Sharyl Attkisson is a five-time Emmy Award winner and recipient of the Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting.  Mrs. Attkisson has also authored two New York Times bestsellers: “The Smear” and “Stonewalled.” – WEBSITE HERE

Additionally Mrs. Attkisson hosts the Sunday national TV news program “Full Measure,” which focuses on investigative and accountability reporting.  Was the effort to focus America’s attention on the idea of “fake news” itself a propaganda effort?  Sharyl Attkisson did some digging.  WATCH:

Moments ago FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer responded to the requests from the House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte. (full pdf’s below – #1 and #2)

There are nuances in each response specific to the statutory roles of each Chairman and the specific requests made by each committee.  Reflected in Judge Collyer’s responses is a need for careful consideration of each unique request.

♦House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes holds primary oversight authority over the aggregate Intelligence Community (IC).  Chairman Nunes has requested the transcripts from the FISA Court during the DOJ/FBI Title-1 surveillance application over their target, U.S. person Carter Page.

♦House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte holds primary oversight authority over the Department of Justice -including the FISA court- and has requested the actual FISA Title-1 application as submitted by the DOJ/FBI for surveillance of Carter Page.

Judge Collyer responds to both legislative branch chairman from the position of “never previously receiving such requests.” There are separation of power challenges, but also an understanding inherent in the response to Chairman Goodlatte of the unique statutory oversight his committee holds.

The Legislative Branch created the FISA Court system; however, the secret court resides in the Judicial Branch.  Judge Collyer is taking both requests under consideration and asks both Chairman to consider seeking relief from the Executive Branch with requests directly to the DOJ for the majority of the information they seek.

However, there is an underlying issue not being discussed within the communication – yet visible in the corner amid their engagement. That issue is the possibility the DOJ may have modified the FISA documents within its possession in an effort to hide from congress the trail of a conspiracy against a presidential candidate and an incoming administration.

In essence, the FISA documents held by the court *may not be* identical to the FISA documents released by the Department of Justice. Chairman Goodlatte is seeking to rule out that possibility.

Here are the responses.

To Chairman Nunes (seeking transcript):

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/371621778/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-orIgdZtFsfC6XRS0nvon

.

To Chairman Goodlatte (seeking documents):

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/371622097/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-3bXJwf8DD1DQhLmpteZA

.

As a reminder (for context and discussion).  The only people who have actually seen the FISA Title-1 Application are:

♦The officials in the DOJ and/or FBI who assembled it.  Those people are unknown but presumed to be from the DOJ – National Security Division. (Possibly: John P Carlin, Mary McCord or similar).

♦The presiding FISC judge who approved the application. (Possibly: Judge Rudolph Contreras – though no concrete evidence therein).

♦The three congressional representatives who have viewed the application as presented by the DOJ for the construction of the various memos:

•HPSCI member Trey Gowdy;
•HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff;
•and House Judiciary Chairman ¹Bob Goodlatte.

¹Chairman Goodlatte has viewed the FISA application as presented by the DOJ and is requesting to see the same application as presented by the FISA court.

For those following the increasingly curious case against General Mike Flynn, events took another unusual turn yesterday as Special Counsel Robert Mueller -with agreement from all parties- filed a motion for a protective order to seal documents. These are documents compelled on behalf of the defense, by Judge Emmet Sullivan, prior to sentencing.

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

The Contreras recusal always seemed sketchy. If the conflict existed on December 7th, wouldn’t that same conflict have existed on November 30th, 2017?

On December 12th, 2017, Judge Sullivan gave out a rather unusual set of instructions to Robert Mueller.  The instructions included Sullivan telling Mueller to turn over to the Flynn defense anything that could be considered exculpatory:

[…]  if the government has identified any information which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes is not material, the government shall submit the material to the Court for in camera review. (link)

On January 31st, 2018, Robert Mueller requested a delay of sentencing pushing the sentencing phase into May of this year.  And then yesterday, February 14th, 2018, Mueller asks for the information he is turning over to be sealed.

As Nick Falco points out on Twitter: “We haven’t seen text messages between Strzok-Page mentioning Flynn or around the time of Strzok-Flynn Interview on January 24, 2017. I’m sure Horowitz has the texts & has given them to the Mueller team. Starting today, Flynn will have access to this evidence for his defense.” …  “Today’s Stipulated Motion gives the Flynn team access to ALL evidence, including the FD-302’s, as long as the evidence is kept secret.”

