A lot of under-the-radar action happening today surrounding the upcoming DOJ Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz report.
House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte called Inspector General Michael Horowitz earlier today to discuss the content of the subpoena he recently sent to the DOJ demanding investigative records related to the ongoing IG internal review and report.
Simultaneous to this oversight discussion, and related to the content therein, FBI Director Christopher Wray released a public statement announcing additional FBI staff resources committed to fulfillment of Chairman Goodlatte’s request.
FBI – As the Director of the FBI, I am committed to ensuring that the Bureau is being transparent and responsive to legitimate congressional requests.
Up until today, we have dedicated 27 FBI staff to review the records that are potentially responsive to Chairman Goodlatte’s requests. The actual number of documents responsive to this request is likely in the thousands. Regardless, I agree that the current pace of production is too slow.
Accordingly, I am doubling the number of assigned FBI staff, for a total of 54, to cover two shifts per day from 8 a.m. to midnight to expedite completion of this project. (link)
DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has ‘at least’ 1.2 million documents gathered as part of his fourteen month investigation into the politicization of the FBI and DOJ.
Included within the exhaustive evidence is the total transcript of text messages between FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Attorney Lisa Page extending almost two years. Some of those text messages were previously released to congressional oversight committees and have structured much of the media storyline and investigative pathways for three congressional committees. However, only a small portion of those texts were actually release so far.
According to an interview between Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte and radio personality Sean Hannity earlier today, Horowitz has assembled all of the information for his report but the scope of the report is so exhaustive it will most likely be released in segments according to the subject material and the myriad of issues involved:
The first section of the IG report, encompassing the DOJ/FBI political activity -specifically surrounding leaks to the media and fired Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe- will likely come out first in April.
The McCabe release should be followed by a release of the IG findings on the topic of FBI and DOJ conduct, and the politicization therein, within the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
The issues with the DOJ/FBI representations to the FISA Court, the October 21st DOJ/FBI application therein and other issues, will flow thereafter; there may be sub-chapter reports released supplemental to the FISA investigation surrounding Christopher Steele, Fusion-GPS and/or the private contractors and abuse of FBI and DOJ databases.
However, following protocol the IG report will first be released and reviewed to the three principles in charge of the internal departments being investigated. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray will review each section prior to further release.
Additionally, it is almost certain the IG report will contain highly classified information. While congress will see the totality of the report (after Sessions, Wray and Rosenstein review), each segment will be vetted in a similar matter to the April 2017 FISA Court opinion; which is to say – the public version will have redactions. [At least initially].
Senator Lindsey Graham appears on Fox News for an interview with Maria Bartiromo. 99.99% of the interview is country club Senator Graham repeating the same South Carolina white wine spritzer talking points he’s famous for. That is to say lots of words amounting to nothing. The gastric equivalence of cucumber and mayonnaise triangle sandwiches on crust-less Wonder bread with a side of celery.
However, there is a reminder at 09:50 of a key and important point that tries to surface yet continues to get whacked down by the annoying duplicity of swamp creatures and a media that completely ignores the obvious. Lindsey Graham claims Christopher Steele lied and told the FBI he never talked to media.
We do not know this to be true, and neither does he.
.
It is far more likely the FBI:… #1) Ignored Chris Steele talking to media because they needed his Clinton-Steele dossier for a false FISA application; and #2) the FBI later told congress they didn’t know about Steele talking to media, but they really did; and #3) the FBI falsified FD-302 reports of their interview with Chris Steele to cover their tracks.
Here’s how we know:
Christopher Steele had no motive to lie to the FBI about his media contacts.
The FBI had tons of motive to lie about their knowing Steele talked to the media.
It’s just common sense.
Christopher Steele wasn’t meeting in secret with the media, it was well known. He was traveling around to meet them in August and September 2016. Why would he lie to the FBI about such transparently well known action in October? Answer: He wouldn’t.
Toward the end of December, the FBI provided the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, with FBI investigative documents (likely FD-302’s) from their contacts with Christopher Steele. According to most reasonable timing we can discover Steele met with FBI officials sometime around October 1st, 2016.
From the U.K. lawsuit against Christopher Steele (pdf here), Steele admits to having shopped the Clinton-Steele dossier to U.S. media outlets “in person” in late September (New York Times, WaPo, New Yorker and CNN), and mid-October, 2016 (New York Times, WaPo, and Yahoo News), per instructions from Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS):
Additionally, in late October, 2016, Christopher Steele briefed Mother Jones via Skype.
