In June 2018, in response to an IG investigation, while denying the FBI had any political bias, FBI Director Christopher Wray promised anti-bias training for all agents. In response to the “challenges” identified by the report, the FBI “appreciates the opportunity” to provide more “support” to our employees. [June 14th, 2018]

In December 2019, in response to another IG investigation, while denying FBI agents would intentionally act illegally, FBI Director Christopher Wray notified the FISA court a Senior FBI investigative lawyer named Kevin Clinesmith intentionally falsified evidence on a FISA application.

In response to the FBI notification, late December 2019 the FISA court demanded to know what corrective actions the FBI was going to take; and what other applications FBI Lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, was involved in.

In response today (full pdf below) FBI Director Christopher Wray promises more training.

[Cloud pdf Link Here]

Making the statements even more ironic; and almost appearing to rub salt into the psyche wounds they inflict; the FBI notification of corrective action was submitted to the FISA court and signed by FBI Counsel Dana Boente:

As head of the DOJ-NSD it was the same Dana Boente who signed the fraudulent FISA renewal in 2017…. Go figure.

Throughout 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and through today, across both administrations, the corrupt group within the FBI in DC were/are protecting themselves. The FBI redacted the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages. The FBI removed Page and Strzok texts and emails. The FBI hid texts and emails from Lisa Page to Andrew McCabe. The FBI kept documents from congress. The FBI has leaked false information to media to cover their tracks; and yes the Trump FBI have participated.

The corrupt FBI under James Comey, Andrew McCabe and James Baker is being protected and facilitated by the corrupt FBI under Christopher Wray, David Bowditch (San Bernadino infamy) and Dana Boente.

It’s one long continuum of exactly the same behavior.

Remember, 50 FBI ‘agents’ on Mueller’s team?  This DC network is ideologically aligned, operating on their own self-interests, & facilitated by a compliant media.  {Go Deep}

Amid mounting pressure, and considerable laughs in her general direction, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has announced her intention to appoint impeachment managers next week and release the impeachment articles to the Senate:

Release the Flying Monkeys

…”I am very proud of the courage and patriotism exhibited by our House Democratic Caucus as we support and defend the Constitution. I have asked Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler to be prepared to bring to the Floor next week a resolution to appoint managers and transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate. I will be consulting with you at our Tuesday House Democratic Caucus meeting on how we proceed further.”… (link)

The nonsense is off-the-charts around this issue.   The DNC media apparatus are playing a game of willful blindness (Mamet Principle) and the RNC media appear genuinely oblivious…  It is beyond silly.

Today Pelosi stutters about releasing the articles sometime “soon”.

WASHINGTON – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she’s not withholding articles of impeachment from the Senate “indefinitely” and will probably send them over “soon,” responding to mounting pressure to allow the Senate to open proceedings in President Trump’s impeachment trial.

“You will keep asking me the same question, I will keep giving you the same answer,” Pelosi said in her weekly press conference on Capitol Hill on Thursday morning. “As I said right from the start, we need to see the arena in which we are sending our managers. Is that too much to ask?” (more)

The House didn’t contract with two-dozen former Obama legal minds from in/around the Lawfare community (and the Mueller group) back in December ’18 and January ’19 including: Douglas Letter, Mary McCord, Norm Eisen, Barry Berke and Daniel Goldman, for a specific process; and now simultaneously get to pontificate that Speaker Pelosi is in charge of this process.  She ain’t.  Period.

This was/is an organized plan by all of the aforementioned with the goal of gaining legal authority to exploit the same team’s prior opposition research on Trump.  The House impeachment is a means to an end; not the end itself.

The House has a group of dozens of various DOJ and former Obama officials working on their behalf.  That House network also has several currently employed DOJ, FBI, State Department and Intelligence Community officials feeding them information on current real-time events.   The HJC are currently arguing the Mueller material and the McGahn testimony are needed for the impeachment trial of President Trump.

The rushed House articles were/are a means to an end. That is – a way for House lawyers to argue in court all of the constitutionally contended material is required as evidence for pending judicial proceedings, a trial in the Senate.