♦Going back to the 30,000 foot overview, the substance behind the application for the FISA Title-1 surveillance warrant is the eventual basis for the FBI’s surveillance of Mike Flynn.

That FISA application is now evidenced to have relied heavily upon the ‘Clinton-Steele Dossier‘; and with discoveries from the Devin Nunes memo, and Chuck Grassley memo, there is strong evidence of gross and intentional misrepresentation within the application.

That puts the spotlight back upon the FISA judge who approved the application despite the transparent flaws, political omissions and factual weaknesses.  If Rudolph Contreras signed off on the Title-1 surveillance warrant, Judge Contreras is now in question.

(L-R) Bob Goodlatte – Chuck Grassley – Devin Nunes

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has requested the FISA Application to be declassified by the DOJ.  House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes has requested transcripts from the application hearing.  House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte -holding statutory oversight over the FISA court- has requested the actual FISA warrant and application (all documents).

Nunes and Goodlatte’s requests were made to presiding FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer.

Judge Collyer was the FISA judge who wrote the eye-opening 99-page opinion of the FISA abuses reported by NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers, DOJ National Security Division head John P Carlin, and FBI Director James Comey.

Coincidentally (or not) Judge Rosemary Collyer might have been the Presiding FISA Judge who -holding concerns over ongoing FISC revelations in late 2017- recused Rudolph Contreras from further contact with the Flynn case. The other option for a forced recusal would the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts.

As Clarice Feldman writes at American Thinker: “As the evidence mounts that the warrant was improperly granted, someone – perhaps the chief judge of the district – removed him from further participation in the case, likely because Contreras approved the warrant and its extension.  If the warrant was improperly issued, all the evidence it garnered is tainted.”

This brightens the spotlight upon Judge Contreras and his involvement in the FISA Title-1 surveillance authority.

Additionally, if you think about when everything began to break out from the headlines it would be intellectually dishonest not to note all of the FBI conspiracy revelations happened immediately after Mike Flynn signed the guilty plea.  The timing appears to show White Hats within the intelligence apparatus hitting back against the DOJ and FBI for perceived injustice against Flynn.

Regardless of how you view events there’s something about the use of the Clinton-Steele Dossier within the FISA application, and the subsequent approval therein, that doesn’t pass the proverbial sniff test.  If Contreras was the authorizing judge; and it seems increasingly likely he was; this puts the judge in the center of the scandal.

What looks even worse for Contreras, amid the backdrop of a conspiracy of intent, is his direct relationship to former Attorney General Eric Holder, President Obama’s wingman:

2012 […] From 2006 until his appointment, Contreras was chief of the civil division in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington. He’s the third person to hold that job before being appointed to the D.C. court, joining Chief Judge Royce Lamberth and Judge John Bates.

Contreras began his career at Jones Day law firm after earning his J.D. in 1991. Gregory Shumaker, partner-in-charge of Jones Day’s Washington office, spoke yesterday about first meeting Contreras when Shumaker was running the firm’s summer associate program. He said Contreras had a gift for connecting with people, a skill that would serve him well on the bench.

In 1994, Contreras was hired by Eric Holder Jr., then the U.S. attorney for D.C., to join that office. Mark Nagle, vice president and general counsel for Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp. and Contreras’ predecessor as civil division chief, spoke about Contreras’ many victories, including his time leading the city’s Medicaid fraud unit.  (read more)

In essence there’s a possibility Judge Contreras might have granted a little more leeway for the ideological endeavors of the DOJ given his prior personal and professional relationships.  Was he willfully blind to the weakness and politics within the FISA application?

All of this is likely to come out as the outcry to release the FISA warrant gets stronger.  Chairman Devin Nunes and Chairman Bob Goodlatte are directly asking the FISA court for information.

The Department of Justice will likely agree to more releases of investigative documents as IG Horowitz finishes his 14-month-long OIG investigation into the entire enterprise. The inspector general has been looking at the politicization, and subsequent weaponization, of the DOJ and FBI and his report will come out well in advance of the Flynn sentencing.

On a Monday night (February 12th, 2018) episode of Tucker Carlson a democrat member of the House Intelligence committee said something interesting that almost everyone missed.  Appearing on the show to joust with Tucker, HPSCI member Eric Swalwell stated: “the House Intel Committee has not interviewed a single witness in over a month”.  [Video Here, quote @03:47]  This statement is rather enlightening.

