Tag Archives: Mike Rogers

Feb 11 2018

Game Over – Judge Jeanine Interview With HPSCI Rep. Chris Stewart…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 10, 2018 by

The game is over. The jig is up. Victory is certain… the trench was ignited… the enemy funneled themselves into the valley… all bait was taken… everything from here on out is simply mopping up the details.  All suspicions confirmed.

Why has Devin Nunes been so confident?  Why did all GOP HPSCI members happily allow the Democrats to create a 10-page narrative?  All questions are answered.

Fughettaboudit.

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence member Chris Stewart appeared on Fox News with Judge Jeanine Pirro, and didn’t want to “make news” or spill the beans, but the unstated, between-the-lines, discussion was as subtle as a brick through a window.  Judge Jeannie has been on the cusp of this for a few weeks.

Listen carefully around 2:30, Judge Jeanine hits the bulls-eye; and listen to how Chris Stewart talks about not wanting to make news and is unsure what he can say on this…

.

Bill Priestap is cooperating.

When you understand how central E.W. “Bill” Priestap was to the entire 2016/2017 ‘Russian Conspiracy Operation‘, the absence of his name, amid all others, created a curiosity.  I wrote a twitter thread about him last year and wrote about him extensively, because it seemed unfathomable his name has not been a part of any of the recent story-lines.

E.W. “Bill” Priestap is the head of the FBI Counterintelligence operation.  He was FBI Agent Peter Strozk’s direct boss.  If anyone in congress really wanted to know if the FBI paid for the Christopher Steele Dossier, Bill Priestap is the guy who would know everything about everything.

FBI Asst. Director in charge of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap was the immediate supervisor of FBI Counterintelligence Deputy Peter Strzok.

Bill Priestap is #1. Before getting demoted Peter Strzok was #2.

The investigation into candidate Donald Trump was a counterintelligence operation. That operation began in July 2016. Bill Priestap would have been in charge of that, along with all other, FBI counterintelligence operations.

FBI Deputy Peter Strzok was specifically in charge of the Trump counterintel op. However, Strzok would be reporting to Bill Priestap on every detail and couldn’t (according to structure anyway) make a move without Priestap approval.

On March 20th 2017 congressional testimony, James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.

FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*

I cannot emphasize this enough. *VERY* important detail. Again, notice how Comey doesn’t use Priestap’s actual name, but refers to his position and title. Again, watch [Prompted]

FBI Director James Comey was caught entirely off guard by that first three minutes of that questioning. He simply didn’t anticipate it.

Oversight protocol requires the FBI Director to tell the congressional intelligence “Gang of Eight” of any counterintelligence operations. The Go8 has oversight into these ops at the highest level of classification.  In July 2016 the time the operation began, oversight was the responsibility of this group, the Gang of Eight:

Obviously, based on what we have learned since March 2017, and what has surfaced recently, we can all see why the FBI would want to keep it hidden that they were running a counterintelligence operation against a presidential candidate.   After all, as FBI Agent Peter Strzok said it in his text messages, it was an “insurance policy”.

REMINDER – FBI Agent Strzok to FBI Attorney Page:

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

So there we have FBI Director James Comey telling congress on March 20th, 2017, that the reason he didn’t inform the statutory oversight “Gang of Eight” was because Bill Priestap (Director of Counterintelligence) recommended he didn’t do it.

Apparently, according to Comey, Bill Priestap carries a great deal of influence if he could get his boss to NOT perform a statutory obligation simply by recommending he doesn’t do it.

Then again, Comey’s blame-casting there is really called creating a “fall guy”.  FBI Director James Comey was ducking responsibility in March 2017 by blaming FBI Director of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap for not informing congress of the operation that began in July 2016. (9 months prior).

At that moment, that very specific moment during that March 20th hearing, anyone who watches these hearings closely could see FBI Director James Comey was attempting to create his own exit from being ensnared in the consequences from the wiretapping and surveillance operation of candidate Trump, President-elect Trump, and eventually President Donald Trump.

In essence, Bill Priestap was James Comey’s fall guy.  We knew it at the time that Bill Priestap would likely see this the same way.  The guy would have too much to lose by allowing James Comey to set him up.

Immediately there was motive for Bill Priestap to flip and become the primary source to reveal the hidden machinations.  Why should he take the fall for the operation when there were multiple people around the upper-levels of leadership who carried out the operation.

Our suspicions were continually confirmed because there was NO MENTION of Bill Priestap in any future revelations of the scheme team, despite his centrality to all of it.

