This interview is interesting from a few aspects.  First, Carter Page states he was a long-standing source of information for the intelligence apparatus, specifically for the CIA for decades.  Secondly, the framework by Page as outlined, and the underlying motive of the FBI to use him as an unwitting target for the FISA application, is essentially confirmation of our prior reconciled point on why the FBI exploited him.  [Watch]

It never made sense that U.S. Person Carter Page was an FBI witness from 2013 through to March/May 2016 and yet in October 2016, to achieve a FISA warrant, the FBI called him an agent of a foreign government.  [FISA APPLICATION]  It never made sense until with more information about the Mueller investigation we realized the FISA warrant was essentially irrelevant; what the Obama intel apparatus needed for their “insurance policy” was The Dossier.

Fusion GPS was not contracted in April 2016 to research Donald Trump. The intelligence community was already doing unlawful NSA-database surveillance and political spy operations. They already knew everything about the Trump campaign. The Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to give them a plausible justification, an insurance policy of sorts, for pre-existing surveillance and spy operations.

Fusion-GPS fulfilled that contract by delivering the Steele Dossier.

Carter Page was not accused of being an agent of a foreign government to get a FISA warrant; that was secondary. Carter Page was accused of being an agent of a foreign government to get the Steele Dossier into the investigation.

The Dossier was used to validate and justify, albeit fraudulently, pre-existing political surveillance (NSA Database) and later John Brennan’s spy operations.  The Dossier was cover for a political surveillance operation under the color of FBI legitimacy.

The NSA database was being exploited for political surveillance operations since around mid-2012. {Go Deep} Following a secret agreement between the FBI and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), the Obama intelligence apparatus was using the NSA database to extract information and build files on political targets. {Go Deep}  They used the FISA-702(16)(17) search process and never informed the FISA court.

The FISA-702 database extraction process (NSA Database), and the utilization of the protections within the smaller ‘national security’ intelligence community, was the primary process to track and monitor specific U.S. persons by the Obama administration.

Early in 2016 NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was alerted to a significant uptick in FISA-702(17) “About” queries; these are searches using the FBI/NSA database that holds all metadata records on every form of electronic communication.  The uptick was aligned with the timing of the GOP presidential primary race.

The NSA compliance officer alerted NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers who then initiated a full compliance audit on/around March 9th, 2016, for the period of November 1st, 2015, through May 1st, 2016. {Go Deep}

Everything after March 9th, 2016, was done to cover up the weaponization of the FISA database. [Explained Here] Spygate, Russia-Gate, the Steele Dossier, and even the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (drawn from the dossier and signed by the above) were needed to create a cover-story and protect themselves from discovery of this four year weaponization, political surveillance and unlawful spying. Even the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel makes sense; he was FBI Director when this began.

On August 15th, 2016, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok have a meeting with Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.  At the conclusion of that meeting, Peter Strzok sends a text message to Ms. 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.”

Here’s where Carter Page is about to come in; but first more context…

On August 25th Hillary Clinton gives a speech in Reno Nevada where she outlines how the “Alt Right” and Russian agents/bots are behind an effort to destroy her campaign. To many people the speech just seemed goofy and paranoid.  She was mocked for it.

Mysteriously Clinton disappeared for almost two weeks after that “Alt Right” speech, and resurfaced on September 11th in New York for a 9/11 event.  This is when she had that mysterious collapsing episode, and was thrown in the van like a sack of potatoes.  With each cough and stumble the possibility and risk of a Trump victory increases.

On September 29th, 2016, the FBI received word from New York that new Clinton emails were uncovered in the Weiner/Abedin laptop.  Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok buried the issue, assuming (hoping) that Clinton would win the election.  The laptop would be avoided by the FBI until October 27th. [backstory]  Undoubtedly the Clinton campaign team was notified.

On October 19th, 2016, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump square off in their final debate.  During the debate Clinton calls Trump “a puppet of Putin”. Clinton suggested that Trump would be a “puppet” for Putin, who has a “very clear favorite in this race.” “No, you’re the puppet!” Trump responded.

Clinton said 17 U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that recent cyber attacks targeting the U.S. election came from Russia. “She has no idea” where the hacking originated, Trump argued. Clinton accused Trump of taking Putin’s word over the conclusions of the U.S. military and intelligence professionals, calling it “frightening.” LINK

Two days after this debate, October 21st, 2016,the FBI rushed an application to the FISA court for a Title-1 surveillance warrant against U.S. person Carter Page.

The FBI didn’t need the FISA warrant for additional investigation.  The FBI needed a Russia narrative and to protect themselves from Trump. The FBI needed the Steele Dossier to justify political surveillance. and their pre-existing investigation, and mount a defense in the event of a Trump victory.

It was the Steele Dossier they needed.

What is Fusion-GPS’s Steele Dossier without Carter Page?

Without Carter Page, the Steele Dossier is an assembled political file with a bunch of speculative claims about the opposition campaign of a presidential candidate. Without Carter Page, the Steele Dossier is a binder of information, a file, sitting on a desk at the FBI essentially useless.  It also came in AFTER their surveillance/investigation began.

How could the FBI ever justify investigating the opposition research of a rival candidate for office? How could they ever get past the sourcing issues? How could they explain their blind eye to the provenance? How could they ever justify using the Steele Dossier?

They need some justification to exploit the Dossier. The FBI needed to use Carter Page as a way to inject the Steele Dossier into a pre-existing investigation of the Trump campaign.

The FBI didn’t use the Steele Dossier as a way to exploit Carter Page for a FISA warrant against the Trump campaign. The FBI used Carter Page as a way to inject the Steele Dossier into a pre-existing FBI investigation of the Trump campaign. That fraudulent FBI investigation was itself a cover-up to hide years of political surveillance using the NSA database.  Hence the Fusion-GPS contract.

Carter Page was never an actual target any more than Russia interference was genuine threat within the campaigns.  Both were complete fabrications.  Despite calling him an agent of a foreign government, Carter Page was never charged.  However, for the sake of protecting themselves, and continuing to keep a President Trump undermined, it was the Dossier that was important, not the FISA warrant.

To get the dossier “in” they needed Carter Page.

With the Dossier in the official investigative bloodstream, the FBI could exploit the content and then use their media allies by leaking information about a Trump-Russia conspiracy.  The media would assist in framing an actual, albeit completely fabricated, Russian conspiracy narrative.  The Russia narrative could then serve multiple purposes of insurance and even launch another FBI investigation in May 2017 per Andrew McCabe.

Once the FBI and Robert Mueller had used the Steele Dossier to generate the needed narrative; and once the counterintelligence investigation -now led by Wesissmann and Mueller- into Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn and Michael Cohen had successfully ensnared them and shut them down on unrelated issues; then the dossier had exhausted its usefulness, and was dispatched along with the FISA on Carter Page.

Once Manafort, Papadopoulos, Flynn and Cohen were under control, all further efforts were targeted to building an “obstruction” case 24/7/365.

No wonder Christopher Steele was surprised to hear his Dossier work product was used to launch a counterintelligence investigation…. because, here’s the key takeaway, it wasn’t.

The Dossier was used to validate and justify, albeit fraudulently, a pre-existing investigation.  That pre-existing counterintelligence investigation, a political surveillance operation under the color of FBI legitimacy, was bolstered by the sketchy Brennan intelligence operation in early 2016, because they needed an origination point.

“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.”

Carter Page was not accused of being an agent of a foreign government to get a FISA warrant; that was secondary.  Carter Page was accused of being an agent of a foreign government to get the Dossier into the investigation.

It was the Dossier that became important and useful in mid-October 2016, not Carter Page.  One of the issues that raised the importance and FBI urgency was realizing in September 2016 they were going to have to do something before the election with the Weiner/Abedin laptop, which they announced on October 27th.