This would explain why all the prior evidence debated for inclusion and legal additions to “articles of impeachment” were dropped. Instead the House focused only on quickly framing two articles that could facilitate two pending court cases.

If the HJC team wins the argument to the three member DC Appellate Court, the DOJ will likely file for a full ‘en banc’ review by the entire panel.  If the HJC wins the ‘en banc’ argument the DOJ will likely appeal for an administrative stay by the Supreme Court.

However, if the HJC team loses, they will most likely not file an appeal and will quickly release the impeachment articles to the Senate.   The impeachment articles (Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress) are currently withheld in an effort to bolster the DC appeals court argument.

The primary goal is to gain the Mueller material; by design the impeachment process is a means toward that end.  Impeachment is not the end; impeachment is the means to an end.  Impeachment is the legal standing to exploit the Mueller material. [Background]

Remember, the Mueller evidence was gathered during a counterintelligence investigation, which means all things Trump -including his family and business interests- were subject to unbridled surveillance for two years; and a host of intelligence gathering going back in time indefinitely. A goldmine of political opposition research.

The Mueller investigation itself was purposed to dig, legally, into every aspect of Donald Trump, his family, his friends, his finances, his companies, his legal holdings, his lawyers, his accountants, his history… all of it… and they did so under both Title-1 and Title-3 surveillance authority because the Mueller probe was a counterintelligence operation.

President Trump: travel records, phone records, electronic files, electronic communications, emails, electronic records, family files, medical records, bank records, tax records,… THE WORKS …all with unlimited surveillance authority as granted by former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and the useful status of an unlimited counterintelligence operation. Think about the scale of the material Weissmann and Mueller gained access to.

Obviously if Jerry Nadler could get his hands on this material it would quickly find its way into the DNC, and ultimately to the 2020 democrat candidate for president. This material would also be fuel for a year of leaks to DC media who could exploit rumor, supposition, and drops of information that Andrew Weissmann and team left to be discovered.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell delivered some bad news to Speaker Pelosi from the floor of the upper-chamber:

…”There will be no haggling with the House over Senate procedure. We will not cede our authority to try this impeachment. The House Democrats’ turn is over. The Senate has made its decision.”…

…Now, go make me a sandwich.

.

[Transcript] – MITCH MCCONNELL – ‘Late last year, Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats sped through a slapdash impeachment of President Trump in 12 weeks. Because, they insisted, the need to undo the 2016 election was urgent. Urgent, they said.

‘Since then, the same people have spent three weeks dragging their heels and refusing to proceed to a Senate trial.

‘Supposedly, the explanation for this shameless game-playing is that Speaker Pelosi wanted “leverage” to reach into the Senate and dictate our trial proceedings to us. I’ve made clear from the beginning that no such “leverage” exists. It’s nonexistent. And yesterday we made it clear it will never exist.

‘A majority of the Senate has decided that the first phase of an impeachment trial should track closely with the unanimous bipartisan precedent that all 100 senators supported for the first phase of the Clinton trial back in 1999.

‘There will be no haggling with the House over Senate procedure. We will not cede our authority to try this impeachment. The House Democrats’ turn is over. The Senate has made its decision.

‘The 1999 precedent does not guarantee witnesses or foreclose witnesses. Let me say that again: it neither guarantees witnesses nor forecloses witnesses. It leaves those determinations until later in the trial where they belong.

‘I fully expect the parties will raise questions about witnesses at the appropriate time. I would remind my friends on the other side: I strongly suspect that not all the potential witnesses would be people the Democrats are eager to hear from.

‘So the Senate will address all these questions at the appropriate time. That is for the Senate, and the Senate only, to decide. Period.” (read more)

Speaker of the House “Tehran Nancy” has announced her intention for a vote on Thursday in an effort to limit President Trump’s authority to defend against attacks by Iran, and increase the democrat effort to protect Iran’s ability to target Americans in the region.

“Mullah Bin Schumer and Tehran Nancy”

“Members of Congress have serious, urgent concerns about the Administration’s decision to engage in hostilities against Iran and about its lack of strategy moving forward. Our concerns were not addressed by the President’s insufficient War Powers Act notification and by the Administration’s briefing today,” Pelosi said in a statement.