According to the HPSCI intelligence memo, the FBI sought a FISA application based on the Steele Dossier on October 21st, 2016. From the evidenced UK court records at least two briefings with reporters, containing five outlets, took place prior to the FBI using the Clinton-Steele dossier in their FISA application.
The “late September” briefings with the New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo News, New Yorker and CNN took place prior to Christopher Steele meeting with FBI officials early October.
The implication therein is that the FBI had to know prior to their October 21st, 2016, court application that the information they were presenting to the FISA court was being heavily shopped to media outlets. This would be immediately disqualifying.
However, in the released HPSCI memo, it is noted that Christopher Steele lied to the FBI about those media engagements taking place. See:
The HPSCI memo notes the FBI relationship with Christopher Steele was terminated after the FISA application (Oct. 21st, 2016), as a result of the Mother Jones article from October 30th, 2016. Media contact by an FBI material witness is immediately disqualifying.
The question is: did the FBI submit the FISA application under false pretenses? Did the FBI actually know Christopher Steele was shopping the dossier to the media prior to their FISA court submission?
The HPSCI memo gives the FBI the benefit of doubt by presuming the FBI were unaware or “lied to“.
The FD-302’s (FBI investigative interview notes), which appear to have been turned over to Senate Chairman Chuck Grassley, could contain the evidence to support the FBI being duped; – OR – show the FBI knew, and proceeded in using the dossier despite disqualifying knowledge of media involvement; – OR – the FBI could have manipulated the FD-302’s.
In an effort to get the answer to those questions into sunlight; and with the understanding that Chairman Grassley has the FBI documents; Grassley produced a memo for declassification that facilitates understanding how the FBI claims it used the Clinton-Steele dossier during their investigation.
On January 5th, 2018, The Grassley Memo approach surfaced. Grassley issues a statement on the reason for the criminal referral. He lets us know that he ALSO has a classified memo that he is trying to get released! Unlike Nunes he needs to go through DOJ:
January 24th, 2018, Grassley Speech: “Hiding From Tough Questions” – In his 17 minute speech Grassley reveals important details about his investigation into Steele and the FBI.
Thanks to the brilliant work of DaveNYviii we can walk through this carefully, and watch the outline in a logical sequence.
“If those [FBI] documents are not true, and there are serious discrepancies that are no fault of Mr. Steele, then we have another problem—an arguably more serious one.”
The FBI, via Agent Peter Strzok, was already caught (text messages with his co-hort Lisa Page) admitting to falsifying FD-302 material during this exact time frame.
At first, the context behind the September 10th, 2016, message was elusive, however it is now clear.
On September 2nd, 2016, during the (pre-election) apex of the FBI providing the documents behind their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of her personal email, and the subsequent decision by FBI Director James Comey not to pursue criminal charges therein, the FBI released their investigative files:
“Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter.
We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI’s electronic FOIA library.” (link)
The FBI was under pressure to release their investigative documents. On Sept 2nd, 2016 the release included the FBI investigative notes (FD-302’s) from the questions and answers during Hillary Clinton’s interview. This investigative release was big news at the time.
The 302’s are the specific FBI forms used to document interviews/interrogations. They detail questions asked and answers given as well as who was present during the interview.
Inside the September 2nd, 2016, FBI release were two files:
•One file was 47 pages (full pdf here) and includes a full summary of the Clinton email investigation.
•The second file is 11 pages (full pdf here) and is the actual FBI investigator notes during the Hillary Clinton interview.
This second file is the “FD-302” (embed at the bottom for reference). This is the 302 file FBI Agent Peter Strzok is referencing in the text message to Lisa Page. Remember, Peter Strzok was one of the FBI people who actually interviewed Hillary Clinton.
What FBI Agent Peter Strzok is admitting in the September 10th text message, is that there are details within the interview of Hillary Clinton that he (and others) intentionally withheld from the September 2nd, 2016, release.
Specifically, evidence withheld in the 302’s would be some of the FBI questions and some of the Hillary Clinton answers to those questions. In essence, the FBI held back actually releasing the full account of the interview.
According to the Strzok text message, the reason for withholding some of the details of the Hillary Clinton interview is because there are “very INFLAMMATORY things” within it; and once congress finds out what was withheld the details will “absolutely inflame” them.