Bill Priestap would have needed to authorize Peter Strzok to engage with Christopher Steele over the “Russian Dosssier”; Bill Priestap would have needed to approve of the underlying investigative process used for both FISA applications (June 2016, and Oct 21st 2016). Bill Priestap would be the person to approve of arranging, paying, or reimbursing, Christopher Steele for the Russian Dossier used in their counterintelligence operation and subsequent FISA application.

Without Bill Priestap involved, approvals, etc. the entire Russian/Trump Counterintelligence operation just doesn’t happen. Heck, James Comey’s own March 20th testimony in that regard is concrete evidence of Priestap’s importance.

Everyone around Bill Priestap, above and below, were caught inside the investigative net.

Above him: James Comey, Andrew McCabe and James Baker.  Below him: Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Jim Rybicki, Trisha Beth Anderson and Mike Kortan.  Parallel to Priestap in main justice his peer John P Carlin resigned, Sally Yates fired, Mary McCord quit, Bruce Ohr was busted twice, and most recently Dave Laufman resigned.  All of them caught in the investigative net…. Only Bill Priestap remained, quietly invisible – still in position.

The reason was obvious.

Likely Bill Priestap made the decision after James Comey’s testimony on March 20th, 2017, when he realized what was coming.  Priestap is well-off financially; he has too much to lose.  He and his wife, Sabina Menschel, live a comfortable life in a $3.8 million DC home; she comes from a family of money.

While ideologically Bill and Sabina are aligned with Clinton support, and their circle of family and friends likely lean toward more liberal friends; no-one in his position would willingly allow themselves to be the scape-goat for the unlawful action that was happening around them.

Bill Priestap had too much to lose… and for what?

With all of that in mind, there is essentially no-way the participating members inside the small group can escape their accountability with Mr. Bill Priestap cooperating with the investigative authorities.

Now it all makes sense.  Devin Nunes interviewed Bill Priestap and Jim Rybicki prior to putting the memo process into place.  Rybicki quit, Priestap went back to work.

(page 5 pdf)

Bill Priestap remains the Asst. FBI Director in charge of counterintelligence operations.

It’s over.

I don’t want to see this guy, or his family, compromised.  This is probably the last I am ever going to write about him unless it’s in the media bloodstream. I can’t fathom the gauntlet of hatred and threats he is likely to face from the media and his former political social network if they recognize what’s going on.  BP is Deep-Throat x infinity… nuf said.

The rest of this entire enterprise is just joyfully dragging out the timing of the investigative releases in order to inflict maximum political pain upon the party of those who will attempt to excuse the inexcusable.

Then comes the OIG Horowitz report.

Then the grand jury empaneled (if not already); and while Democrats attempt to win seats in the 2018 election, arrests and indictments will hit daily headlines.

Oh, lordy…

Feb 11 2018

GOP Members Discuss The FISA Memo…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 10, 2018 by

GOP Membership have put together this video to highlight the key points surrounding how the DOJ and FBI put together a FISA Court application to conduct surveillance on political opposition:

.

Additionally, constitutional lawyer Alan Dershowitz discusses the ongoing issues:

.

Feb 10 2018

Puzzle Pieces – Former Asst. Sec of State Robert Charles Discusses the ‘FISA Review Court’ – May Explain Judge Ruben Contreras Recusal…


Re-Posted from Conservative Tree House on February 10, 2018 by

Former Assistant Secretary of State, Robert Charles, discusses the procedures and processes for gaining a FISA ‘Title-1’ surveillance warrant.   Within the discussion Mr. Charles outlines the FISA review court and a likely path the Carter Page application could have taken after an initial denial.

Additionally, Mr. Charles discusses the downstream ramifications when the U.S. Department of Justice secures a warrant by providing false and/or misleading information to the FISA court: “fruit of the poisonous tree”.

.

The explanation by the former ASoS might very well explain why Robert Mueller asked for a delay in the ongoing Mike Flynn sentencing; and simultaneously explain why Judge Ruben Contreras was recused from the case.

Against a newly discovered likelihood the Robert Mueller investigation began under false pretenses; and against the backdrop that FBI surveillance and wiretaps were obtained through materially (intentionally) false representations to the FISA court; and against the backdrop the original Flynn plea judge (Contrereas) was also the approving FISA judge; and that judge ‘was summarily recused’ from the case; and against increasing evidence that Mike Flynn was set up by a terminal animus, and politically-motivated investigative rogue unit, operating within the FBI; and against surfacing IG Horowitz evidence that FBI investigators manipulated (lied on) their FD-302 interrogation documents; and understanding those falsified 302’s were used in the Mueller/Flynn charging document…

…Special Counsel Robert Mueller asked for postponement of sentencing:

(pdf link)

Both parties did not ‘request‘ a postponement; both parties ‘agreed‘ to a postponement. The motive for the request (Mueller) is entirely divergent from, yet complimentary to, the motive to agree to the request (Flynn).

