Rod Rosenstein Testifies Tomorrow at 10:00am – What Questions Would You Ask?


Rod Rosenstein is scheduled to publicly testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow morning at 10:00am EDT.  This testimony is important because it will either begin a larger reveal, or we should be able to identify whether Chairman Lindsey Graham is positioning to bury all the background events.

With that in mind, what questions would you like to see asked by the committee?

Rosenstein was at the epicenter of the ‘insurance policy’ phase of the coup against President Trump after his inauguration.

Rosenstein authorized the 2017 special counsel under very sketchy circumstances.  There are some indications Rosenstein is going to take the “mistakes were made” approach, and attempt to position himself as a victim of circumstances that were generally beyond his control.

We have over two dozen documented contacts between Rosenstein and Robert Mueller before the special counsel was launched.  The first contact was a phone call the morning after former FBI Director James Comey was fired.  Literally hours after Comey was fired, based -in part- on a letter written by the former DAG recommending the firing, Rosenstein was coordinating the appointment of the special counsel to investigate President Trump.

You could spend several hours of inquiry into just that part of the decision-making process alone; without even touching the ramifications of his role in the Carter Page FISA applications and what came next.   Rosenstein was also the principle influence agent in 2018 who told President Trump not to declassify any documents requested by congress or POTUS would be facilitating an ‘obstruction’ charge against the office of the President.

Yeah, Rosenstein has a lot to answer for.

The Mueller investigation was used by corrupt interests within the special counsel’s office to threaten any/all executive branch and congressional officials with “obstruction of justice” charges if they revealed any exculpatory or counter-narrative information during the Mueller probe.  Former AAG Matt Whitaker calls this the “obstruction of justice trap”, and outlined how even he was threatened by Mueller and Rosenstein.

As outlined by Whitaker, the special counsel was used in 2017, 2018 and into the beginning of 2019, as a shield (hide information); and secondly a weapon (threats) against any entity who would reveal the background intelligence that undercut the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

AG Barr has recently said the DOJ/FBI conduct during the first two years of the administration “was abhorrent” and “a grave injustice.”  How does that statement reconcile with Barr’s prior comments toward Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein when they were the principle decision-makers behind those abuses?

Rosenstein also was in charge of the July 2018 response from the DOJ to the FISA court where both the DOJ and FBI lied to the court about the predicate of the FISA warrant’s validity a full fifteen months after the DOJ and FBI were aware the underlying predicate was built upon fraudulent representations.  There’s another several hours.

Additionally, and adverse to the interests of Lindsey Graham, Rosenstein -together with DC Attorney Jessie Liu- was the architect of the agreement not to prosecute SSCI Security Director James Wolfe for leaking classified ‘top-secret’ documents (the FISA warrant) to reporter Ali Watkins.

Within the Wolfe story the corruption within the Senate intelligence committee surfaces.  Chairman Graham likely will not want to touch that issue, but there’s more than a few hours of inquiry justified.

What was the purpose of the expanded scope memos; including the still hidden third scope memo written October 20, 2017, that allowed Mueller to target Michael Flynn Jr. in the effort to coerce General Flynn into a plea agreement?

Under what principle was Rosenstein acting when he expanded the scope of Mueller on August 2nd and October 20th?

Then you get into the ridiculous indictment of Russian actors (Concord LLC Inc.) that was a completely fabricated pretense, created seemingly only to give some sketchy justification for the Mueller probe’s origin.  How was the special counsel team communicating that activity and under what pretext was Rosenstein convinced to even pursue indictments the DOJ was later forced to drop because of their false pretense?

Rosenstein was also the primary person who blocked the production of documents to congress during their investigation of the Russia collusion-conspiracy nonsense.  What justification does Rosenstein carry for blocking the production of those documents?

You see, Rosenstein is found at the heart of corrupt activity within the DOJ, and by extension the Mueller investigation.   His testimony will either begin the reveal of the story, or his testimony will be purposefully shaped to avoid sunlight and shape public knowledge of the truth behind the events.

