and flout the rules and procedures governing this committee’s business,” he said. “If Democrats believe it is the special counsel’s responsibility to testify to his report, they have no ground for outsourcing that duty at the expense of our committee’s integrity.” (read more)

This is all a staged performance, a pantomime.

Remember, Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller didn’t come into this process as an ‘outsider’, and Mueller didn’t select his team. The corrupt Lawfare team inside government (FBI Counsel James Baker, DOJ Deputy Andrew Weissmann, FBI Deputy McCabe etc.) already knew Mueller. The team had established personal and professional connections to Mueller, and they brought him in to lead the team.

When you realize that Robert Mueller didn’t select the team; rather the preexisting team selected their figurehead, Robert Mueller; then results make sense. Robert Mueller can never be allowed to testify alone to congress because if questioned he actually has very little understanding of what took place.

Not enough people understand the role of the Lawfare group in the corruption and political weaponization of the DOJ, FBI and larger intelligence community.

What Media Matters is to corrupt left-wing media, the Lawfare group is to the corrupt DOJ and FBI.

All of the headline names around the seditious conspiracy against Donald Trump assemble within the network of the Lawfare group.

Three days after the October 21st, 2016, FISA warrant was obtained, Benjamin Wittes outlined the insurance policy approach.

FBI Director James Comey, FBI Legal Counsel James Baker, Comey memo recepient Daniel Richman, Deputy AG Sally Yates, Comey friend Benjamin Wittes, FBI lead agent Peter Strzok, FBI counsel Lisa Page, Mueller lead Andrew Weissmann and the Mueller team of lawyers, all of them -and more- are connected to the Lawfare group; and this network provides the sounding board for all of the weaponized approaches, including the various new legal theories as outlined within the Weissmann-Mueller Report.

The Lawfare continuum is very simple.  The corrupt 2015 Clinton exoneration; which became the corrupt 2016 DOJ/FBI Trump investigation; which became the corrupt 2017 DOJ/FBI Mueller probe; is currently the 2019 “impeachment” plan.

Weissmann and Mueller delivering their report evolved the plan from corrupt legal theory into corrupt political targeting.  Every phase within the continuum holds the same goal. Every phase holds the same participants.  This is a group effort.

The current “impeachment strategy” is planned-out within the Lawfare group.

 

Jul 15 2019

Sunday Talks: Devin Nunes Discusses Upcoming Mueller Testimony…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree house on July 14, 2019 by 

HPSCI ranking member Devin Nunes appears on Fox News Weekend to discuss the upcoming congressional testimony of special counsel Robert Mueller.  Additionally, Nunes discusses the aggregate issues with the FBI and DOJ.

The Gang-of-Eight meeting Nunes notes McCabe attempted to get him removed from was the May 17th, 2017, meeting by Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe where they briefed the Go8 on the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel prior to the public release.

During that 3/17/17 meeting DAG Rod Rosenstein and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe were concerned that Devin Nunes would support President Trump’s position when McCabe and Rosenstein launched the corrupt and fraudulent Special Counsel.

For deep-weed CTH readers: After listening to Nunes strongly implying he expects a full DC cover-up of the entire weaponized DC operation against candidate, president-elect and President Trump. I started a new intelligence research project to identify what might lie at the center of that concern.

Many of you know I work with old school research filing systems and timelines. One aspect that stands out; and considering Nunes has been a Go8 member since Rep. Mike Rogers resigned – therefore he has a particularly valuable insight; is the strong possibility that all of the Obama-era surveillance was actually a political CIA operation.

There are a host of small details -and individual characters- that only have one commonality, the CIA.

Starting with the footnote from FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer:

The pre-existing MOU, suspected origination in around 2012, is a key piece of this puzzle. If the Terror Threat Integration Center (TTIC) is the premise behind how the FBI and CIA memo of understanding connects shared information from NSA database extraction (I think it does), then John Brennan is actually the originator of this contractor problem.

At the very beginning of the Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) origination, the task was to synergize the CIA and FBI.   John Brennan was THE GUY, (back in 2003) who was given this task:

On 1 May 2003, the Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC) opened its doors. Led by its first Director, John Brennan, TTIC filled its ranks with approximately three dozen detailees from across the US Government (USG) and was mandated to integrate CT capabilities and missions across the government.

Prior to the establishment of TTIC, individual Federal departments and agencies (largely CIA and FBI) provided the President their own assessments of the terrorist threat. (link)

It would make sense that Brennan and Mueller (pre-comey) set up the standard of the CIA and FBI working together on domestic surveillance efforts.   It does not seem coincidental that Brennan was made CIA Director in 2012, at the exact same time as Obama and Holder dropped the IRS ‘secret research project’ and shifted to NSA database extraction.