[…] “We found that what changed between September 29 and October 27 that finally prompted the FBI to take action was not new information about what was on the Weiner laptop but rather the inquiries from the SDNY prosecutors and then from the Department. The only thing of significance that had changed was the calendar and the fact that people outside of the FBI were inquiring about the status of the Weiner laptop.” (IG Report pg 331)

It was the dossier they needed most, not Carter Page.

The Russian election interference narrative; the use of Joseph Mifsud, Stefan Halper, the London and Australian embassy personnel; Erika Thompson, Alexander Downer, U.S. DIA officials; everything around Crossfire Hurricane; and everything after to include the construct of the Steele Dossier; all of it was needed for the creation of an ‘after-the-fact‘  plausible justification to cover-up what Mike Rogers discovered in early 2016, AND the downstream unmasked records that existed in the Obama White House SCIF.

Fusion GPS was not hired in April 2016 to research Donald Trump.  The intelligence community was already doing surveillance and spy operations. They already knew everything about the Trump campaign. The Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to give them a justification for pre-existing surveillance and spy operations.

That’s why the FBI, and later the Mueller team, are so strongly committed to, and defending, the formation of the Steele Dossier and its dubious content.

Fox News host Maria Bartiromo interviewed Mark Meadows earlier today on her Sunday morning show.  This is quite possibly the most revealing interview so far this year on the Obama ‘Spygate’ and surveillance investigation.  The interview is jam-packed with info.

Clapper and Brennan demanding protection for sources and methods, but at the same time they’re saying people weren’t spied on. … Well, you wouldn’t need to protect sources and methods if people in the Trump administration weren’t spied on.

The segment with Meadows begins at 18:37 [prompted, just hit play] and includes multiple new aspects including: •Weissmann/Mueller report collapsing under scrutiny. •New investigative documents likely mean criminal indictments. •New evidence of a “cover-up” within the FBI. •AG Bill Barr has firm disposition to provide accountability. •Expect significant delay in OIG Horowitz report (ie. Steele interview etc.). •FBI Papadopoulos covert recordings likely to be public. •Overall declassification delayed; likely no release prior to OIG report.

HPSCI ranking member Devin Nunes appears on Fox News with Judge Jeanine Pirro to discuss ongoing political issues.  During the interview Representative Nunes outlines the House hearings scheduled for next week.

The framework and purpose of this upcoming week is something we have outlined since January; democrats are forming the foundation for impeachment as a political tool.  The comments from Nunes about impeachment hearings begins at 05:00 [WATCH]

.

As we discussed last week, all of this is by design. Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats are structuring a contempt vote against U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr for next week, June 11th.   As part of the current construct, the Lawfare alliance of legal advisers and staff are writing specific language into the vote that will automatically allow more contempt votes against the Trump administration without hearings.

Their collective goal is to use a legislative vote to open a civil lawsuit against Bill Barr for his failure to deliver the fully unredacted Mueller report to them.

Additionally, the contempt vote will be written so that any arbitrary Trump administration official can also be held in contempt, without a committee vote, and thereby initiate a civil lawsuit against the executive officer that will have to be defended in court.

Pelosi and the Lawfare group are avoiding a criminal contempt process because that would require the DOJ to participate.  Instead lawyers working on behalf of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, HPSCI Chairman Schiff, and/or White House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings will sue the Trump administration in civil court.

If they can win a civil award (they will carefully select the judge) Pelosi and Nadler can start issuing civil fines for contempt against individual cabinet members.  Adam Schiff has previously stated his recommended target amount would be $25,000 per day/per person.

Now go back to December 2018 and the specific rule changes that Pelosi put in place, and you’ll see how this was planned out long ago.  This lawfare approach, including every aspect of the Mueller probe and the delivery of the Weissmann report therein, is all part of one carefully planned continuum of activity.   By design at the end of their plan is the official impeachment investigation.

Washington, D.C. –The House Judiciary Committee will continue hearings focused on the alleged crimes and other misconduct laid out in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report.  The next hearing entitled “Lessons from the Mueller Report: Presidential Obstruction and Other Crimes” will take place on June 10th. The hearing will feature former White House Counsel John Dean as well as former U.S. Attorneys and legal experts. The Committee also plans to consider targeted legislative, oversight and constitutional remedies designed to respond to these matters. (read more)

See how it is all sequenced, timed and connected?

This has been their plan all along.  Pelosi’s poo-pooing of impeachment was always a head-fake to the compliant media, designed to fabricate a narrative around unlikely impeachment, and throw people off the scent of a plan that was designed even before the mid-term election of 2018.

[Trust me, Pelosi’s approach to hide their plan works.  Look at how many people criticized CTH warnings that Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and Cummings were planning this out all along.]

When we approach the term “impeachment” we are not discussing it as the technical and legal approach for removal of a President; but rather the political use of the process to Alinsky (damage) President Donald Trump.

Professional political Democrats would not be using “impeachment” in the constitutional sense of the process (high crimes and misdemeanors); but rather weaponizing the process –as a tool itself– to: •target the executive office; •diminish the presidency (“isolate”/”marginalize”, Alinsky rules); •and position themselves for 2020.

After the 2018 mid-terms, and in preparation for the “impeachment” strategy, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hired Lawfare Group members to become committee staff. Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired  Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link), all are within the Lawfare network.

[IMPORTANT: Keep in mind that Speaker Pelosi has selected former insider DOJ official Douglas Letter to be the Chief Legal Counsel for the House.  That becomes important when we get to the part about new powers granted to the House Counsel.]

The Pelosi House rules clearly present the outline for an impeachment calendar as directed by changes to the oversight committees.  Additionally, there is a myriad of new processes which appear to have been developed through the Lawfare alliance.  Here’s some of the overview (full pdf).

Speaker Pelosi sets up a new, much narrower, oversight priority for Chairman Elijah Cummings; specifically to tailor oversight to the White House and President Donald Trump. Additionally we see the outlined time-schedule for hearings.

In subsection “k” the “clarification” is the narrowing of Elijah Cummings focus.  “Oversight Over the Executive Office of the President“.  This sets up the system for Cummings to target President Trump, his family, and all members of the executive branch as they relate to specific White House functions.

The Pelosi rules tell Chairman Cummings to deliver his schedule for his investigation(s) to the House by April 15th, 2019.  Thereafter the hearing sessions will commence.  The objective of those hearings is House impeachment of the President; so now we know the general timeline the Democrats plan to follow.

♦ To help achieve that objective on Page #3 Pelosi changed the rules on depositions:

In previous oversight hearings depositions of witnesses could not be conducted by counsel unless minority members were also present.  Pelosi removes that rule allowing an expanded team of House lawyers to question anyone regardless of whether there is a republican present to defend/protect the interests of the witness or target.

Additionally, in the event Republicans develop immediate defensive plans to push back against the weaponization of these oversight committees, Pelosi gives her Chairs 60 days to make up the rules for their committees so they can deflect any defenses.

♦ Following with the investigative plans for impeachment; and in conjunction with all new powers granted to a massively expanded group of House lawyers with new and expanded power; page #7 has specific rules to benefit HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff:

HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff can now, autonomously, demand and instruct depositions from anyone, at any time, for any reason; and the House Intelligence Committee does not need to consider any possible scheduling conflicts for any of the targets, or have any republican members present therein.  [Schiff granted far more power than Nunes.]

♦ Page #9 is the beginning of a very interesting new power being granted to an expanded office of House Legal Counsel:

This is only the first part of this Pelosi rule.  This part speaks to coordination with Lawfare and similar activist groups outside government.  The House will now defend Obamacare, and all other possible constructs, with a legal team – regardless of what the DOJ might be doing on the same legal matter.   In essence, a mini-legislative DOJ branch that will fight the U.S. Dept of Justice if needed. (more on this in another section).