What questions do you want to see asked?

Flynn Judge’s Lawyer Files Response to District Court – Says Flynn Can Defend Himself Against Independent Accusations By Court…


The hired lawyer for Judge Emmet Sullivan has filed a response to the DC District Court order in the case against Michael Flynn. [pdf available here] The DC district court ordered Sullivan to explain why he would not allow DOJ to drop charges against Flynn; the response by Sullivan’s lawyers says the DOJ position is essentially a moot issue, and Flynn can defend himself against independent accusations by the court.

The premise of Judge Sullivan to act as both prosecutor, judge and jury is ridiculous.  Additionally, Sullivan now claims Flynn must defend himself against claims of unlawful lobbying for Turkey that were never a substantive part of the original DOJ filing before the court.

Here’s the Full Filing:

.

The underlying premise behind the justification by Sullivan is fraught with twisted language to spin the prosecution.  It will be interesting to see how the DOJ response is structured.

Part of the illogical argument within Sullivan’s filing relates to his demand the DOJ explain in detail the background corruption that underpins their change in position.  Example: why did none of the original corrupt prosecutors sign-off on the change in DOJ position?

If there is one positive that might come out of this nonsense it’s that AG Barr may be forced to directly put specific details of corrupt behavior by the Mueller prosecutors in a response.   The DOJ has attempted to retreat from the Flynn case without calling out, and directly identifying, corrupt DOJ activity.  Perhaps that will change….

We shall wait and see.

Sunday Talks: Senator Ron Johnson Discusses Senate Homeland Security Committee Investigation of Operations Against Trump Administration…


Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Senator Ron Johnson, appears on Fox News for an interview with Maria Bartiromo.  Senator Johnson outlines the evidence he has uncovered and the next steps in his senate investigation into intelligence abuses against candidate Trump and the incoming administration.

.

Johnson Timeline and Data Below:

Nothing Inappropriate – DNI John Ratcliffe Releases Wiretapped Flynn-Kislyak Transcripts and FBI Summaries (“CR Cuts”) Of Those Transcripts…


DNI John Ratcliffe has released the transcripts and FBI generated summaries known as “CR cuts” from the telephone calls between incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. [pdf version here].

A fast review of the transcripts (also embed below) shows there was nothing inappropriate or improper about the conversations at all.  Quite the opposite: Lt. General Flynn was direct, diplomatic, polite and represented the interests of U.S. policy from both the outgoing Obama administration and incoming Trump administration.

The views expressed by Lt. General Flynn did not impede or obstruct outgoing Obama policy nor did they undermine any position during the transition.  Any media reporting to the contrary was completely false.

The FBI summaries or “CR Cuts”, created by FBI analysts, are what FBI Director James Comey gave to former DNI James Clapper on January 4th, for use in briefing former President Obama.  The summaries are FBI interpretations of what the calls contained.

It has been my long-standing suspicion the FBI summaries (CR Cuts) will not accurately reflect the content of the calls; and were purposefully manipulated by the FBI to give a false impression that Flynn was undermining Obama.  I am doing that comparison now.

Here’s the summaries and transcripts:

.

More to follow…

 

Sidney Powell Discusses DOJ/FBI Selective Releases as Richard Grenell Points Out Senator Mark Warner’s Conflicts…


An interesting couple of things happened just as Richard Grenell passed the sunlight baton to DNI John Ratcliffe. First, SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner is angered about the sunlight Grenell has delivered. Second, former AAG Matt Whitaker outlines how the Mueller investigation threatened him. Both issues merge (outlined below).

Michael Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell appears on FBN with Liz MacDonald to discuss recent events. WATCH:

.

When considering that Robert Mueller was used as a weapon (threat) and a shield (bury information); and when considering Senator Mark Warner’s recent protestations against Grenell; it is well worth going back in history to May 2018 when SSCI Vice-Chairman Warner was demanding the Mueller investigation must not allow congressional oversight.