The timing here is too damned coincidental.

FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer didn’t pick the year 2012 out of thin air when she noted the government’s unreliable “non-compliance rate” since that time frame.  In essence, based on admissions to the court, the FISA-702 contractor database search abuse began at the same time Brennan became CIA Director, and likely the same time as that FBI and CIA (or ODNI and TTIC – matters not) Memorandum of Understanding.

You put all of that together with Brennan’s 2016 “Working Group” and the “Deputies Meetings“, and then stand back and look at who the known participants were in/around the exact same time…. and, well, the one constant is the C.I.A.

The Working Group operated out of the Central Intelligence Agency Headquarters, where it worked in secrecy away from the other members of the various intelligence agencies. Agents that participated in the Working Group had to sign non-disclosure agreements to access the shared intelligence of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. It has also been described as “informal”.

The Crossfire Hurricane investigation team, in conjunction with a number of agents at the Eastern District of Virginia under United States Attorney Dana Boente, reported to the Working Group, including the Central Intelligence Agency.

Robert Hannigan GCHQ meets with Brennan (CIA) instead of Mike Rogers (NSA).

Joseph Mifsud – CIA

Stephan Halper – CIA

Peter Strzok – CIA

Carter Page – CIA (admitted)

Oleg Deripaska – CIA (attempted recruitment)

The London Center – CIA

The Cambridge Symposium – CIA

Erika Thompson – (Western Intelligence) (CIA)

Charles Tawil – (Israeli Intelligence) (CIA)

Nellie Ohr – CIA

The list goes on and on.

If you drill down the curriculum vitae of any key participants in the 2016 events you will find a direct connection to the CIA; not an indirect or obscure connection, but rather an admitted direct relationship between their professional endeavors and the CIA.

Given the nature of Devin Nunes open concerns about accountability; and when you honestly take a ‘big picture’ look at the participants in/around the activity he is talking about…. what you end up with is a sense that Nunes concern is related to how all of the players are enmeshed with the CIA.

Heck, it’s enough to make you ask if  the DOJ “Russia” angle, which we can clearly see is transparently fraudulent -and was pushed by DAG Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller, was actually created to hide the 2016 fingerprints of the CIA?

Wait, what-the….

Yeah, think about it.

How would you best hide the fingerprints of the CIA trying to influence a U.S. presidential election?

Maybe, blame the Russians?

Now the reason for the WaPo and NYT recent stories about AG Barr and the inquisition into the CIA start to make more sense…. and that further backstops Nunes public concern.

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter

The_War_Economy@The_War_Economy

Durham is literally going to interview somebody at the CIA’s Counterintelligence Mission Center.https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/12/us/politics/russia-investigation-cia.html …

Jul 14 2019

Flynn Case Highlights Multiple 2016 “Insurance Policy” Motives by DOJ and FBI Operatives…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on July 13, 2019 by 

Former National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn is involved in two heavily connected legal cases that came from the special counsel appointment of Robert Mueller.  One direct case is in DC District Court, Judge Emmet Sullivan; and one indirect case in the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA), Judge Anthony Trenga.

The DC case is the direct case against Michael Flynn where Flynn took a plea deal and has been in a rather tentacled sentencing phase since November 2017.  The EDVA case is the FARA case against Flynn’s former business associate Bijan Rafiekian where Flynn was going to be a witness (now cancelled).

While the larger issues connecting both cases are somewhat complex, some details released last week reveal a concerning bigger picture that originated long before Robert Mueller became special counsel in May 2017.  [Back story HERE and HERE and HERE]

I’m going to make the assumption the reader is familiar with the backstory noted above; and additionally, in full disclosure for the reader, this is openly written for the research benefit of the Flynn defense team – with whom I’ve had no contact.

Of particular interest to me was the revelation that DOJ National Security Division head David Laufman engaged with Flynn in January 2017, and was the lead point of contact within the DOJ-NSD when Flynn was filing FARA compliance documents, as part of the transition into the Trump administration.

Laufman is particularly interesting -within this specific timeline- because he is at the heart of the DOJ/FBI small group activity in 2015/2016 when the group goal was Clinton’s exoneration and Trump’s surveillance/investigation.  While Laufman’s name is not as well known as Peter Strzok or Lisa Page, his Main Justice activity is just as consequential.

We know and accept from prior records [pg 12 Mueller report] that Michael Flynn was under some form of official and unofficial surveillance and investigation by the Obama administration from sometime in 2015 all the way to his first weeks in the Trump administration in January/February 2017.