Sara Carter held a pod-cast interview with HPSCI ranking member Devin Nunes.  At approximately 36:25 of the interview congressman Nunes discusses the testimony of Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.

The transcript from Atkinson’s House testimony has never been released.  Rep. Nunes states the reason HPSCI Chairman Schiff has kept the transcript hidden and classified is because the content is extremely damaging to the origin of the impeachment fraud.  Additionally, the testimony from Atkinson conflicted with evidence which surfaced later:

“[Atkinson] is under active investigation. I’m not gonna go any farther than that because you know obviously he has a chance to come in and prove his innocence, but my guess is Schiff, Atkinson they don’t want that transcript out because it’s very damaging”… (Link)

CTH has previously outlined ICIG Michael Atkinson as a dirty player amid a network of very corrupt officials who hold self-interests from participating in unlawful abuses of government surveillance including the DOJ and FBI activity during the 2016 election.

On Sunday, October 6th, 2019, even before the revelations of Schiff working with the whistle-blower surfaced, ranking member Devin Nunes originally discussed his concerns with the testimony of Michael Atkinson.  Nunes noted the testimony “was a joke”.

Nunes told Sirius XM’s Breitbart News Sunday host Matt Boyle, “[The ICIG is] either totally incompetent or part of the deep state, and he’s got a lot of questions he needs to answer because he knowingly changed the form and the requirements in order to make sure that this whistleblower complaint got out publicly.”

“So he’s either incompetent or in on it, and he’s going to have more to answer for, I can promise you, because we are not going to let him go; he is going to tell he truth about what happened,” Nunes added.  (read more)

ICIG Atkinson never reviewed the call transcript and facilitated the complaint processing despite numerous flaws.  Additionally Atkinson ignored legal guidance from both the director of national intelligence (DNI) and the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel that highlighted Atkinson’s poor decision-making.

Michael K Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD) in 2016. That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were the former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.

(Link to Atkinson Career File)

The DOJ-NSD were using sketchy legal interpretations of the Foreign Agent Registration Act  (FARA §901) to justify political surveillance.  Atkinson’s legal guidance within the department would have been critical for them to continue this approach.

[Reminder: The DOJ-NSD was purposefully under no IG oversight. In 2015 the OIG requested oversight and it was Deputy AG Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.]

Additionally, Michael Atkinson was the lawyer for the same DOJ-NSD players who: (1) lied to the FISA court (Judge Rosemary Collyer) about the 80% non compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors; (2) filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and (3) used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.

Yes, that means Michael Atkinson was Senior Counsel for the DOJ-NSD, at the very epicenter of the political weaponization and FISA abuse.

Immediately after the Carter Page FISA warrant is approved, in the period where DOJ-NSD head John Carlin has given his notice of intent to leave but not yet left, inside those specific two weeks, the National Security Division of the DOJ tells the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) they have been breaking the law. The NSD specifically inform the court they are aware of contractors who have been using FISA 702(16)(17) database search queries to extract information on political candidates.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has looked into the FISA application used against U.S. Person Carter Page. Additionally, U.S. Attorney John Durham is said to be looking at the intelligence communities’ use of systems for spying and surveillance.

If the DOJ-NSD exploitation of the NSA database, and/or DOJ-NSD FISA abuse, and/or DOJ-NSD FARA corruption were ever to reach sunlight, current ICIG Atkinson -as the lawyer for the process- would be under a lot of scrutiny for his involvement.

Yes, that gives current ICIG Michael Atkinson a strong and corrupt motive to participate with the Schiff/Lawfare impeachment objective.

It now looks like the Lawfare network constructed the ‘whistle-blower’ complaint aka a Schiff Dossier, and handed it to allied CIA operative Eric Ciaramella to file as a formal IC complaint.  This process is almost identical to the Fusion-GPS/Lawfare network handing the Steele Dossier to the FBI to use as the evidence for the 2016/2017 Russia conspiracy.