♦ Page #13 is the most interesting, and ties back to the Page #9 rule.

Here Speaker Pelosi sets up an internal House division of lawyers, paid with taxpayer funds, to defend Obamacare against any adverse action.  In essence Pelosi is setting up her own Legislative Branch division of justice, to fight against the Executive Branch U.S. Department of Justice if needed.

The primary issue surrounds defending Obamacare from possible legal removal.  However, it doesn’t take a deep political thinker to see where this approach ends up. It would be naive to think the Lawfare group (Benjamin Wittes) did not help create this new internal legal system.

Normally/traditionally House Counsel represents the interests of the entire Legislative Branch on any issue that might surface.  However, Pelosi set up a legal activist agency within the House Counsel to specifically “advocate” for Democrat priorities, against the position of the U.S. Department of Justice, and use taxpayer funds to finance the scheme.

Speaker Pelosi has created her own mini DOJ (the Lawfare alliance) inside the legislative branch.  And, with additional investigative powers granted to House committees, we might even see a mini-FBI investigative units, dispatched to conduct investigations, accountable only to speaker Pelosi.  Heck, considering congress already has subpoena power, there’s no telling where this might end.

In federal court yesterday (Friday, June 7). In a FOIA case ruling (full pdf below)  Judge James Boasberg was deciding public release over two issues related to the memos of former FBI Director James Comey.  Backstory HERE and HERE.

Judge Boasberg was deciding what could be publicly released, meaning current redactions removed, based on two connected events: (#1) The content of the Comey Memos; and (#2) the declarations of lead FBI agent for Robert Mueller’s special counsel, David Archey, in describing those memos.  CNN had filed a lawsuit to gain full access.

[Note: the descriptions of the Comey memos by FBI agent David Archey are known as the “Archey Declarations” – Read Here.]

For those who may not be aware, there are so many memos (dozens) when assembled they seem to make up an actual diary of moment-by-moment events, during the FBI investigation of Donald Trump, as documented by FBI Director James Comey.

♦ In the issue of the redactions within the Comey Memos, the judge doesn’t remove them. Some are ordered to be removed, some are approved to stay in place.  The Comey memo aspect, and the redaction decision, is basically a splitting of the baby 50/50.  It will be interesting, but meh, maybe not too much detail. – CNN ARTICLE

(Pdf Link)

The issues argued by the FBI lawyers to keep the Comey memos hidden surround sources and methods.  The judge generally agreed to the potential for compromise, but also outlined several sections of redactions within the Comey memos where that argument doesn’t hold up.  [The judge has read the fully unredacted memo content.]

♦ However, on the issue of the Archey Declarations there’s an opportunity for some very interesting information to surface. Here’s an example of currently existing redactionswithin the Archey Declarations:

And stunningly, yes, STUNNINGLY, Judge Boasberg has ordered the Archey declarations to be fully released to the public WITHOUT REDACTIONS. See pages 34 and 35 of the ruling.

That means all those black boxes in the example above will be removed and CNN will be allowed the fully unredacted content of the declarations by FBI Agent David Archey.

This should be interesting.

Here’s the ruling:

.

And Here’s the Prior Ruling that contains the Archey Declarations:

.

THE ARCHEY DECLARATIONS – This is the original declaration outlining to the court on October 13th, 2017, why the Comey memos must be sealed.  It is inside this exhibit where we discover there are many more memos than previously understood, and the content of those memos is far more exhaustive because James Comey documented the FBI investigation.

In essence Comey created these memos to cover his ass. (pg 13):

FBI Agent Archey then goes on to explain what is inside the memos: It is in this section where we discover that Comey made notes of his meetings and conversations with investigators.

Along with writing notes of the meetings and conversations, apparently Comey also made notes of the sources and methods associated with the investigation.  Why would Comey generate classified information in these notes (sources and methods) unless he was just covering his ass because he knew the investigation itself was a risk…

The content of the memos seems rather exhaustive; it appears Comey is keeping a diary for use in the event this operation went sideways. (page #14, exhibit B)

All of those investigative elements would likely be contained in official FBI files and notes by the investigative agents.  There is no need for a contemporaneous personal account of meeting content unless Comey was constructing memos for his own protection. These memos appear to be motivated by the same mindset that caused Susan Rice to generate her email to self on inauguration day.

In the next section FBI Agent David Archey explains the scale of the memos.  There are obviously far more than previously discussed or disclosed publicly.  Additionally, look carefully at the way the second part is worded.

Archey is saying Comey’s written recollections should be withheld because it might affect the testimony of people familiar with the “memorialized conversations”. (page #15, Exhibit B)

This is an October 2017 filing, Comey was fired May 9th.  FBI Agent Archey is outlining Trump as the target who might adjust his testimony.  Again, more evidence of the special counsel focus being motivated by the obstruction case they were hoping to build. [Reminder, Comey was still FBI director at the time these memos were written]

The next section gets to the heart of why the FBI wants to keep the Comey memos hidden and not released.

In this section Archey outlines how FBI Director James Comey wrote down who the sources were; what code-names were assigned; how those confidential sources engaged with FISA coverage initiated by the FBI; what foreign governments were assisting with their effort; and what the plans were for the investigation.

Again, why memorialize all of this classified information unless the memos were intended as CYA protection for himself?

The good news is: all of those redactions will now be removed !!

The DOJ has released the FBI agent report (FD-302) written after their interview of Michael Flynn on Jan 24th, 2017. (Full pdf below)  From prior testimony we know that FBI Agent Peter Strzok did the questioning and FBI Agent Joe Pientka took notes.

However, for some reason, within the DOJ release of the report they are continuing to redact the name Joe Pientka. [Could be due to ongoing employment]

It’s worth noting according to Mark Meadows the Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz has interviewed Joe Pientka extensively; prior attempts by congress to gain testimony from Pientka were blocked by the FBI and Rod Rosenstein.

FBI Agent Joseph Pientka was never interviewed by the joint House judiciary and oversight committees (Goodlatte and Gowdy).   The reason, as explained by Meadows, was simple; Pientka was on Weissmann and Mueller’s special counsel team. Congress was not allowed to interfere in the Mueller probe.  In hindsight this looks like Weissmann, Mueller & Rosenstein strategically using the investigation as a shield from sunlight.

The interview took place on January 24, 2017.  The report was written Jan 24th, 2017.  The wording was then deliberated by the small group, approved by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and entered into the record on February 15th, 2017. Here’s the report:

Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack filed a cover letter attempting to explain the reason for the Flynn interview on January 24th, 2017, and a delay in the official filing of the interview notes (FD-302) on February 15th, 2017, and then another edit on May 31st, 2017.

To explain the FBI delay, Van Grack claimed the FD-302 report “inadvertently” had a header saying “DRAFT DOCUMENT/DELIBERATIVE MATERIAL” (screen grab)

What the special counsel appeared to be obfuscating was a process of deliberation within the investigative unit, headed by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, surrounding the specific wording of the 302 report on the Flynn interview. Likely how best to word the FBI notes for maximum damage.

In late 2018 Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack was attempting to hide the length of the small group deliberations within the FBI. In hindsight it seems he did not want the court to know Andrew McCabe was involved in shaping how the Flynn-302 was written.

However, we know there was a deliberative process in place, seemingly all about how to best position the narrative, because we can see the deliberations in text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok: See below (note the dates):

The text message conversation above is February 14th, 2017.

The Michael Flynn FD-302 was officially entered into the record on February 15th, 2017, per the report:

The interview took place on January 24th, 2017. The FD-302 was drafted on January 24th, and then later edited, shaped, and ultimately approved by McCabe on February 14th, then entered into the official record on February 15th.