Yes, it now makes sense, why Senator Mark Warner was demanding DAG Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray must keep records from congress.

(Source Link)

According to Mark Warner in May 2018, it would be “irresponsible” and “potentially illegal” for congressional oversight to keep demanding records from the FBI and DOJ about their spying and surveillance activity against the campaign of Donald Trump.

Now the statements yesterday by AAG Matt Whitaker make sense.

Within an interesting interview conducted by Jan Jekielek of Epoch Times, former AAG Matt Whitaker confirms the Mueller investigation was used by corrupt interests within the special counsel’s office to threaten any/all executive branch and congressional officials with “obstruction of justice” charges if they revealed any exculpatory or counter-narrative information during the Mueller probe. (read more)

Additionally, Senator Mark Warner carried a massive conflict because he was an active participant in the legislative side of the soft coup effort.

You see, when Dianne Feinstein stepped down as Vice-Chair from the Senate Intel Committee after the 2016 election, it was Mark Warner who took her place.  This puts Warner on the Gang-of-Eight starting January 3, 2017.

Coincidentally, the Gang-of-Eight conduct all oversight over DOJ and FBI covert and counterintelligence operations…. including those covert actions that took place in 2016.

It gets better….

Senator Mark Warner was also the guy caught text messaging with DC Lawyer Adam Waldman in the spring of 2017 (his first assignment).   Waldman was the lawyer for the interests of Christopher Steele – the author of the dossier.

While he was working as an intermediary putting Senator Warner and Christopher Steele in contact with each-other.  Simultaneously Adam Waldman was also representing the interests of… wait for it,…. Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska.

Derispaska was the Russian person approached by Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok and asked to assist in creating dirt on the Trump campaign, via Paul Manafort.

Senator Mark Warner holds a vested interest in making sure that no-one ever gets to the bottom of the 2016 political weaponization, spying and surveillance operation.  Hence Mark Warner was/is furious with the efforts of Ric Grenell as DNI.

Senator Mark Warner was a participant in the execution of the “insurance policy” trying to remove President Trump via the Russian Collusion narrative.  Documents that Ric Grenell has declassified and left for DNI Ratcliffe create a trail that encompasses the activity of Warner.

Senator Feinstein’s 2016 senior staffer (with Gang-of-Eight security clearance) was Dan Jones.  It was revealed that Dan Jones contracted with Christopher Steele to continue work on the Russia conspiracy narrative after the 2016 election, and raised over $50 million toward the ideological goals of removing President Trump. {See Here}

Staffer Dan Jones surfaces again in text messages from Feinstein’s replacement on the Gang-of-Eight, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman, Mark Warner {See Here}

Senator Warner was texting with Adam Waldman about setting up a meeting with Chris Steele.  Waldman is a lobbyist/lawyer with a $40,000 monthly retainer to represent the U.S. interests of Russian billionaire Oleg V. Deripaska.

Senator Mark Warner was trying to set up a covert meeting.  In the text messages Adam Waldman is telling Senator Warner that Chris Steele will not meet with him without a written letter (request) from the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator Warner didn’t want the Republican members to know about the meeting.  Chris Steele knew this was a partisan political set-up and was refusing to meet unilaterally with Senator Warner.   His lawyer Adam Waldman was playing the go-between:

That “Dan Jones”, mentioned above, talking with Chris Steele and told to go to see Senator Warner, is the former senate staffer Dan Jones, Dianne Feinstein’s lead staff.

Simultaneously, while working to connect Senator Warner to Christopher Steele, Adam Waldman is representing Oleg Deripaska:

(Source Link) 

Oleg Deripaska was a potential source (highly likely in multiple aspects) of intelligence information within the Steele Dossier; and Deripaska was also well known to the FBI as they attempted to recruit him for the stop Trump effort.

John Solomon – […] Deripaska also appears to be one of the first Russians the FBI asked for help when it began investigating the now-infamous Fusion GPS “Steele Dossier.” Waldman, his American lawyer until the sanctions hit, gave me a detailed account, some of which U.S. officials confirmseparately.