A month earlier, January 4th, 2018, an agreement was finally made between House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and DOJ Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for complete disclosure of all unreadacted documents AND a list of witnesses who Nunes wanted the HPSCI to question.

Included in those names was:  FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who exchanged anti-Trump text messages during an affair and previously worked on the special counsel’s Russia probe; FBI general counsel James Baker, who was reassigned; FBI head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap, whom ex-FBI boss James Comey testified made the decision not to brief Congress about the Russia case during last year’s election; and Bruce Ohr, a DOJ official reassigned after concealing meetings with figures involved in the dossier.

The January 4th agreement between Devin Nunes and Rod Rosenstein was made after a great deal of back-and-forth.  Chairman Nunes then documented the agreement in a letter.

On January 8th, Bruce Ohr was demoted for the second time.  [AND DOJ officials scheduled Bruce Ohr to be available to Devin Nunes on January 17th]

On January 9th, the DOJ provided the unredacted DOJ/FBI documents requested to Chairman Nunes; the documents the DOJ produced surrounded the Clinton-Steele Dossier and the FISA Title-1 application.   The documents were assigned to a SCIF in the basement of the House.  Those documents become the basis for Chairman Nunes to outline his memo; essentially a declassification request to the White House written by Trey Gowdy.

As a result of the agreement between Rod Rosenstein and Devin Nunes, one member from each side of the HPSCI aisle (one Democrat and one Republican) was permitted to review the original FISA application documents which included the Clinton-Steele dossier use therein.

Trey Gowdy and Adam Schiff were the two Intel committee members who reviewed. (Remember, this is January 9th, 2018)  [Only Gowdy, Schiff and House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte reviewed the original FISA documents]

A week later, January 16th, 2018, Chairman Nunes  postponed the witness interview with DOJ official Bruce Ohr scheduled for the next day, January 17th.

Instead, on January 18th, 2018, the HPSCI voted to allow all member of the House to review the Nunes-Gowdy Memo created after the DOJ provided the documents (January 9th).   [January 18th THROUGH February 2nd was #ReleaseTheMemo]

Now remember, throughout this time none of those prior agreed-upon FIVE witnesses (Strzok, Page, Priestap, Baker, Ohr) have been interviewed.  Everyone’s attention shifted from witness testimony to the Memo; and as Democrat Eric Swalwell stated, no witness were interviewed. Period. [<- key point].

So to summarize so far: during January all the DOJ documents arrived, the HPSCI (Nunes) memo was written, released, declassified and released to the public on February 2nd, 2018 – but no witnessed testified.  [Nunes Memo – Link]

So the question becomes:

How does the exact testimony (including quotes) of Bruce Ohr, and Bill Priestap become part of the Nunes Memo if neither Bruce Ohr or Bill Priestap was ever interviewed by the House Intelligence Committee?

Who is doing the interrogations of Bill Priestap and Bruce Ohr?

It’s not the HPSCI.  It’s not the House Judiciary Committee and it’s not the Senate (Chuck Grassley).  [Remember Grassley is relying on responsive FD-302’s provided by the FBI.]

See where this is going?  DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has interviewed these witnesses and extracted testimony.  Can you see now why Nunes was in ‘no hurry’ to interview the FIVE? (Strzok, Page, Ohr, Baker and Priestap).

Let me remind everyone that each of the aforementioned names is still within the system.  Unlike Mike Kortan, David Laufman, Sally Yates, James Rybicki or Andrew McCabe, none of the five (Strzok, Page, Ohr, Baker, Priestap) have been removed.  Peter Strozok is in FBI HR; Lisa Page is doing something; Bruce Ohr and James Baker are holding down chairs somewhere; and Bill Priestap is still Asst. FBI Director in charge of counterintelligence.

It doesn’t go unnoticed the media are transparently not following up on Peter, Lisa, Bruce Jim or Bill.  No satellite trucks in front of their houses etc.; no pounding on their doors for comment etc.  Nothing.

Further, ask yourself why Inspector General Michael Horowitz (or someone thereabouts) began to advance upon the entire ‘Trump operation’ with releases of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page text messages?  Why them? Surely, other collaborative communication was also captured, yet we only heard of Page and Strzok.  Why?

Here’s what is becoming transparently obvious.  The fab-five are cooperating with the investigative unit of the OIG.  All five of them.

The text message release was strategic.  It was intended to substantiate the entire enterprise, put the ‘small group on notice’ and flush out the co-conspirators.  The downstream exits of Kortan, Laufman, Rybicki, McCabe et al are evidence therein.