This is all beginning to go backwards.

It is also not coincidental that Brandon L Van Grack is the signatory to the delay request by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s request to the new Judge, Emmet G Sullivan.

If, as has been reported, Inspector General Michael Horowitz now has evidence the FBI manipulated their FD-302 (interrogation and questioning) documents, as also admitted by FBI agent Peter Strzok in related matters regarding Clinton…

…. and those manipulated or falsified FBI 302’s (containing FBI investigative notes of Michael Flynn’s questioning during the January 2017 interview) were used in the actual Flynn charging documents, then Robert Mueller has a big problem.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/366062176/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-QHaNTpsHk3My0BRqqECU

.

Secondly, the underlying surveillance application evidence presented to the FISA court (June ’16 – denied, perhaps Ruben Contreras), and later resubmitted to a FISA review court (Oct ’16 – approved), became the basis for wiretap surveillance on Trump campaign officials.

The downstream consequence was the FBI interrogation of Michael Flynn.

As a direct result we end up at the December 1st 2017 plea hearing, again back to Judge Contreras although this time in his role as a U.S. District Court, only now the plea is based on evidence that was an outcome of materially misrepresented claims to Contreras (June ’16) when he was within his capacity as a FISC judge and initially denied the DOJ FISA “Title-1” application.

Due to the classification of FISC roles and responsibilities, Contreras would be incapable of discussing his concerns, or asking FISA related questions in open court, during his role as U.S. District Judge.

Hence, Contreras ‘was recused‘ from the Flynn case as an outcome of that initial FISA  hearing and his later notification to the FISA court of his concerns about the pleading he just judged with Michael Flynn.

With the IG exposing falsified and manipulative investigative practices by the FBI, Mueller would have no alternative but to throw the brakes on. This whole thing is turning into a sh*t-show of epic proportions. EARLIER WE DISCUSSED

Additionally, the Robert Mueller prosecuting lawyer, the Special Counsel attorney that signed General Flynn’s Statement of Offense filed in U.S, District Court 12/01/2017, was “Brandon L Van Grack”. [See page #5]

When Trump transition team lawyer Kory Langhofer (Trump for America transition organization) contacted the special counsels office about the illegal and unethical way they retrieved transition team emails from the GSA. Who was he put in contact with?

It was Brandon L Van Grack who was in communication w/ the Trump for America transition organization; and, according to the documents on this topic (attached), misrepresented (ie. lied about) the Special Counsel access to the GSA emails on 12/12/2017. (Pdf Link)

What reason would Van Grack have for taking the call from the transition attorney in the first place?… and then, what reason would he have for lying about the information that was requested?

It is my belief, based on mounting evidence, a specific cast of characters -within the Mueller “Russia Election Interference” probe- were placed there, specifically by former FBI chief legal counsel James Baker, to protect the people behind the FBI’s 2016/2017 counterintelligence operation against Trump.

I suspected, and ongoing evidence has confirmed, the same FBI and DOJ “small group”, the team who worked diligently to ensure Hillary Clinton was never found culpable in the 2015/2016 email investigation, later worked on the 2016 Trump counterintelligence operation (FISA wiretapping surveillance etc).

That same “small group” within the FBI and DOJ were then given the task in 2017 of covering both prior operations: A) *Clear Hillary Clinton, and B) *Counterintel op on Trump.

To cover, cloud and protect the DOJ and FBI officials engaged in both operations, the “small group” was then reassembled within Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel team as organized by James Baker.

Inside Mueller’s crew, the “small group” essentially works to watch over what information the Trump officials or congress could possibly be discovering…. under the auspices of investigating ‘Muh Russia’ etc.

If the “small group” comes across a risky trail being followed, they work to impede, block, delay or deflect anyone from that trail.  That is their purpose inside the Special Counsel, Robert Mueller probe.

That objective is why the Special Counsel attorney that signed General Flynn’s Statement of Offense filed Dec. 1, 2017, was the same attorney who responded to the Trump transition team inquiry. Brandon L Van Grack.

This “small group” are essentially around 20 career DOJ and FBI staff lawyers behind and beside the visible names we have recently become aware of. Including: Peter Strzok, Bruce Ohr, Lisa Page, Bill Priestap, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates, James Comey, James Baker, David Laufner, Mike Kortan, Jim Rybicki, Trisha Beth Anderson, John P Carlin, Mary McCord, etc.