Peter Strzok then goes on to say when/if the full FOIA is released, presumably post-election, Jim, Trisha, Dave and Mike are going to have to figure out how to deal with the discrepancy:
…”I’m sure Jim and Trisha and Dave and Mike are all considering how things like that will play out as they talk among themselves.”
•”Jim” is likely James Baker, the disgraced Chief Legal Counsel for FBI Director James Comey. He was busted out of a job right before congressional questioning.
•”Trish” is likely Trisha Beth Anderson, Office of Legal Counsel for the FBI. [Anderson was hired for the DOJ, by AG Eric Holder, from Eric Holder’s law firm.]
•”Dave” was likely David Laufman the Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence. Laufman sat in on the questioning of Hillary Clinton and resigned RIGHT AFTER these Strzok/Page text messages were released. [SEE HERE]
•And “Mike” was almost certainly Mike Kortan, the FBI Communications Director who also resigned right after the Nunes memo was released, when confronted by FBI Director Christopher Wray about an unauthorized FBI statement which attempted to undermine the HPSCI memo content. [See HERE and HERE]
So it would appear, James Baker and Trisha Anderson, the legal advisers at the top of the FBI leadership apparatus, in addition to Lisa Page the DOJ attorney assigned to the staff of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, were all legally aware the September 2nd, 2016, FOIA release was manipulated by the FBI to conceal part of Hillary Clinton’s questions and answers.
Perhaps now we can better understand the importance of this specific text message as it was released by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte.
This message by Strzok shows a team of FBI officials intentionally conspiring to withhold “inflammatory” Clinton investigation evidence, from congress. And the decision-making goes directly to the very top leadership within the FBI.
Peter Strzok justifies his knowledge of the intentionally withheld 302 interview material by claiming: “because they weren’t relevant to understanding the focus of the investigation”. However, to evaluate the filter this investigative team are applying we only need to look at the wording of their public release which accompanied the material:
Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. (link)
They felt obligated only to release information about “classified” or “improperly stored or transmitted” information. That’s a rather disingenuous investigation.
There’s no mention of any FBI intent to investigate action or conduct undertaken by Hillary Clinton or her team to hide the use of classified or improperly stored information; or any intent to look at a cover-up, scrubbing, or conduct that happened AFTER it was discovered that she unlawfully used a personal e-mail server during her tenure.
We can see from the wording of the FBI public release, and the overlay of the text message from interviewer Peter Strzok, a deliberate effort to inquire into only the surface issues of classified information transmission and storage. There was no investigative intent to go beyond that, and no information released, intentionally, that might disclose any larger issues.
If the FBI was legitimately conducting an investigation, and providing the subsequent evidence from within that investigation, the FOIA would include all material relevant to the investigation, which would include all 302 (essentially Q&A) pages. However, the set of questions and answers the FBI released on Sept. 2nd 2016 was not the full set of Questions and Answers. They withheld something, likely “inflammatory”, per FBI Agent Strzok.
FBI Agent Peter Strzok is outlining in this text message a deliberate intent to shape the Clinton interview, and then a deliberative process of filtering out only those aspects of the interview that would support their pre-determined outcome, delivered only days later.
Additionally, FBI Agent Strzok is admitting that a group of FBI officials including himself, James Baker, Trisha Anderson, Lisa Page, and likely others (McCabe, Comey) conspired together to intentionally withhold information -derived from this interview- from congress and the American people.
President Trump is no longer planning to utilize the services or representation of the legal husband and wife team of Joseph diGenova and Victoria Toensing, within the ongoing Mueller probe, due to conflicts.
“The President is disappointed that conflicts prevent Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing from joining the President’s Special Counsel legal team,” his lawyer, Jay Sekulow, said in a statement. “However, those conflicts do not prevent them from assisting the President in other legal matters. The President looks forward to working with them.”
[…] DiGenova and Toensing released a statement on the announcement Sunday, saying: “We thank the President for his confidence in us and we look forward to working with him on other matters.” (link)
Just guessing, but it doesn’t seem surprising there would be a conflict considering Toensing is representing an FBI whistle-blower in the Clinton Uranium-One scandal.
The National Security Council is a large intelligence bureaucracy, within the Washington DC intelligence apparatus, consisting of dozens of principles and hundreds of staff. Many of those staffers are career officials, holdovers from prior administrations.
According to Foreign Policy, incoming National Security Adviser to the President, John Bolton, is planning a significant ‘clean house’ removing a significant number of people within the system.