Additionally, the OIG  (Horowitz) would want to keep the testimony of Page, Strzok, Ohr, Baker and Priestap away from the Democrat politicians, well known leakers, within the House Intelligence Committee (ie. Eric Swalwell and Adam Schiff) until he was certain their usefulness as witnesses was exhausted.

That explains why AAG Rod Rosenstein was negotiating with Devin Nunes, and why Nunes came away from those negotiations with wind in his investigative sails.  Hence, after a review of the FISA documents – Nunes dropped/postponed his demand for immediate testimony by the fab-five to the HPSCI.

As a person familiar with such specific investigative measures recently shared:

“They are sat down, told to not do anything, say anything or discuss anything UNTIL they get an attorney. At which time, the attorney is handed a letter from the investigating unit. That letter says in essence, this is how screwed you are. If you want to be less screwed you will sign this letter of cooperation and assist us. When we don’t need you, you sit there. When we do we will call you and you will provide what we need. Any deviation from this agreement lands you in jail for the full term.”

Additionally regarding Bruce and Nellie Ohr:

“The Republican memo states they turned over all their work and testified to someone that Bruce Ohr met with Christopher Steele and Steele was saying he didn’t want Trump in office. They didn’t testify to a Congressional committee, so it had to be the IG.”

All of the news and information coming forward, including the withdrawal of the request for the Democrat memo, aligns with a very specific fact pattern.  Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, James Baker, Bill Priestap, Bruce Ohr and likely Nellie Ohr, have cut some kind of deal with the IG for process leniency in exchange for cooperation.

That perspective explains everything seen and not seen.

It is very likely the final investigative summary from the Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General (DOJ-OIG), Michael Horowitz, is going to be rather stunning and encompassing:

This also puts the Susan Rice email to herself in a more encompassing light.

It’s doubtful you can find a more succinct example of TDS than a seemingly inebriated Democrat Senator asking the aggregate intelligence apparatus, during a public session of congress, to give specific details of U.S. covert intelligence efforts to thwart Russian, Chinese and North Korean cyber-warfare.   [Watch around 06:30] As Democrat Senator Joe Manchin professionally restrained himself from laughing, even Democrat Senator Kamala Harris couldn’t avoid the eye-roll.  ‘Muh Russia’ is real.

Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), ranking member of armed services committee, began his mid-day sluration with a ‘resist-we-much‘ effort to continue the vast White House Russian conspiracy narrative, and slowly morphed into a weirdly-sounding intoxicated demand for the NSA, CIA and intelligence officers to give him specific examples of their efforts to combat quantum cyber-intelligence operations.   Eventually ODNI Dan Coats grabbed the wheel and stopped Senator Reed from going full  Chappaquiddick…  WATCH:

“Best Men” !

…”We are led by very, very stupid people”…

~ Candidate Trump

It goes without saying the U.S. institutional media apparatus have cherry-picked the most useful parts of the collective testimony today to frame their necessary talking points. FBI Director Christopher Wray, CIA Director Mike Pompeo, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Robert Ashley, NSA Director Adm. Michael Rogers and National Geospatial Intelligence Agency Director Robert Cardillo.

However, with that said, and understanding the aggregate intelligence apparatus are working together with some of the more genuinely significant members of three congressional committees (Chairman Nunes, Chairman Grassley and Chairman Goodlatte); and accepting larger understandings become increasingly worthwhile amid the segments the media apparatus would prefer to overlook; here’s the full congressional testimony of the intelligence agencies:

Feel free to use the comment section to draw attention to any particular points you feel might be of significant interest.  Please note the exact time within the video as it relates to your comment.  Thanks.

(L-R) FBI Director Christopher Wray, CIA Director Mike Pompeo, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Robert Ashley, NSA Director Adm. Michael Rogers and National Geospatial Intelligence Agency Director Robert Cardillo

According to ranking member Adam Schiff his declassification request was critically important, immediately necessary,… vital to the larger understanding,… intensely important to get released… etc.  Well, where is it?

UPDATE:  Schiff now says he doesn’t want it released.

Last Friday FBI Director Christopher Wray and DOJ AAG Rod Rosenstein, informed the White House chief legal counsel of declassification adjustments needed for release. The White House subsequently informed congress and requested Adam Schiff (House Intelligence Committee) to work with the FBI and DOJ therein for quick release.