Feb 10 2018

President Trump Highlights “Deep State” Intelligence Intent…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 10, 2018 by

Earlier today President Trump highlighted the activity of the politically weaponized intelligence community:

(Link)

Feb 10 2018

Why People Hate? Is It for only Three Reasons?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Forecasts

Re-Posted Feb 10, 2018 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: Mr. Armstrong; I find it astonishing that there are people who really hate you to the core. Nobody has been a greater forecaster than you and because of that, they attack you. Your forecast on the Dow and then you come out and say here is the high and it then starts to crash, can only be astonishing. You have helped me be in sync with the markets not just buy and sell signals, but in understanding why it is time to buy or sell. Nobody speaks with such clarity and you are truly a world teacher. CNN, Blomberg News, and New York Times pretend you do not even exist. This can only be a reflection that they are hiding the truth from the people as well.

So I found this quote. It is very appropriate.

God Bless

TY

REPLY: Thank you. It is hard to get past all this nonsense because the world seems to be about pounding one’s chest to self-proclaim their opinion is better than everyone else. I try to show that I too am just human and it takes a massive computer to correlate the world and in doing so, the truth is then revealed. But that truth means the system as managed by the political elite is dysfunctional. Yet the elite refuse to yield any power.

Hopefully, one-day people will wake up and understand that these forecasts are NOT me personally. I agree with your quote. The NY boys have always seen me as a threat. They just like to rig the game and exploit their own customers. For the life of me, I do not understand institutions who deal with people who are out to extort money from them and have zero conscious about providing good advice. How many times do they need to be raped before they wake up and count their fingers after shaking hands?

The market speaks if you dare to listen. But first, we have to comprehend its language. The entire system is driven by people with an opinion trying to force the future to unfold as they desire. This is our worst human trait.

Feb 10 2018

Kimberley Strassel Discusses Corruption Junction With Tucker Carlson…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 9, 2018 by

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel appears on Tucker Carlson TV show to discuss the decision by the FBI and DOJ not to declassify the Democrats’ rebuttal memo without redactions; and the report U.S. deep state operatives paid $100K to a Russian agent for damaging information on President Trump.

Feb 9 2018

Executive Branch Responds To Minority Legislative Branch Declassification Request…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 9, 2018 by

The minority members (Democrats) of the House Intelligence Committee, ie the legislative branch, submitted a 10-page memo for declassification by the executive branch.  The comensurate process involves the National Security Council, Office of Legal Counsel and all executive agencies within the national security apparatus (CIA, NSA, ODNI, State Dept., DoD, FBI, DOJ) to review the request prior to declassification approval.

Apparently the U.S. Department of Justice, National Security Division, do not approve of the current submission without redactions.  WH response letter:

Whereas last week the Democrats and media were arguing the intelligence community (DOJ/FBI) were a separate authority apart from the White House, and must remain so lest they be obstructing justice; this week the Democrats and media are arguing the intelligence community (DOJ/FBI) are inherently under the authority of the White House and thereby obstructing justice.

Reversing their argument is the only way Democrats and Media can frame the preferred White House obstruction narrative.

Feb 9 2018

DOJ Official Rachel Brand Resigns…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 9, 2018 by

Associate Attorney General Rachel Brand is leaving the Department of Justice.  Ms. Brand was the #3 official in main justice holding a position immediately behind Rod Rosenstein.

Rachel Brand was to FISA surveillance what Tom Selleck is to reverse home mortgages. Indeed almost all of Ms. Brands’ exclusive recent responsibility has been to advocate for national surveillance authority within the DOJ.   She was a very effective spokesperson.

Ms. Brand is now going to be the legal head of Wal-Mart as the global governance director.

Good luck with that Wal-Mart workers.  Enjoy your future microchip. All your biometrics are belong to us…

Feb 9 2018

Big Picture Question: How Do We Know?…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 9, 2018 by sundance

Yesterday the news broke of Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman, Mark Warner, seeking covert contact with ‘Clinton-Steele Dossier’ originating entity Christopher Steele.

Within the March/April 2017 communication, the back-and-forth centered around Chris Steele wanting a written request signed by both the Vice-Chair (Warner) and the Senate Committee Chairman, Richard Burr.

Without that bi-partisan request, Steele was not willing to engage with Warner unilaterally.  If you consider the timing of the attempted communication (March ’17), and you overlay the expressed concerns therein; against the backdrop of the 2016 DC severe ideological effort the push for a special counsel probe based on false pretense against newly-elected President Trump; a picture emerges of Christopher Steele recognizing his endeavors within the enterprise carried considerable risk.