It was a deliberative document from the outset. Thanks to the Strzok/Page text messages we know the 2018 cover letter from the Special Counsel is misleading. The Feb 15th, 2017, date was the day after McCabe approved it (three weeks after the FBI interview).

May 17th, 2017, Robert Mueller was assigned as special Counsel. Then, the FD-302 report was re-entered on May 31st, 2017, removing the header; paving the way for Mueller’s team to use the content therein.

UPDATE (3:55pm EDT): The lawyer change (motion for leave) was denied by Judge Sullivan due to a technicality in the filing (no accompanying order, and failure to outline method of notification to Flynn). They are free to refile (probably will).

Previously: This is a very interesting development and may well indicate a change in strategy; or, even more interesting, the execution of a pre-planned strategy, for General Michael Flynn.  There is a possibility, with legal distance happening as a result of Weissmann and Mueller’s investigation concluding, that Michael Flynn may be shifting to offense.

Two separate court filings today show: (1) Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn has fired his legal team and retained new counsel; and, (2) the DOJ is filing the evidentiary documents (possibly Joe Pientka 302 and Kislyak transcript?) under seal.

The Daily Caller is reporting that an announcement from the new legal counsel will come out within the next few days:

Robert Kelner, a partner at Covington & Burling, said in a court filing Thursday that Flynn terminated their arrangement and has already hired new lawyers.

[…] It is not clear why Flynn is replacing Covington & Burling as counsel. Kelner declined comment. A source close to Flynn told The Daily Caller News Foundation a statement is likely to be released in the coming days. (link)

Additionally Techno Fog is noting there are new DOJ filings being presented to the court “under seal” (This could be the FD-302, from Flynn FBI interview, and/or the Kislyak transcript the DOJ previously would not provide the court in public record):

Additionally x 2, there is another motion by the DOJ (Van Grack, Jessie Liu) where previous filings under seal the government is now saying can be released.

My guess on the motion allowing ‘unsealing’ is that it could be connected to the Scope Memos provided by Rosenstein authorizing the targeting of Flynn; or it could be tied to the Flynn participation in the lobbying case.  Both would be pertinent to sentencing.

All of this is very interesting.

I hope this is connected to an intentional decision by Michael Flynn to stay in litigation long enough to outlast the Weissmann-Mueller probe.   CTH suspicion has always been that Weissmann-Mueller threatened Flynn with prosecution of his son, Flynn Jr., to coerce a plea agreement.

If our hunch has been accurate, Weissmann-Mueller held prosecution of Flynn Jr. as a sword of Damocles over the head of Flynn Sr. throughout the prosecution, plea and sentencing….  However, if that’s the case, with Weissmann and Mueller ending their investigation, Flynn would be out from under the threat.

This is a lot of supposition; but it would be extremely damaging to the DOJ if this view is accurate.  If a plea was signed under duress and threat, Judge Emmet Sullivan could dismiss the agreement.

Politically, this would also be extremely damaging to Mueller and crew.

Remarkable developments….

BACKSTORY…

On December 29, 2016, President Obama announced a series of sanctions against Russians who were located in Maryland. This was Obama’s carefully constructed response to provide additional validity to the Joint Analysis Report. After fueling the Russia conspiracy for several weeks the Obama administration knew this action would initiate a response from both Russia and the incoming Trump administration.

After the December 29, 2016, sanctions against Russia, the Obama IC were monitoring Kislyak communications and watching for contact with the incoming Trump administration.

Additionally, it is suspected Flynn may have been under a FISA surveillance warrant which seems confirmed by the Weissmann/Mueller report. The FBI intercepted, recorded, and later transcribed the conversation. [Notice how Judge Sullivan says: “and any other audio recordings”; ie he’s suspecting additional surveillance.]

In the January 2017 background, the media were continuing to follow the lead from the Obama White House, and Intelligence Community (writ large), by fueling a narrative that any contact with Russians was proof of collusion of some sort. In addition, the communications team of the Obama White House, DOJ, FBI and aggregate IC began pushing a narrative surrounding the obscure Logan Act.

The ridiculous Logan Act angle was promoted by Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and targeted to infer that any action taken by the Trump campaign prior to taking office was interference with the political Obama Russia action. Any contact with Russian government officials would be evidence of collusion. That was the plan. DOJ Deputy AG Sally Yates was in charge of pushing the Logan Act narrative to the media.

The first two weeks of January 2017 was a merging of two necessary narratives: (1) Russian interference; and (2) the Logan Act. Each deployed against any entity who would counter the Russia narrative story.

The media were running this dual narrative 24/7 against the incoming Trump officials and demanding repeated answers to questions that were framed around this story-line.

On January 3rd, 2017, the new congressional year began. SSCI Vice-Chair Dianne Feinstein abdicated her position within the Gang-of-Eight, and turned over the reigns to Senator Mark Warner. Warner was now the vice-chair of the SSCI; and a Go8 member.

On January 6th, 2017, the Obama White House published the Intelligence Community Assessment, and declared:

We assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence. (pdf link)

It is not coincidental the ICA was “high confidence” by Brennan and Clapper; and less confidence by Mike Rogers (NSA).

With the Flynn Dec. 29, 2016, transcript in hand, the DOJ and FBI began aiding the Logan Act narrative with Obama intelligence officials supporting the Russia Conspiracy claims and decrying anyone who would interfere or counter the official U.S. position.

On January 14th, 2017, the content of the communication between Flynn and Kislyak was leaked to the Washington Post by an unknown entity. Likely the leak came from the FBI’s counterintelligence operation; the same unit previously carrying out the 2016 campaign spying operations. [Andrew McCabe is highly suspected]

The FBI CoIntel group (Strzok, McCabe etc.), and the DOJ-NSD group (Yates, McCord etc.) were the largest stakeholders in the execution of the insurance policy phase because they were the epicenter of spygate, fraudulent FISA presentations and the formation of the Steele Dossier.

The media leak of the Flynn conversation with Kislyak was critical because the DOJ/FBI were pushing a political narrative. This was not about legality per se’, this effort was about establishing the framework for a preexisting investigation, based on a false premise, that would protect the DOJ and FBI. The investigation they needed to continue evolved into the Mueller special counsel. This was all insurance.

The Flynn-Kislyak leak led to Vice-President Mike Pence being hammered on January 15th, 2017, during a CBS Face the Nation interview about Trump campaign officials in contact with Russians. Pence was exceptionally unprepared to answer the questions and allowed the media to blend questions about campaign contacts with necessary, and entirely appropriate, transition team contacts.

•Sunday January 15th, 2017 – VP-elect Mike Pence appears on Face The Nation. [Transcript Here]

JOHN DICKERSON: But there’s a distinction between that feeling about the press and legitimate inquiry, as you say, that the Senate Intelligence Committee is doing.

Just to button up one question, did any advisor or anybody in the Trump campaign have any contact with the Russians who were trying to meddle in the election?

MIKE PENCE: Of course not. And I think to suggest that is to give credence to some of these bizarre rumors that have swirled around the candidacy. (link)

*NOTE* The incoming administration was under a false-narrative siege created by the media. At the time (early Jan, 2017) ‘any contact’ with Russians was evidence of meddling/election-collusion with Russians. VP-elect Mike Pence poorly answered the question from Dickerson from a very defensive position.

The toxic media environment and Mike Pence speaking poorly during a Face The Nation interview now became a much bigger issue.

Once Vice-President Mike Pence made the statement that Flynn had no contact with anyone from Russia etc. any contradictory statement from Flynn would make Pence appear compromised. Michael Flynn is now contrast against Pence’s false point without clarification. As National Security Advisor Flynn was interviewed by the FBI on January 24th, nine days after Pence made his comments.