(Via FP) Incoming National Security Advisor John Bolton and people close to him are expected to launch a massive shake-up at the National Security Council, aiming to remove dozens of current White House officials, starting with holdovers from President Barack Obama’s administration, according to multiple sources.
Those targeted for removal include officials believed to have been disloyal to President Donald Trump, those who have leaked about the president to the media, his predecessor’s team, and those who came in under Obama.
“Bolton can and will clean house,” one former White House official said.
Another source said, “He is going to remove almost all the political [appointees] McMaster brought in.”
A second former White House official offered a blunt assessment of former Obama officials currently detailed or appointed to the NSC: “Everyone who was there during Obama years should start packing their shit.” (read more)
This should have happened earlier…. but at least it’s a good restart now.
In 2008 the American taxpayer was a “client without a voice” when Citi-Group demanded a financial bailout. TARP followed as the largest bailout in history, and Citibank got the biggest bailout of all:
The final report from the Congressional Oversight Panel found that between TARP, the FDIC, and the Federal Reserve, Citigroup received the most federal funding during the financial crisis for a total of $476.2 billion in cash and guarantees. (link)
Fast forward ten years and now Citibank announces their intent to restrict business enterprise engaged in the Second Amendment, firearm sales. The motive is transparent; leadership within Citi-group are opponents to gun ownership and they have now made a decision to use their financial business as a weapon to enforce their political beliefs:
[…] Today, our CEO announced Citi is instituting a new U.S. Commercial Firearms Policy. […] Under this new policy, we will require new retail sector clients or partners to adhere to these best practices: (1) they don’t sell firearms to someone who hasn’t passed a background check, (2) they restrict the sale of firearms for individuals under 21 years of age, and (3) they don’t sell bump stocks or high-capacity magazines. This policy will apply across the firm, including to small business, commercial and institutional clients, as well as credit card partners, whether co-brand or private label. (more)
It is important to keep in mind that all three issues outlined by Citibank are not unlawful; these are social policies around firearm sales that Citibank is initiating on their own. If you follow the underlying policy to a reasonable outcome, the same approach could be taken toward barring auto dealers who use Citi-financial products from selling gasoline powered automobiles because the people running Citibank are environmentalists.
In the current example they don’t like certain types of gun purchases (18 year olds, 20 round magazines, etc.), so ask yourself what will they not like next?
Regardless of how you feel about guns think about what this financial service company is doing here.
What happens when they don’t like the political position of Home Depot?
What happens when they don’t like the free speech of Alex Jones (Info-Wars)?
Beyond the ‘second amendment’ you can just as easily see Citi-group using their monolithic financial control to target the ‘first amendment’.
Perhaps it wouldn’t be so particularly annoying if Citibank didn’t demand the previous taxpayer bailout (TARP); I don’t remember gun owners having the option of exclude their tax receipts from the bailout request of Citi in 2008?
I digress.
However, with more and more organizations deciding to limit the use of their products and services based on political ideology; and with Citibank now openly stating their intent to create national legislation without actually applying congressional laws to their endeavors; it’s a fair request to say Citi-group should no longer be permitted any favorable benefits from the FDIC.
If you are stunned by their position…. What can you do about it?
Disconnect yourselves from Citigroup: ♦If you have investments with Citigroup pull out of their service; move your money. ♦Drop Citigroup as a lender or mortgage provider. ♦Cut up your Citigroup credit cards. ♦Never take a loan from Citigroup. ♦Or, ultimately for those in business…. if you are a business that takes Citigroup financial products as payment, consider applying a surcharge for any customer who uses Citibank credit or debit cards.
♦Citibank customers paying an additional, say… 5% surcharge might just catch someone’s attention. Just sayin’.
There’s no escaping the reality that today’s Omnibus spending bill is a significant slap in the face to Trump voters and supporters. The $1.3 trillion UniParty spending scheme is a bitter rebuke from the legislative branch. A twitter comment outlines an understandable, albeit emotionally charged, reaction:
“You did have a choice. There’s always a choice. You betrayed us with what you did. We have fought for you. We have lost friends/family for you. We have become targets for you. Yes, you did have a choice. Fix this.”
Despite the valid and understandable reaction, ‘betrayal’ is harsh. From POTUS Trump perspective the lack of “choice” stems from a cornerstone that Making America Great Again is dependent on a strong U.S. military. Protecting Americans writ large is contingent upon ensuring our military is solid. Unfortunately, the only way to ensure the #1 objective was to acquiesce/concede to the blackmail of the UniParty in DC. – FUBAR.