That collective monitoring could have included authorized Title-3 electronic surveillance or Title-1 (FISA) surveillance.  My best guess is Title-III until the publication of the Turkish Op-Ed, and that opened the door to Title-I.  The change requires the target to do something that would allow the DOJ to jump and claim “acting as an agent of a foreign power”.   The  November 8th, 2016 op-ed advocacy, without notation of the contract, would provide the DOJ-NSD with the ability to make that claim.

David Laufman was head of the DOJ-NSD office that would have been watching.  In hindsight, the leaked reporting to the Wall Street Journal in 2017 confirms this:

WASHINGTON—The investigation into former national security adviser Mike Flynn began soon after a Justice Department staffer noticed a Nov. 8, 2016, op-ed article by the retired Army general in the congressional publication The Hill, according to a person familiar with the matter.

[…] In the article, Mr. Flynn championed closer U.S. ties with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and maligned the Turkish government’s No. 1 foe, U.S.-based cleric Fethullah Gulen.

The piece didn’t disclose Mr. Flynn’s business relationship with Turkish interests.

The Justice Department staffer, who works in the office that enforces the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, checked the database of people registered to represent foreign interests. He found no entry for Mr. Flynn and sent him a letter inquiring about the article, according to this person, who said the staffer’s query triggered the FARA investigation.  (read more)

We know that FARA investigations were used by the Lynch/Yates DOJ to gain FISA surveillance on DC targets.  Given that Flynn was already a high profile target it would be almost guaranteed the Obama administration quickly gained a FISA warrant on Flynn in the days immediately following the public advocacy (November 2016).

So when Flynn was engaged with David Laufman in December ’16/January ’17 in the completion of the FARA compliance forms, it is certain that Laufman knew much more about the background of who hired the Flynn Intel Group, than Flynn himself.  Hence, Laufman pressured a FARA filing that was later used by Mueller to claim Flynn filed a misleading FARA notification.   It was all a set up.

Heck, knowing how foreign intelligence units were used by the FBI and CIA to engage the Trump campaign (pure politics); and keeping the entire sketchy intel operation around the killing of Jamal Kashoggi in mind (more politics); I’m now of the opinion someone in/around the Obama White House worked with someone in/around Recep Erdogan (Turkish Govt.) to set up that entire 2016 Flynn lobbying scenario using a Dutch front group.  The DOJ-NSD was waiting to exploit it.

So yesterday, there were some court arguments as the EDVA case against Flynn’s partner is about to start….  The transcript is not yet public, but Techno-Fog gained access.  Pay attention to this snippet Techno released:

Please pay attention to this part: “because of Flynn’s relationship with an ongoing presidential campaign without any reference to the defendant or FIG”…

The word “campaign” is a written Freudian slip, a *tell* per se’, that informs those paying attention of the history of the government’s activity and foreknowledge.

So here’s where I’m at….   The granules are small, but the granules are all assembled in the same part of the same picture.  The Dutch/Turkish lobbying contract was a set-up; just like the Trump Tower meeting was a set-up; just like the London meeting with Alexander Downer was a set-up; just like the $10,000 from Charles Tawil to George Papadopoulos was a set-up; just like Mifsud was a set-up… etc. etc.

In the foreground you’ve got Brennan and the White House (Brennan’s working group), and Fusion GPS, and Nellie Ohr, and Christopher Steele etc… In the background you’ve got Yates, and Carlin, and Laufman, and McCord, and Weissmann (DOJ-NSD team); together with Comey, and McCabe, and Baker, and Strzok, and Page (FBI team)… and essentially the bridge, Bruce Ohr, acting as a carrier smidgen taking information from the working group to the FBI to the DOJ….

These are the basic elements of the seditious small group within the DOJ-NSD and FBI.

Additionally, this gets more interesting when you think about the scale of what they were doing, and how intensely they were committed to it.

When the network was failing in their impeachment effort; when the insurance policy was not working; and when they were falling back in logical sequence to various defensive positions throughout 2018; where did David Laufman resurface?

See the scale of this?

New York Field office FBI agent Monica McLean was the handler who initiated her best friend Dr. Christine Blasey-Ford against Supreme Court nominee Judge Kavanaugh.  Who was Monica McLean’s lawyer?…. David Laufman.

Who was Blasey-Ford’s lawyer?…. Michael Bromwich; he’s also the lawyer for Andrew McCabe.

Why?

What possible reason would the same ‘small group’ participants have for going from the 2016 election effort, and 2017 impeachment effort, to the 2018 SCOTUS manipulation effort?  [Also intended to influence the 2018 mid-term]

The “small group” activity was/is so illegal (literally seditious), it was a reasonable part of the concentric defense to try and block a SCOTUS nomination and influence the outcome of the 2018 mid-term election.

That’s the scale of this.

And given the scale of this….