•Tuesday January 24th – Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn was interviewed at the WH by the FBI.

During this ambush interview, disguised as a meeting, FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Agent Joe Pientka were contrasting Vice-President-elect Pence’s statements to CBS against the known action of Mike Flynn. [Flynn has three options: either (1) Flynn contradicts Pence, or (2) he tells a lie; or (3) Flynn explains Pence misspoke, those were his options.]

How Flynn responded to the line of inquiry, and explained/reconciled the difference between Pence’s statement on Jan 15th and what actually took place on December 29th, 2016, is why the FBI ended up with the initial conclusion that Flynn wasn’t lying.

It is within this dynamic where the FD-302 reports, written by Strzok and Pientka, then became the subject of political manipulation by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

The FBI knew the content of the Flynn call with Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in. The FBI were intercepting those communications. So when Pence said no-one had any contact on January 15th, the FBI crew IMMEDIATELY knew they had an issue to exploit.

We see the evidence of the FBI knowing they had an issue to exploit, and being very nervous about doing it, in the text messages between Lisa Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok who would end up doing the questioning of Flynn.

The day before the Flynn interview:

♦January 23, 2017, the day before the Flynn interview, Lisa Page says: “I can feel my heart beating harder, I’m so stressed about all the ways THIS has the potential to go fully off the rails.” Weird!

♦Strzok replies: “I know. I just talked with John, we’re getting together as soon as I get in to finish that write up for Andy (MCCABE) this morning.” Strzok agrees with Page about being stressed that “THIS” could go off the rails… (Strzok’s meeting w Flynn the next day)

[We’re not 100% sure who “John” is, it is highly likely to be Johnathan Moffa; However, we know “Bill” is Bill Priestap, FBI Deputy Director in charge of Counterintelligence. And “Jen” is Jennifer Boone, FBI counterproliferation division]

So it’s the day before they interview Flynn.

Why would Page & Strzok be stressed about “THIS” potentially going off the rails?

The answer is simple: they knew the content of the phone call between Mike Flynn and Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in, and they were about to exploit the Pence statement to CBS. In essence they were admitting to monitoring Flynn, that’s why they were so nervous. They were planning and plotting with Andrew McCabe about how they were going to exploit the phone-tap and the difference in public statements by VP Mike Pence.

There’s a good possibility Flynn was honest but his honesty contradicted Pence’s national statement on CBS; and Flynn likely tried to dance through a needle without being overly critical of VP-elect Pence misspeaking. Remember, the alternative: if Flynn is brutally honest, the media now runs with a narrative about Vice-President Pence as a national liar.

•Wednesday January 25th, 2017, – The Department of Justice, National Security Division, (at this timeframe Mary McCord was head of the DOJ-NSD) – received a detailed readout from the FBI agents who had interviewed Flynn. Yates said she felt “it was important to get this information to the White House as quickly as possible.”

•Thursday January 26th – (morning) Yates called White House Counsel Don McGahn first thing that morning to tell him she had “a very sensitive matter” that had to be discussed face to face. McGahn agreed to meet with Yates later that afternoon.

•Thursday January 26th – (afternoon) Sally Yates traveled to the White House along with a senior member of the DOJ’s National Security Division, “who was overseeing the matter”, that is Mary McCord. This was Yates’ first meeting with McGahn in his office, which also acts as a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF).

Yates said she began their meeting by laying out the media accounts and media statements made by Vice President Mike Pence and other high-ranking White House officials about General Flynn’s activity “that we knew not to be the truth.”

According to Sally Yates testimony, she and Mary McCord presented all the information to McGahn so the White House could take action that they deemed appropriate. When asked by McGahn if Flynn should be fired, Yates answered, “that really wasn’t our call.”

Yates also said her decision to notify the White House counsel had been discussed “at great length.” According to her testimony: “Certainly leading up to our notification on the 26th, it was a topic of a whole lot of discussion in DOJ and with other members of the intel community.”

•Friday January 27th – (morning) White House Counsel Don McGahn called Yates in the morning and asked if she could come back to his office.

•Friday January 27th – (late afternoon) According to her testimony, Sally Yates returned to the White House late that afternoon. One of McGahn’s topics discussed was whether Flynn could be prosecuted for his conduct.

Specifically, according to Yates, one of the questions *McGahn asked Yates: “Why does it matter to DOJ if one White House official lies to another?” She explained that it “was a whole lot more than that,” and reviewed the same issues outlined the prior day.

[*If you consider that McGahn was trying to thread the needle between Mike Pence’s poorly worded response to CBS, and Michael Flynn’s FBI questioning that came after Pence’s statement, McGahn would see the no-win situation Flynn was in during that inquisition.]

McGahn then expressed his concern that taking any action might interfere with the FBI investigation of Flynn, and Yates said it wouldn’t: “It wouldn’t really be fair of us to tell you this and then expect you to sit on your hands,” Yates claims to have told McGahn.

McGahn asked if he could look at the underlying evidence of Flynn’s conduct, and she said they would work with the FBI over the weekend and “get back with him on Monday morning.”

•Friday January 27th, 2017 – (evening) In what appears to be only a few hours later, President Trump is having dinner with FBI Director James Comey where President Trump asked if he was under investigation. Trump was, but to continue the auspices of the ongoing investigation, Comey lied and told him he wasn’t.

This why the issue of how the FBI agents write the 302 summary of the Flynn interview becomes such an important facet. We see that dynamic again playing out in the messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok; with Andrew McCabe providing the guidance.

Don’t forget, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was likely the person who leaked the content of the Mike Flynn phone call between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak to the Washington Post. A massive leak of highly classified information:

Within the case against Michael Flynn, prosecutor Brandon Van Grack later filed a cover letter attempting to explain the reason for the Flynn interview on January 24th, 2017, and a delay in the official filing of the interview notes (FD-302) on February 15th, 2017, and then another edit on May 31st, 2017.

To explain the FBI delay, Van Grack claimed the FD-302 report “inadvertently” had a header saying “DRAFT DOCUMENT/DELIBERATIVE MATERIAL” (screen grab)

What the special counsel appeared to be obfuscating was a process of deliberation within the investigative unit, headed by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, surrounding the specific wording of the 302 report on the Flynn interview. Likely how best to word the FBI notes for maximum damage.

In late 2018 Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack was attempting to hide the length of the small group deliberations within the FBI. In hindsight it seems he did not want the court to know Andrew McCabe was involved in shaping how the Flynn-302 was written.

However, we know there was a deliberative process in place, seemingly all about how to best position the narrative, because we can see the deliberations in text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok: See below (note the dates):

The text message conversation above is February 14th, 2017.

The Michael Flynn FD-302 was officially entered into the record on February 15th, 2017, per the report:

The interview took place on January 24th, 2017. The FD-302 was drafted on January 24th, and then later edited, shaped, and ultimately approved by McCabe, on February 14th, then entered into the official record on February 15th.

It was a deliberative document from the outset. Thanks to the Strzok/Page text messages we know the cover letter from the Special Counsel is misleading. The Feb 15th, 2017, date was the day after McCabe approved it (three weeks after the FBI interview).

May 17th, 2017, Robert Mueller was assigned as special Counsel. Then, the FD-302 report was re-entered on May 31st, 2017, removing the header; paving the way for Mueller’s team to use the content therein.

This level of overt corruption, and corrupt intent within the special counsel, is one of the more brutally obvious reasons why authorizing Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein should be regarded as participating in a political framing against the Trump White House.

The FBI interpretation of the Flynn interview was the way the DOJ and FBI could control the interview content; and specifically because the only recourse Flynn would have to contradict that FBI interpretation would be to compromise the Vice President… Flynn cannot openly challenge the structure of the narrative within the 302 outline.

See what happened?

Does it all make sense now?