Two months before Trump was elected president, Deripaska was in New York as part of Russia’s United Nations delegation when three FBI agents awakened him in his home; at least one agent had worked with Deripaska on the aborted effort to rescue Levinson. During an hour-long visit, the agents posited a theory that Trump’s campaign was secretly colluding with Russia to hijack the U.S. election. (more)

Now, for more motive for Senator Warner to keep sunlight from the operation, listen carefully to the opening statement from former CIA Director John Brennan May 23rd, 2017, during his testimony to congress.

Pay very close attention to the segment at 13:35 of this video of Brennan’s testimony:

Brennan: [13:35] “Third, through the so-called Gang-of-Eight processwe kept congress apprised of these issues as we identified them.”

“Again, in consultation with the White HouseI PERSONALLY briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership; specifically: Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr; and to representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members.

“Given the highly sensitive nature of what was an active counter-intelligence case [that means the FBI], involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”…

So when CIA Director John Brennan was providing “individual” briefings to each of the gang-of-eight members (pictured above), they were accompanied by one senior staff.  That means a personal, individualized, briefing to Dianne Feinstein and Dan Jones.

The same Dan Jones who participated in the 2016 Brennan briefings, is the same Dan Jones who continued paying for Christopher Steele’s involvement after the Trump inauguration (ie. payoff); and the same Dan Jones who was a liaison visiting Senator Mark Warner to help continue the effort.

Things making sense now?

Now we see why Senator Mark Warner did not want a “paper trail”…

Lou Dobbs Discusses “Spygate” With Investigative Journalist Lee Smith…


Lee Smith appears on Lou Dobbs to discuss the latest revelations in the Obama-era surveillance operations.  Mr. Smith calls it “Obama’s culture of espionage.”

The Line Holds – Speaker Pelosi Drops Plan For House FISA Reauthorization Vote…


After President Trump announced he would veto any FISA reauthorization bill, without a full investigative review of prior FISA abuse so that legislation could be created specifically to fix the severe flaws in the process, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has dropped the vote for FISA reauthorization:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The House of Representatives on Thursday dropped consideration of legislation that would have extended U.S. surveillance tools, after President Donald Trump threatened a veto and his fellow Republicans withdrew their support.

“The two-thirds of the Republican Party that voted for this bill in March have indicated they are going to vote against it now,” Representative Steny Hoyer said in a statement on Thursday, after a vote on the measure was unexpectedly postponed late on Wednesday.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent a letter to members of the Democratic caucus saying she intends to hold negotiations with the Senate on a possible compromise bill that could be passed and sent to Trump.  (read more)

A little background context is needed.  In November of 2019 buried deep in the congressional budget Continuing Resolution (CR) was a short-term extension to reauthorize the FISA “business records provision”, the “roving wiretap” provision, the “lone wolf” provision, and the more controversial bulk metadata provisions [Call Detail Records (CDR)], all parts of the Patriot Act.

In Mid-March 2020 the Senate voted to reauthorize the expired FISA provisions with some modest modifications.

However, in late March the office of inspector general published a brutal interim memo highlighting continued abuses within the system.

Within the 17-page-memo the IG notifies Attorney General Bill Barr and FBI Director Chris Wray that all of the claimed FISA processes, in every FBI field office, are grossly deficient, and in most cases there is zero compliance with FISA standards.  The IG memorandum was presented before the IG even looked at the specifics of the non-compliance.

This IG memo came out March 31st after the senate had voted to reauthorize the provisions and standards the IG reviewed.  The House now holds the senate reauthorization bill, but obviously the FISA problems are bigger than addressed by the small fixes within the Senate bill.

President Trump is committed to seeing that FISA is not reauthorized without “significant” reform. Senator Rand Paul has proposed to significantly change the FISA process by forcing the DOJ, FBI and Intelligence Community to apply for search and surveillance warrants to Title-3 courts in order to access any NSA database containing private information of American citizens.