Vice-Chairman Warner didn’t want a ‘paper trail’ and transparently didn’t want the political opposition (republican members), to know of his political intent.  Therefore Warner never asked Chairman Burr for his signature upon the letter requested by Steele. Ultimately Mr. Steele was correct in his suspicions, and prudent in his risk avoidance.

All of that is true, however, very few have stopped to ask: how did we, the viewing public, discover the Warner messaging and communication story in the first place?

How did the story of the Warner text messaging get into the media bloodstream?   Who was the ‘entity’ who investigated, discovered, and eventually released the Warner messaging?

The answers to those questions are similar to the questions that have been demonstrably overlooked ever since early December when we discover the story of Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Bruce Ohr.  Each of the aforementioned ‘small group’ officials was removed from responsibility, disciplined and currently remains in stasis.

Within the overwhelming deluge of information that flowed as a consequence no-one paused to ask: How did we, the viewing public, find out about them, all of them, and their activity?

The December 2017 Strzok, Page and Ohr revelations gave rise to massive downstream consequences:

  • ♦FBI chief-legal-counsel James “Jim” Baker was reassigned; ♦FBI Deputy Director Andrew “Andy” McCabe was resigned; ♦DOJ Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr was demoted again; ♦FBI Asst. Deputy Director and chief-of-staff Jim Rybicki quit; ♦Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence, David “Dave” Laufman quits;  ♦FBI Asst. Director Michael “Mike” Kortan, head of the FBI Public Affairs Office, resigns.

Questions:

How did we discover the original text messages?

How do we discover Page/Strzok changing the wording of the Clinton exoneration “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless”?
How do we discover Bruce Ohr being in contact with Fusion GPS; or working with Peter Strzok; or meeting with Christopher Steele?
How did we find out in December about Nellie Ohr, Bruce’s wife, working with Fusion GPS?
How do we find out about text messages for the “insurance policy”; or intentionally incomplete “FD-302’s”?
Most importantly – As the deluge of information now floods the geography around us, has anyone looked up to see who was the shadowy figure atop the damn who triggered the collapse?

Every current story is well down-stream from those initial releases of information into the public sunlight.  Not a single story of consequence is disconnected from the origin.  None of the FISA revelations, or anything else, would have happened without the initial December 2017 information release…

…And just like yesterday’s news about Vice-Chairman Mark Warner, no-one apparently knows where all this originating information came from.

Many vague and inferential references have been made toward the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General, and the investigative oversight of Michael Horowitz via his year-long DOJ investigation, as the impetus of the information flow.

I don’t disagree with that presentation a single bit.

It is virtually a guarantee that IG Horowitz and his team of investigators inside the apparatus are the ones who collected every bit of the evidence that has led to these and other revelations yet to come.

But that still doesn’t answer the question: How do WE find out about them?

The dutiful Michael Horowitz has a boss.

Michael Horowitz’ boss is most certainly in the loop.

His boss is:

Carry on…

 

Feb 9 2018

Chairman Nunes Asks FISA Court For Transcripts…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on February 9, 2018 by

Mid-January House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte sent a letter to FISA Court presiding judge Rosemary Collyer requesting all the documents presented by the DOJ in their application for a “Title-1” FISA surveillance warrant over Carter Page.  The House Judiciary Committee holds primary statutory oversight over the Justice Department and the FISA Court.

The DOJ has the Carter Page surveillance application (the DOJ also has the authority to declassify the FISA appliction).  However, other than Chairman Goodlatte, the DOJ would only permit one person from each side of the House Intel Committee (HPSCI)  to review the application. Trey Gowdy and Adam Schiff were those two reviewers.

[*NOTE: We cannot confirm but strongly suspect – due to DOJ conduct and ongoing DOJ motives, Goodlatte wants to rule-out the possibility of two versions: an original application to the FISC, and an application the DOJ may have modified for congressional review. Hence, Goodlatte wants to see the application in the hands of the court.]

While Chairman Goodlatte is focused on the application, HPSCI Chairman Nunes is requesting the FISA Court transcript from the DOJ/FBI application hearing.  Nunes is seeking to understand how the “Title-1” application was presented to the court.

WASHINGTON – House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., is seeking transcripts from a top secret national security court regarding the FBI and Justice Department’s application for a surveillance warrant for a Trump campaign aide, according to a congressional letter obtained by Fox News.

Writing to Rosemary M. Collyer, the presiding judge at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Nunes asked for transcripts of “any relevant FISC hearings associated with the initial FISA application or subsequent renewals related to electronic surveillance of Carter Page.”

[…] Transcripts from the application hearings could speak to a central issue in the debate: to what extent the FBI and DOJ relied on the dossier.  (read more)

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/371151684/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-3dbKi4anFhUllacCZWRB

.