Do you see why there are reports of the second FBI agent, Joe Pientka, saying he didn’t believe Flynn lied to them in the interview. Likely because Flynn didn’t lie; but the McCabe crew jumped on the opportunity to frame a lose/lose. Either Flynn accepts a version of the 302 report where he lied; or, Flynn has to take the position that Vice President Mike Pence lied to the nation in the CBS Face The Nation interview.

See how that went down?

However, after Weissmann and Mueller enter the picture, they need to force Flynn to admit to the construct of the 302 as presented. For that they need some leverage.

The original authorization for the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller was May 17th, 2017. The recently released Weissmann report shows there were two additional scope memos authorizing specific targeting of the Mueller probe. The first scope memo was August 2nd, 2017, OUTLINED HERE, and is an important part of the puzzle that helps explain the corrupt original purpose of the special counsel.

The second scope memo was issued by Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller on October 20th, 2017. The transparent intent of the second scope memo was to provide Weissmann and Mueller with ammunition and authority to investigate specific targets, for specific purposes. One of those targets was General Michael Flynn’s son, Michael Flynn Jr.

As you review the highlighted portion below, found on pages 12 and 13 of the Weissmann report, read slowly and fully absorb the intent; the corruption is blood-boiling:

This second scope memo allowed Weissmann and Mueller to target tangentially related persons and entities bringing in Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn Jr. Additionally this memo established the authority to pursue “jointly undertaken activity“.

The four identified targets within the original July 2016 investigation, “Operation Crossfire Hurricane”, were George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and Carter Page. (See HPSCI report):

General Flynn was under investigation from the outset in mid-2016. The fraudulent FBI counterintelligence operation, established by CIA Director John Brennan, had Flynn as one of the early targets when Brennan handed the originating electronic communication “EC” to FBI Director James Comey on/around July 31st, 2016.

The investigation of General Flynn never stopped throughout 2016 and led to the second investigative issue of his phone call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak:

Page #12 October 20th, 2017, Scope Memo:

The first redaction listed under “personal privacy” is unknown. However, the second related redaction is a specific person, Michael Flynn Jr.

In combination with the October 2017 timing, the addition of Flynn Jr to the target list relates to the ongoing 2016/2017 investigation of his father for: (1) possible conspiracy with a foreign government; (2) unregistered lobbying; (3) materially false statements and omissions on 2017 FARA documents; and (4) lying to the FBI.

This October 20th, 2017, request from Weissmann and Mueller aligns with the time-frame were special counsel team lawyers Brandon L. Van Grack and Zainab N. Ahmad were prosecuting Michael Flynn and cornering him into a guilty plea.

Getting Rosenstein to authorize adding Mike Flynn Jr. to the target list (scope memo #2) meant the special counsel could threaten General Flynn with the indictment of his son as a co-conspirator tied to the Turkish lobbying issue (which they did) if he doesn’t agree to a plea. Remember: “jointly undertaken activity“.

Forcing a plea for ‘lying to investigators‘ by threatening prosecution for FARA violations was the identical strategy used against both George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn.

The October 20th, 2017, expanded scope memo authorized Mueller to start demanding records, phones, electronic devices and other evidence from Mike Flynn Jr, and provided the leverage Weissmann wanted. After all, Mike Flynn Jr. had a four month old baby.

The amount of twisted pressure from this corrupt team of prosecutors is sickening. A month later, General Flynn was signing a plea agreement:

UPDATE (3:55pm EDT): The lawyer change (motion for leave) was denied by Judge Sullivan due to a technicality in the filing (no accompanying order, and failure to outline method of notification to Flynn). They are free to refile (probably will).

Previously: This is a very interesting development and may well indicate a change in strategy; or, even more interesting, the execution of a pre-planned strategy, for General Michael Flynn.  There is a possibility, with legal distance happening as a result of Weissmann and Mueller’s investigation concluding, that Michael Flynn may be shifting to offense.

Two separate court filings today show: (1) Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn has fired his legal team and retained new counsel; and, (2) the DOJ is filing the evidentiary documents (possibly Joe Pientka 302 and Kislyak transcript?) under seal.

The Daily Caller is reporting that an announcement from the new legal counsel will come out within the next few days:

Robert Kelner, a partner at Covington & Burling, said in a court filing Thursday that Flynn terminated their arrangement and has already hired new lawyers.

[…] It is not clear why Flynn is replacing Covington & Burling as counsel. Kelner declined comment. A source close to Flynn told The Daily Caller News Foundation a statement is likely to be released in the coming days. (link)

Additionally Techno Fog is noting there are new DOJ filings being presented to the court “under seal” (This could be the FD-302, from Flynn FBI interview, and/or the Kislyak transcript the DOJ previously would not provide the court in public record):

Additionally x 2, there is another motion by the DOJ (Van Grack, Jessie Liu) where previous filings under seal the government is now saying can be released.

My guess on the motion allowing ‘unsealing’ is that it could be connected to the Scope Memos provided by Rosenstein authorizing the targeting of Flynn; or it could be tied to the Flynn participation in the lobbying case.  Both would be pertinent to sentencing.

All of this is very interesting.

I hope this is connected to an intentional decision by Michael Flynn to stay in litigation long enough to outlast the Weissmann-Mueller probe.   CTH suspicion has always been that Weissmann-Mueller threatened Flynn with prosecution of his son, Flynn Jr., to coerce a plea agreement.

If our hunch has been accurate, Weissmann-Mueller held prosecution of Flynn Jr. as a sword of Damocles over the head of Flynn Sr. throughout the prosecution, plea and sentencing….  However, if that’s the case, with Weissmann and Mueller ending their investigation, Flynn would be out from under the threat.

This is a lot of supposition; but it would be extremely damaging to the DOJ if this view is accurate.  If a plea was signed under duress and threat, Judge Emmet Sullivan could dismiss the agreement.

Politically, this would also be extremely damaging to Mueller and crew.

Remarkable developments….

BACKSTORY…

On December 29, 2016, President Obama announced a series of sanctions against Russians who were located in Maryland. This was Obama’s carefully constructed response to provide additional validity to the Joint Analysis Report. After fueling the Russia conspiracy for several weeks the Obama administration knew this action would initiate a response from both Russia and the incoming Trump administration.

After the December 29, 2016, sanctions against Russia, the Obama IC were monitoring Kislyak communications and watching for contact with the incoming Trump administration.

Additionally, it is suspected Flynn may have been under a FISA surveillance warrant which seems confirmed by the Weissmann/Mueller report. The FBI intercepted, recorded, and later transcribed the conversation. [Notice how Judge Sullivan says: “and any other audio recordings”; ie he’s suspecting additional surveillance.]

In the January 2017 background, the media were continuing to follow the lead from the Obama White House, and Intelligence Community (writ large), by fueling a narrative that any contact with Russians was proof of collusion of some sort. In addition, the communications team of the Obama White House, DOJ, FBI and aggregate IC began pushing a narrative surrounding the obscure Logan Act.

The ridiculous Logan Act angle was promoted by Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and targeted to infer that any action taken by the Trump campaign prior to taking office was interference with the political Obama Russia action. Any contact with Russian government officials would be evidence of collusion. That was the plan. DOJ Deputy AG Sally Yates was in charge of pushing the Logan Act narrative to the media.

The first two weeks of January 2017 was a merging of two necessary narratives: (1) Russian interference; and (2) the Logan Act. Each deployed against any entity who would counter the Russia narrative story.

The media were running this dual narrative 24/7 against the incoming Trump officials and demanding repeated answers to questions that were framed around this story-line.

On January 3rd, 2017, the new congressional year began. SSCI Vice-Chair Dianne Feinstein abdicated her position within the Gang-of-Eight, and turned over the reigns to Senator Mark Warner. Warner was now the vice-chair of the SSCI; and a Go8 member.