Rand Paul’s proposal seems like a good approach; however, the DOJ does not support having to go to a court every-time they “incidentally” capture records of Americans prior to being able to look at or utilize the results.  It’s a complex issue but history has shown the inherent ‘honor system‘ within the functions of the process simply does not work.

Prior to the December 9, 2019, inspector general report on FISA abuse; and prior to the March 31st interim memo as the IG looks deeper into the FISA process; FISA Court judges Rosemary Collyer (declassified 2017) and James Boasberg (declassified 2019) both identified issues with the NSA bulk database collection program being exploited for unauthorized reasons.  In the Obama-era this included political surveillance.

Americans were, and are, under surveillance as part of the process.  The capture of all electronic metadata belonging to American citizens, in combination with the captured metadata of non-American persons, makes it almost impossible to review the totality of the database without infringing on the privacy rights of Americans.

For the past several years no corrective action taken by the intelligence community has improved the abuses outlined by the FISA court; the surveillance has only worsened.

The U.S. constitution’s fourth amendment is being violated by the continued abuse of bulk metadata collection, particularly when private contractors and government officials illegally access the system. The 2016 FISA review (Judge Collyer partly declassified in 2017) and the 2018 FISA review (Judge Boasberg partly declassified in 2019) both show ongoing and systematic wrongdoing despite all prior corrective action and promises.

Beyond the database search abuses, on the use of fully assembled FISA applications for surveillance warrants against American citizens, there are even more troubling findings.  Below are the stunning top-lines identified by the March 2020 IG memo:

  • The IG reviewed 29 FISA applications, surveillance warrants, used against U.S. persons.
  • The 29 FISA applications were from eight different field offices.
  • The FISA applications were from Oct/2014 through Sept/2019.
  • All of the FISA applications reviewed were approved by the FISA court.

The ‘Woods File’ is the mandatory FBI evidence file that contains the documentary proof to verify all statements against U.S. persons that are contained in the FISA application.  Remember, this is a secret court, the FISA applications result in secret surveillance and wiretaps against U.S. persons outside the fourth amendment.

♦ Within the 29 FISA applications reviewed, four were completely missing the Woods File.  Meaning there was zero supportive evidence for any of the FBI claims against U.S. persons underpinning the FISA application.  [ie. The FBI just made stuff up]

♦ Of the remaining 25 FISA applications, 100% of them, all of them, were materially deficient on the woods file requirement; and the average number of deficiencies per file was 20.  Meaning an average of twenty direct statements against the target, supporting the purpose of the FISA application, sworn by the FBI affiant, were unsubstantiated.  [The low was 5, the high was 63, the average per file was 20]

♦ Half of the FISA applications reviewed used Confidential Human Sources (CHS’s).  The memo outlines that “many” of applications containing CHS claims had no supportive documentation attesting to the dependability of the CHS.

♦ Two of the 25 FISA applications reviewed had renewals; meaning the FISA applications were renewed to extended surveillance, wiretaps, etc. beyond the initial 90-days.  None of the renewals had any re-verification.  Both FISAs that used renewals were not compliant.

But wait… it gets worse.

The DOJ and FBI have an internal self-check mechanism.  The DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) chief counsel, and the chief counsel for every FBI field office are required to conduct an “Accuracy Review” of selected FISA applications.  One per field office (25 to 30 field offices),which are also sent to DOJ-NSD (main justice) for general counsel inspection.

Keep in mind, these “accuracy reviews” are known in advance, so the FBI has all the time in the world to select the best FISA file for review.  Additionally, I surmise the OIG wanted to inspect the “accuracy review” FISA’s because they would show the best light on the overall system itself.  The OIG was looking for the best, most compliant, product to report on.

However, when the OIG inspected 42 of these Accuracy Reviews, the IG identified that only three of them had accurately assembled documents (Woods File) supporting the application.  The error rate within the files self-checked was over 93%.