Atkinson’s conflict-of-self-interest, and/or possible blackmail upon him by deep state actors who most certainly know his compromise, likely influenced his approach to this whistleblower complaint.   That would explain why the Dept. of Justice Office of Legal Counsel so strongly rebuked Atkinson’s interpretation of his responsibility with the complaint.

In the Justice Department’s OLC opinion, they point out that Atkinson’s internal justification for accepting the whistleblower complaint was poor legal judgement.  [See Here]  I would say Atkinson’s decision is directly related to his own risk exposure:

.

Michael Atkinson was moved from DOJ-NSD to become the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) in 2018.  What we end up with is a brutally obvious, convoluted, network of corrupt officials; each carrying an independent reason to cover their institutional asses… each individual interest forms a collective fraudulent scheme inside the machinery of the FBI apparatus.

The motive behind the DOJ/FBI effort to cover for Senate Intelligence Committee Security Director James Wolfe’s unlawful classified information leaks, is connected to this network and expands into the SSCI Chairman (Richard Burr) and Vice-Chair Mark Warner.

Security Director Wolfe was working on instructions from inside the committee itself; his leak of the FISA application to journalist Ali Watkins was in alignment with the intents/motives of the SSCI in March 2017.   Dirty politicians corrupting staff.

The DOJ and FBI didn’t charge James Wolfe with the leaking of classified information because it would have exposed corruption within the SSCI.  Wolfe was prepared to call the senators in his defense…. this could not be allowed.  The SSCI has oversight over the intelligence community to include the FBI, DOJ, DOJ-NSD, CIA, ODNI etc.

How does all of this corruption come together?….  More importantly how does this level of institutional corruption create the inability of FBI whistle-blowers to come forward?

♦ The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is the approver for any nominations for any executive appointed position involving the intelligence community.

If the senate intel committee wants to block the nomination, likely adverse to their interests, they can… simply, they don’t take it up. (See Trump’s attempt to appoint Representative John Ratcliffe as ODNI as an example.)

However, along with approving Christopher Wray and David Bowditch (recommendations from DAG Rod Rosenstein), the SSCI also approved former DOJ-NSD legal counsel Michael Atkinson to become Intelligence Community Inspector General.

Who would an honest intelligence whistle-blower have to go through?  Dirty ICIG Michael Atkinson.  The same dirty Michael Atkinson who was the top legal counsel to the head of the DOJ-NSD when the corrupt DOJ-NSD agency operations were ongoing.

See how the whistle-blower block works?

Aligned interests – The Senate Intel Committee used the placement of Atkinson to block any whistle-blower action that would be adverse to their interests.  Honest whistle-blowers ain’t stupid, they know what surrounds them.

You might remember recently how Burr and Warner would not support Rep. John Ratcliffe for Director of National intelligence under the auspices of Ratcliffe not having enough “experience” within intelligence operations. However, those same “experience” concerns were absent when they approved dirty ICIG nominee Michael Atkinson.

Senator Mark Warner […] You’re also aware that this Committee is leading the review into the Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. During this hearing I want to hear assurances from both of you that you will fully cooperate with this review and provide this Committee with all the information requested in a timely fashion.

Mr. Atkinson, as the Inspector General of the Intel Community your job is especially critical because of the nature of the material that they handle every day, whistleblowers within the IC generally can’t go public to expose misbehavior and misuse of official resources. We the Congress and the American people will depend upon you as an independent agent of accountability for the Office of the DNI and, for that matter, for the whole intel community.

While you don’t have previous experience as an inspector general, I look forward to hearing your plans for the righting
of the ship at the IC’s IG when it comes to both whistleblower protections and investigations.

I’m very concerned by the significant number of open cases that I believe have lingered too long. If confirmed, I will ask you to make the whistleblower program a priority. This is an area that cuts across party lines and committee jurisdictions. (continue transcript)

The intelligence apparatus is a key part of the rogue administrative state that operates in direct alignment with a rogue state department and politicians who use their influence to gain material wealth from sales/control of policy.

It is a synergy of DC interests.

Republican Senator Josh Hawley appeared on ‘Fox & Friends’ this morning to outline a proposal for Senate action to throw out the impeachment case if Democrats don’t prosecute it.

.