On January 6th, 2017, the Obama White House published the Intelligence Community Assessment, and declared:

We assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence. (pdf link)

It is not coincidental the ICA was “high confidence” by Brennan and Clapper; and less confidence by Mike Rogers (NSA).

With the Flynn Dec. 29, 2016, transcript in hand, the DOJ and FBI began aiding the Logan Act narrative with Obama intelligence officials supporting the Russia Conspiracy claims and decrying anyone who would interfere or counter the official U.S. position.

On January 14th, 2017, the content of the communication between Flynn and Kislyak was leaked to the Washington Post by an unknown entity. Likely the leak came from the FBI’s counterintelligence operation; the same unit previously carrying out the 2016 campaign spying operations. [Andrew McCabe is highly suspected]

The FBI CoIntel group (Strzok, McCabe etc.), and the DOJ-NSD group (Yates, McCord etc.) were the largest stakeholders in the execution of the insurance policy phase because they were the epicenter of spygate, fraudulent FISA presentations and the formation of the Steele Dossier.

The media leak of the Flynn conversation with Kislyak was critical because the DOJ/FBI were pushing a political narrative. This was not about legality per se’, this effort was about establishing the framework for a preexisting investigation, based on a false premise, that would protect the DOJ and FBI. The investigation they needed to continue evolved into the Mueller special counsel. This was all insurance.

The Flynn-Kislyak leak led to Vice-President Mike Pence being hammered on January 15th, 2017, during a CBS Face the Nation interview about Trump campaign officials in contact with Russians. Pence was exceptionally unprepared to answer the questions and allowed the media to blend questions about campaign contacts with necessary, and entirely appropriate, transition team contacts.

•Sunday January 15th, 2017 – VP-elect Mike Pence appears on Face The Nation. [Transcript Here]

JOHN DICKERSON: But there’s a distinction between that feeling about the press and legitimate inquiry, as you say, that the Senate Intelligence Committee is doing.

Just to button up one question, did any advisor or anybody in the Trump campaign have any contact with the Russians who were trying to meddle in the election?

MIKE PENCE: Of course not. And I think to suggest that is to give credence to some of these bizarre rumors that have swirled around the candidacy. (link)

*NOTE* The incoming administration was under a false-narrative siege created by the media. At the time (early Jan, 2017) ‘any contact’ with Russians was evidence of meddling/election-collusion with Russians. VP-elect Mike Pence poorly answered the question from Dickerson from a very defensive position.

The toxic media environment and Mike Pence speaking poorly during a Face The Nation interview now became a much bigger issue.

Once Vice-President Mike Pence made the statement that Flynn had no contact with anyone from Russia etc. any contradictory statement from Flynn would make Pence appear compromised. Michael Flynn is now contrast against Pence’s false point without clarification. As National Security Advisor Flynn was interviewed by the FBI on January 24th, nine days after Pence made his comments.

•Tuesday January 24th – Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn was interviewed at the WH by the FBI.

During this ambush interview, disguised as a meeting, FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Agent Joe Pientka were contrasting Vice-President-elect Pence’s statements to CBS against the known action of Mike Flynn. [Flynn has three options: either (1) Flynn contradicts Pence, or (2) he tells a lie; or (3) Flynn explains Pence misspoke, those were his options.]

How Flynn responded to the line of inquiry, and explained/reconciled the difference between Pence’s statement on Jan 15th and what actually took place on December 29th, 2016, is why the FBI ended up with the initial conclusion that Flynn wasn’t lying.

It is within this dynamic where the FD-302 reports, written by Strzok and Pientka, then became the subject of political manipulation by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

The FBI knew the content of the Flynn call with Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in. The FBI were intercepting those communications. So when Pence said no-one had any contact on January 15th, the FBI crew IMMEDIATELY knew they had an issue to exploit.

We see the evidence of the FBI knowing they had an issue to exploit, and being very nervous about doing it, in the text messages between Lisa Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok who would end up doing the questioning of Flynn.

The day before the Flynn interview:

♦January 23, 2017, the day before the Flynn interview, Lisa Page says: “I can feel my heart beating harder, I’m so stressed about all the ways THIS has the potential to go fully off the rails.” Weird!

♦Strzok replies: “I know. I just talked with John, we’re getting together as soon as I get in to finish that write up for Andy (MCCABE) this morning.” Strzok agrees with Page about being stressed that “THIS” could go off the rails… (Strzok’s meeting w Flynn the next day)

[We’re not 100% sure who “John” is, it is highly likely to be Johnathan Moffa; However, we know “Bill” is Bill Priestap, FBI Deputy Director in charge of Counterintelligence. And “Jen” is Jennifer Boone, FBI counterproliferation division]

So it’s the day before they interview Flynn.

Why would Page & Strzok be stressed about “THIS” potentially going off the rails?

The answer is simple: they knew the content of the phone call between Mike Flynn and Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in, and they were about to exploit the Pence statement to CBS. In essence they were admitting to monitoring Flynn, that’s why they were so nervous. They were planning and plotting with Andrew McCabe about how they were going to exploit the phone-tap and the difference in public statements by VP Mike Pence.

There’s a good possibility Flynn was honest but his honesty contradicted Pence’s national statement on CBS; and Flynn likely tried to dance through a needle without being overly critical of VP-elect Pence misspeaking. Remember, the alternative: if Flynn is brutally honest, the media now runs with a narrative about Vice-President Pence as a national liar.

•Wednesday January 25th, 2017, – The Department of Justice, National Security Division, (at this timeframe Mary McCord was head of the DOJ-NSD) – received a detailed readout from the FBI agents who had interviewed Flynn. Yates said she felt “it was important to get this information to the White House as quickly as possible.”

•Thursday January 26th – (morning) Yates called White House Counsel Don McGahn first thing that morning to tell him she had “a very sensitive matter” that had to be discussed face to face. McGahn agreed to meet with Yates later that afternoon.

•Thursday January 26th – (afternoon) Sally Yates traveled to the White House along with a senior member of the DOJ’s National Security Division, “who was overseeing the matter”, that is Mary McCord. This was Yates’ first meeting with McGahn in his office, which also acts as a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF).

Yates said she began their meeting by laying out the media accounts and media statements made by Vice President Mike Pence and other high-ranking White House officials about General Flynn’s activity “that we knew not to be the truth.”

According to Sally Yates testimony, she and Mary McCord presented all the information to McGahn so the White House could take action that they deemed appropriate. When asked by McGahn if Flynn should be fired, Yates answered, “that really wasn’t our call.”

Yates also said her decision to notify the White House counsel had been discussed “at great length.” According to her testimony: “Certainly leading up to our notification on the 26th, it was a topic of a whole lot of discussion in DOJ and with other members of the intel community.”

•Friday January 27th – (morning) White House Counsel Don McGahn called Yates in the morning and asked if she could come back to his office.

•Friday January 27th – (late afternoon) According to her testimony, Sally Yates returned to the White House late that afternoon. One of McGahn’s topics discussed was whether Flynn could be prosecuted for his conduct.

Specifically, according to Yates, one of the questions *McGahn asked Yates: “Why does it matter to DOJ if one White House official lies to another?” She explained that it “was a whole lot more than that,” and reviewed the same issues outlined the prior day.

[*If you consider that McGahn was trying to thread the needle between Mike Pence’s poorly worded response to CBS, and Michael Flynn’s FBI questioning that came after Pence’s statement, McGahn would see the no-win situation Flynn was in during that inquisition.]

McGahn then expressed his concern that taking any action might interfere with the FBI investigation of Flynn, and Yates said it wouldn’t: “It wouldn’t really be fair of us to tell you this and then expect you to sit on your hands,” Yates claims to have told McGahn.