So the best FBI files are selected to undergo the FBI and DOJ-NSD accuracy review.  The accuracy review takes place by FBI legal counsel and DOJ-NSD legal counsel.  However, the IG finds that only three FBI applications in the accuracy reviews were compliant.

The error rate in the files undertaken by the internal accuracy review was over 93% (3 compliant out of 42 reviewed).  These were the FISA files with the greatest possibility of being accurate.   That tells us how flawed the process has always been.

FUBAR!

 

AG Barr Appoints West Texas U.S. Attorney to Support Durham Investigation – Review Unmasking Before and After 2016 Election…


John Bash, the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, has been assigned to assist USAO John Durham in the investigation of corrupt and malign activity by former USIC,  DOJ and FBI officials.  USAO Bash is in addition to USAO Jeff Jensen who is reviewing activity specifically as it pertains to General Michael Flynn.

John Bash is assigned to review the scale and severity of overall Obama-era unmasking to identify if laws were broken, and or if downstream leakers can be identified.

Tonight Sean Hannity invites Justice Dept. Spokesperson Kerri Kupec onto his television show so she could listen to him talk about it.  Within the interview: “the attorney general determined that certain aspects of unmasking needed to be reviewed separately as a support to John Durham’s investigation,” Ms. Kupec said. WATCH:

IG Report FBI Misconduct

Advertisements

The “Obstruction of Justice Trap” – Former AAG Matt Whitaker Confirms Mueller Probe Was Used As Weapon to Cover Coup Effort….


Within an interesting interview conducted by Jan Jekielek of Epoch Times, former AAG Matt Whitaker confirms what CTH long suspected. The Mueller investigation was used by corrupt interests within the special counsel’s office to threaten any/all executive branch and congressional officials with “obstruction of justice” charges if they revealed any exculpatory or counter-narrative information during the Mueller probe.

Whitaker describes this as the “obstruction of justice trap.”

Essentially, this approach confirms the second-prong purpose of the Mueller investigation itself. First, use the special counsel in 2017, 2018 and into the beginning of 2019, as a shield (hide information); and secondly a weapon (threats) against any entity who would reveal the background intelligence that undercut the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

We know President Trump was threatened by Rod Rosenstein not to declassify any information in September of 2018 or the Mueller investigation would use that act as evidence of obstruction. Whitaker confirms that same approach was applied toward any executive branch officer who would reveal or release information to congress during the tenure of the special counsel; even within the DOJ and including the attorney general.

This is how the Mueller probe was weaponized to mislead the American people.

While the Mueller team continued the same corrupt process started in 2016; and essentially transferred the same objectives as the DOJ/FBI team under Crossfire Hurricane; that same investigative unit was used to keep information from surfacing in ’17, ’18 and ’19 that would expose the corrupt nature of the investigation itself.

Documents could not be released without Mueller approval; interviews with key FBI/DOJ officials could not be conducted without Mueller team approval; information could not be declassified without Mueller team approval, etc.

Any agency or individual that attempted to release any information was subject to the threat of indictment by the same corrupt prosecutors leading the investigation. It’s a self-fulfilling safety mechanism.  Even DOJ officials like Matt Whitaker were under threat. Whitaker calls it the “Obstruction of Justice Trap”.

With that in mind this is a very serious flaw in the authority of the special counsel statute that needs to be addressed by congress. Who can watch the watchers, when the watchers were specifically selected because they would knowingly contribute to the corruption.

Very disturbing (timestamps for interview):

♦03:43 On Judge Sullivan choosing not to dismiss the case against Gen. Flynn
♦06:54 On FBI director Christopher Wray calling for an internal investigation
♦08:41 What kind of accountability will we see for 2016 election surveillance?
♦15:27 The problem with the regulation creating Special Counsels
♦19:32 Obstruction of justice trap?
♦35:38 Communist China’s a greater threat than Russia

.