~ “Leadership is often painful” ~
There ain’t a single part of this that seems ok, regardless of necessity. Worse still, is having to accept the republican side of the UniParty would enjoy nothing more than losing their majority position so they can go back to being comfortable enablers of the unholy DC alliance, and expel the annoying disruption known as President Trump.
Yes, this self-preserving UniParty approach is by design; it is a feature of the swamp – not an anomaly. Our only current solace is a historic reference; generally speaking when President Trump retreats from a fight, he tends to re-advance his force with greater severity. But on this singular day, if there’s a larger push-back yet to unfold, the commander-in-chief is conceding to the opposition a great deal of valuable ground.
“Well, I don’t really have to do any holding together, now that I figured out what Trump is up to. He is shaking things out, but counting on Trump gravity to pull things back together as he moves along.
He is moving “forward” at speeds Obama could not even dream of.
You and I will be anti-Trump trolls one day and MAGA heroes the next. Get used to it. Trump speed is the new normal. Some will call it flip-flopping, but that’s not what it is. Trump is dodging and weaving through reality faster than the reality can react to disrupt his plans.
I was explaining this to my wife. This is a roller-coaster now. Trump is no longer waiting for people to keep up. He is taking his bewildering art-of-the-deal campaign schtick into geopolitics, and for a lot of people who can’t keep up or hold on, it will be a rough ride.
Trump is no longer playing only with evil and cunning players who are still predictable, easily beatable dopes, like Hillary. He is playing against killers, with his own team of killers, and all the while he has scheming creeps like Hillary, BGI, SPLC, and the neocons gunning for him. Snake Ryan ready to bite when nobody is looking. “Warhead” McCain screaming for Russian blood. Psycho Kim and Samoa Obama plotting some kind of intrigue to take him down. And THOSE are the lightweights.
This is the majors now. Trump has to outwit world-class adversaries and “frenemies” by defining the deals that they will agree to. One minute they will think Trump is their friend – the next minute, a cunning, bitter foe.
And he has to do this with evil cheerleaders like Warhead, Linderace, Dipsy Dowd, Maggie Haterman, and Fake Yapper trashing him or praising him alternately, no matter which way he goes. They can’t keep up, either.
Neither can many around him. I think that half of the problem with advisers crashing into each other is they don’t realize what Trump is doing.
And people will trash you, and they will trash me. Get used to it. I’ve already caught plenty of people mocking me. Well, just wait a week in Trump time. Look stupid and conned by Trump one minute, and you look like a sage three days later.
Trump will not find perfect solutions. He will find OPTIMAL solutions. We cannot ask for more. Trump has stood by and watched Perfect murder Good for 8 years – maybe longer. He’s not gonna do it. He’s going to deliver the best outcome possible, and he’s not waiting for us to feel relaxed about it.
Best presidency ever! Just hang on. More winning is coming, but a lot of people are going to scream that it’s all over at EVERY turn.
The best way through this is to define viewpoints, not people, because people will shift as they change position and velocity in Trump gravity. Bash the neocon, warmonger, and dopey globalist positions – not the people who are going to hold them one moment and come loose from them later.
Trump is Jupiter moving through the asteroid belt. He is going to pull people into his orbit. A few will get slung off into space, but most will come along for the ride of their lives.
I am ON the Trump Train for good, even if I scream that I want off and can’t take it.
In the end, I only want to scream “TOO MUCH WINNING!!!” (link)
Today I pray for our nation. ♦I ask that you would give our President wisdom beyond his own understanding and the courage to chose the right path no matter how narrow the gate. ♦I pray for all in authority over us that you would give them the grace and strength to stand against the temptation to use power as a weapon but rather to carry it reverently as one would a child. ♦I pray for the spiritual leaders of our country that they would hear your voice and know your heart. ♦I pray that they would lead from their knees and by that simple grace bring each one of us to our knees before your throne. ♦Have mercy on our nation Lord, In Jesus name, Amen
COMMENT: I really do not know what it’s gonna take for you to get the Noble Price for something. Your computer is amazing. The market crashes the week of the 19th. Here in NYC we have been buried in snow and even CNN has reported we have never seen this much snow in 130 years. Your computer should be put in charge of the government. It certainly couldn’t do a worse job. They Oprah could be President and everyone would be happy provided she cannot overrule your computer.