President Trump Tweet Sept 21, 2018

BREAKING: President Trump Vows to Veto FISA Reauthorization if Passed…


Moments ago President Trump tweeted he will veto the House FISA re-authorization if it is passed without first investigating and exposing prior FISA abuses committed against his prior election campaign and administration:

The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote by proxy on the FISA re-authorization previously passed by the Senate.  No-one has any idea if the FISA vote will actually pass the House and it appears most republicans are positioned to vote against it.

Lou Dobbs discusses the issues with Representative Jim Jordan shortly before President Trump tweeted his intent.  WATCH:

.

These developments come on the heels of increased sunlight into the corrupt purposes and intents of Obama-era intelligence officials and how they weaponized their authorities to target the Trump administration starting with National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

[…] It was the FBI, not the NSA, that wiretapped Kislyak’s calls and created the summary and transcript, the former officials said. (link)

The FBI was conducting (FISA) surveillance on Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.  When Kislyak contacted Flynn the call was intercepted by the FBI.  The calls were then transcribed and “tech cuts” created.

On January 3rd Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were text messaging about the intercept.  It is important to note these text messages have never been released; and were intentionally removed and hidden from the text messages that were released.

We only know about these specific texts from a Senate oversight committee paper that put a timeline together.

This January 3rd communication is critical so I’m going to explain it.  You will see why the FBI and DOJ and Intelligence Community have kept it hidden:

A FISA order, in this case on Sergey Kislyak, is referred to as “technical coverage” or a “tech”.  The FBI interceptors, staff doing the interception, then type up summaries of telephone conversations captured. Those are referred to as “tech cuts” or “cuts”.

The “CR cut” in the text message above is a “Crossfire Razor cut”, or a Flynn cut.

This is a summary of the call intercept.  This is the non-traditional intelligence document that FBI Director James Comey gave to DNI James Clapper to use for the briefing of President Obama on January 4th. There are no redacted or masked names because it is a raw intelligence document.

The Clapper briefing officially informed the White House of the existence of an open FBI investigation into Michael Flynn.  That briefing led to the January 5th “pull aside” meeting outlined in the Susan Rice memo.

The FBI was investigating Flynn and monitoring Russian communications to see a reaction to the sanctions imposed on December 29, 2016.  When Kislyak called Flynn the FBI legally intercepted the call because the FISA authority was surveillance on Kislyak and Flynn was also under investigation.

But there are more implications…

Peter Strzok  texts: “[Bill Priestap], like us, is concerned with over sharing.  Doesn’t want Clapper giving [the Flynn cut, or summary of intercepted call] to White House.”  All political, just shows our hand and potentially makes enemies.

Lisa Page responds: “Yeah but keep in mind we were going to put that in the doc on Friday, with potentially larger distribution than just DNI.”

Strzok Replies: “The question is should we, particularly to the entirely of the lame duck U.S. Intelligence Community with partisan axes to grind.”

The implication of the Lisa Page response about sharing the Flynn intercept, is the intention of the FBI to include the “CR cut”, the FBI summary intercept of the Kislyak call, within the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which was being released on Friday.  The filter of their entire conversation was political.

We don’t know if the Kislyak-Flynn call was used as a part of the classified evidence within the ICA.  It sounds from Lisa Page’s text response that the issue was discussed and then a decision made not to include it:  “we were going to put that in”, implies they did not.

Bill Priestap and Peter Strzok have issues with the raw “tech cut” of the intercept being shared with DNI Clapper and White House.  Lisa Page downplays those concerns by saying: ‘hey relax, in context we were about to put that readout in the ICA which is a far bigger deal than just sharing it with the White House.’

Putting it all together.  The FBI intercepted the call.  A “tech cut” summary of the call was generated exclusive to the FBI.  James Comey gave that call summary including Flynn’s name to James Clapper; and James Clapper briefed President Obama.

Michael Flynn wasn’t unmasked in documents related to the call because Flynn’s name was never masked in the documents, the FBI “CR cut”.  [READ SENATE DOCUMENT]