That’s my 2 cents from a snowed-in New Yorker
DR
REPLY: Deep Learning machines can indeed do a far better job than any human. They cannot be bribed and there is no bias. Even the voice programs learn that the word “live” is pronounced completely different based on the context: “Hell0; live from New York …” and “I live in Florida…” I bet if you put it on a teleprompter and a politician has to read it without practicing first, they will pronounce it like they “live” in Washington.
That is no0t a bad idea. I would actually consider working on such a project if it prevented politicians from economic tinkering and barred people like Larry Summers, the father of Negative Interest Rates, who will one day be known as the father of the Pension Crisis.
Perhaps you are correct – it can’t be any worse.
PS: Sorry, but I have been warning that the energy output of the Sun has turned down dramatically. Cheer-up! At least they are starting to sell long-underwear again. That too is cyclical. Don’t worry, we are not headed for the White Earth Effect. It’s just going to get colder into 2032. It has been 60s here in the Tampa area. So I didn’t move far enough South
Today chairman Bob Goodlatte sends a formal subpoena to the DOJ (Inspector General Michael Horowitz) for documents regarding the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server, potential abuses of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility recommendation to fire former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.
However, it’s not the subpoena that should make the news. Pay close attention to the DOJ response.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) is one of the top three people throughout the entirety of congress with a comprehensive knowledge of the events surrounding the investigations of the FBI and DOJ. Chairman Goodlatte is one of only four people outside the DOJ who have read the full DOJ FISA application used for a Title-1 Surveillance warrant of Carter Page.
The House Judiciary Committee holds the primary statutory oversight over the U.S. Department of Justice. Additionally, Chairman Goodlatte is the congressional office working closest with DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz. In short, Goodlatte is the center of all ‘oversight’ information circling the investigations into the DOJ and FBI.
However, all of that said, even Chairman Bob Goodlatte doesn’t, and shouldn’t, know what criminal investigations are underway. We’ve explained this dynamic of disconnect numerous times. We really began emphasizing this when AG Jeff Sessions admitted he brought in a prosecutor from outside Washington DC to work with Inspector General Horowitz.
You can read the Goodlatte Subpoenas – HERE – along with the letter that accompanies his demand. However, more important is the response from the DOJ as communicated by Fox News journalist Chad Pergram (emphasis mine):
Oh, what’s that? Yes, the DOJ has to review the demand for evidence because release of those documents might conflict with ongoing Grand Jury information (evidence). Yes, that means a Grand Jury is impaneled, exactly as we expected.
Yes, that also means there are “law enforcement actions” currently ongoing as a result of the prosecutor assigned to reviewing the evidence discovered by Inspector General Horowitz.
Are there still those who doubt?
There has been a great deal of consternation, directed toward AG Jeff Sessions surrounding the ongoing FISA abuse scandal and the larger issues of unlawful DOJ and FBI conduct in their political investigation of candidate Donald Trump. It is a matter of great division amid people who follow the details. Yet there is overwhelming evidence he assigned a prosecutor to conduct a criminal investigation of the FBI and DOJ “small group” a long time ago. Now we know, with certainty, a GRAND JURY is empaneled.
… I have appointed a person outside of Washington, many years in the Department of Justice to look at all the allegations that the House Judiciary Committee members sent to us; and we’re conducting that investigation. (read more)
Evidence of this prosecutor, and the Grand Jury, was also visible within the firing of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. –SEE HERE– We’ve been talking about this since it became obvious someone was giving information to congressional investigators.
♦First, the question: If Jeff Sessions has appointed a prosecutor to work with Inspector General Horowitz, why do congressional reps keep asking for a second special counsel?
The answer is a lot simpler than we might think: They don’t know.
The legislative branch of the government doesn’t know what the criminal investigations are of the executive branch of government; AND AG Jeff Sessions has repeatedly said his intention is to restore the proper, appropriate and professional standards of the U.S. Department of Justice. (ie. no talking about criminal investigations)
Within this specific investigation there is a triple role. ¹A DOJ Inspector General conducting an internal investigation; ² Appropriate congressional oversight; and ³ the collection of evidence that might also be used in criminal indictments.
Within the IG collection of evidence there are two competing issues: #1) Evidence of misconduct and political bias (shared openly with congress and oversight); and #2) evidence of illegal activity (retained from congress to preserve integrity of evidence for later used in criminal proceedings); this is where the “outside DC prosecutor” comes in.
Which brings us to point #2
♦Accusations of DOJ hiding evidence from congress.
Several congressional representatives have stated the information about Judge Rudolph Contreras was not readily know because his association with Peter Strzok was redacted within text messages sent from DOJ to congress. Therefore the DOJ is trying to hide damaging information. That claim is not the correct framework/context.
Congress as a whole (reps, staff and investigators) can go to the DOJ and look at ALL unredacted text messages. However, if congressional staff wish to take copies with them the copies must be redacted. Why? Because, just like the Contreras issue within the Strzok and Page text messages, there’s a possibility specific texts are evidence of a crime.
Go back to December 2nd, 2017, when the first reports of the IG investigative findings were hitting the news media and you’ll note IG Horowitz said he has no issues with congressional oversight getting his investigative evidence with the approval FROM the DOJ. In this example the “prosecutor”, working with Horowitz, has to make a determination if a potential criminal case would be compromised by allowing the release of specific information/evidence gathered by the Inspector General.
♦Lastly, where all this appears to be going. It is not likely there will be a ‘second special counsel’ per se’. With a prosecutor already working with Inspector General Horowitz that person already has a thorough knowledge of all the evidence. As soon as the IG publishes his report, the prosecutor can begin subpoenaing witnesses. And now we know there’s already a Grand Jury seated somewhere hearing the criminal evidence he/she has carved out from the overwhelming IG evidence as collected.
You and I might be frustrated with the pace of the activity for a myriad of righteous reasons. However, we must also remind ourselves of the scale and scope of the corruption here that is inherent within the BIG PICTURE. All of this was done on purpose. None of this was accidental.
The prosecutor could, likely would, be having to outline the biggest political conspiracy in the history of politics. It is entirely possible officials within the CIA, NSA, DOJ, FBI, State Department, ODNI, and national security apparatus along with the Obama White House, Clinton campaign officials, politicians, career bureaucrats and possibly judges are all entwined and involved.
Add into this likelihood the complicit ideological media who will go absolutely bananas about any single member of their team being indicted; and a better than average chance the media will follow instructions from their leadership and send tens-of-thousands of low-info sycophants into the streets in protest, and well… you see the picture.
The left only know one narrative: “Jeff Sessions is doing Trump’s evil bidding.” That’s it. That’s the drumbeat. 24/7/365 That’s the narrative pushed over and over.
Just look at the media reaction to Andrew McCabe’s simple firing, which Trump had nothing to do with, and think about what their response would be to indictments?
Republican congressman from Arizona Andy Biggs. interviewed on Fox News today, begins to question the ongoing relevance and purpose of the Mueller investigation.
This interview happens at the same time ABC is reporting that fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe instructed his “small group” collaborators to investigate Attorney General Jeff Sessions in March of 2017.
Nearly a year before Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired senior FBI official Andrew McCabe for what Sessions called a “lack of candor,” McCabe oversaw a federal criminal investigation into whether Sessions lacked candor when testifying before Congress about contacts with Russian operatives, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News. (read more)
It should be emphasized the timeline of this ABC report is in March, 2017. At the time outlined all of the corrupt “small group” political operatives were still working diligently on utilization of their “Insurance Policy” against the incoming administration. FBI Agent Peter Strzok, FBI Attorney Lisa Page, FBI Legal Counsel James Baker, along with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe were coordinating the groups’ efforts.
Via ABC – […] One source told ABC News that Sessions was not aware of the investigation when he decided to fire McCabe last Friday less than 48 hours before McCabe, a former FBI deputy director, was due to retire from government and obtain a full pension, but an attorney representing Sessions declined to confirm that.
Last year, several top Republican and Democratic lawmakers were informed of the probe during a closed-door briefing with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and McCabe, ABC News was told. (read more)
Staying on this timeline, this period of 2017 (March, April, May) was when FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker (now removed) was working on putting together the ancillary “small group” team for alternate deployment onto the Mueller team. Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were central characters in this ancillary, and specialized, group.
Strzok and Page were removed in July 2017, after Inspector General Michael Horowitz interceded and informed Robert Mueller of the blatant bias he had identified, along with the strong possibility of unlawful manipulation of their investigative intent.
The behaviors outlined by ongoing reports and research show the evolution of the “small group” objectives after the inauguration.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 