McGahn asked if he could look at the underlying evidence of Flynn’s conduct, and she said they would work with the FBI over the weekend and “get back with him on Monday morning.”

•Friday January 27th, 2017 – (evening) In what appears to be only a few hours later, President Trump is having dinner with FBI Director James Comey where President Trump asked if he was under investigation. Trump was, but to continue the auspices of the ongoing investigation, Comey lied and told him he wasn’t.

This why the issue of how the FBI agents write the 302 summary of the Flynn interview becomes such an important facet. We see that dynamic again playing out in the messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok; with Andrew McCabe providing the guidance.

Don’t forget, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was likely the person who leaked the content of the Mike Flynn phone call between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak to the Washington Post. A massive leak of highly classified information:

Within the case against Michael Flynn, prosecutor Brandon Van Grack later filed a cover letter attempting to explain the reason for the Flynn interview on January 24th, 2017, and a delay in the official filing of the interview notes (FD-302) on February 15th, 2017, and then another edit on May 31st, 2017.

To explain the FBI delay, Van Grack claimed the FD-302 report “inadvertently” had a header saying “DRAFT DOCUMENT/DELIBERATIVE MATERIAL” (screen grab)

What the special counsel appeared to be obfuscating was a process of deliberation within the investigative unit, headed by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, surrounding the specific wording of the 302 report on the Flynn interview. Likely how best to word the FBI notes for maximum damage.

In late 2018 Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack was attempting to hide the length of the small group deliberations within the FBI. In hindsight it seems he did not want the court to know Andrew McCabe was involved in shaping how the Flynn-302 was written.

However, we know there was a deliberative process in place, seemingly all about how to best position the narrative, because we can see the deliberations in text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok: See below (note the dates):

The text message conversation above is February 14th, 2017.

The Michael Flynn FD-302 was officially entered into the record on February 15th, 2017, per the report:

The interview took place on January 24th, 2017. The FD-302 was drafted on January 24th, and then later edited, shaped, and ultimately approved by McCabe, on February 14th, then entered into the official record on February 15th.

It was a deliberative document from the outset. Thanks to the Strzok/Page text messages we know the cover letter from the Special Counsel is misleading. The Feb 15th, 2017, date was the day after McCabe approved it (three weeks after the FBI interview).

May 17th, 2017, Robert Mueller was assigned as special Counsel. Then, the FD-302 report was re-entered on May 31st, 2017, removing the header; paving the way for Mueller’s team to use the content therein.

This level of overt corruption, and corrupt intent within the special counsel, is one of the more brutally obvious reasons why authorizing Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein should be regarded as participating in a political framing against the Trump White House.

The FBI interpretation of the Flynn interview was the way the DOJ and FBI could control the interview content; and specifically because the only recourse Flynn would have to contradict that FBI interpretation would be to compromise the Vice President… Flynn cannot openly challenge the structure of the narrative within the 302 outline.

See what happened?

Does it all make sense now?

Do you see why there are reports of the second FBI agent, Joe Pientka, saying he didn’t believe Flynn lied to them in the interview. Likely because Flynn didn’t lie; but the McCabe crew jumped on the opportunity to frame a lose/lose. Either Flynn accepts a version of the 302 report where he lied; or, Flynn has to take the position that Vice President Mike Pence lied to the nation in the CBS Face The Nation interview.

See how that went down?

However, after Weissmann and Mueller enter the picture, they need to force Flynn to admit to the construct of the 302 as presented. For that they need some leverage.

The original authorization for the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller was May 17th, 2017. The recently released Weissmann report shows there were two additional scope memos authorizing specific targeting of the Mueller probe. The first scope memo was August 2nd, 2017, OUTLINED HERE, and is an important part of the puzzle that helps explain the corrupt original purpose of the special counsel.

The second scope memo was issued by Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller on October 20th, 2017. The transparent intent of the second scope memo was to provide Weissmann and Mueller with ammunition and authority to investigate specific targets, for specific purposes. One of those targets was General Michael Flynn’s son, Michael Flynn Jr.

As you review the highlighted portion below, found on pages 12 and 13 of the Weissmann report, read slowly and fully absorb the intent; the corruption is blood-boiling:

This second scope memo allowed Weissmann and Mueller to target tangentially related persons and entities bringing in Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn Jr. Additionally this memo established the authority to pursue “jointly undertaken activity“.

The four identified targets within the original July 2016 investigation, “Operation Crossfire Hurricane”, were George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and Carter Page. (See HPSCI report):

General Flynn was under investigation from the outset in mid-2016. The fraudulent FBI counterintelligence operation, established by CIA Director John Brennan, had Flynn as one of the early targets when Brennan handed the originating electronic communication “EC” to FBI Director James Comey on/around July 31st, 2016.

The investigation of General Flynn never stopped throughout 2016 and led to the second investigative issue of his phone call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak:

Page #12 October 20th, 2017, Scope Memo:

The first redaction listed under “personal privacy” is unknown. However, the second related redaction is a specific person, Michael Flynn Jr.

In combination with the October 2017 timing, the addition of Flynn Jr to the target list relates to the ongoing 2016/2017 investigation of his father for: (1) possible conspiracy with a foreign government; (2) unregistered lobbying; (3) materially false statements and omissions on 2017 FARA documents; and (4) lying to the FBI.

This October 20th, 2017, request from Weissmann and Mueller aligns with the time-frame were special counsel team lawyers Brandon L. Van Grack and Zainab N. Ahmad were prosecuting Michael Flynn and cornering him into a guilty plea.

Getting Rosenstein to authorize adding Mike Flynn Jr. to the target list (scope memo #2) meant the special counsel could threaten General Flynn with the indictment of his son as a co-conspirator tied to the Turkish lobbying issue (which they did) if he doesn’t agree to a plea. Remember: “jointly undertaken activity“.

Forcing a plea for ‘lying to investigators‘ by threatening prosecution for FARA violations was the identical strategy used against both George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn.

The October 20th, 2017, expanded scope memo authorized Mueller to start demanding records, phones, electronic devices and other evidence from Mike Flynn Jr, and provided the leverage Weissmann wanted. After all, Mike Flynn Jr. had a four month old baby.

The amount of twisted pressure from this corrupt team of prosecutors is sickening. A month later, General Flynn was signing a plea agreement:

…“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new ones.” 

~ Niccolò Machiavelli

CTH has been fully immersed in the battle against the Chamber of Commerce Decepticons for so long we have to be careful of our language.  This battle is the heart of Wall Street’s war against MAGA Main Street.

Republican senators from Mitch McConnell’s ‘decepticon caucus’ are now warning President Trump they will fully engage in an open effort to stop him from confronting the corrupt corporate systems that finance their life of indulgence.  Tariff’s on Mexico are a bridge too far for Tom Donohue and the multinational Wall Street lobbying system.  The republicans who benefit from K-Street lobbyist payments are now on full display.

Senate Leader Mitch McConnell has one major career alliance that has been unbroken and unchanged for well over two decades.  That alliance is with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and specifically with CoC President Tom Donohue.  [SEE HERE and SEE HERE].

However, decepticon senator John Kennedy (U-LA) has personally spoken to Trump and outlines the president will not back down in the face of their threats:

“He’s as serious as four heart attacks and a stroke,” Kennedy told reporters at the Capitol. “A 5% tariff isn’t going to break the bank. A 25% tariff is a different story, but we are a long way from there.” (link)

Through his power structure, McConnell directly controls about 8 to 15 republican senators; we have called them “The Decepticons” for years. [Cornyn, Thune, Porter, Blunt, Portman, Burr, Barasso, Crapo, Murkowski, Gardner, Roberts, Sasse, Tillis, Graham and now Romney]

While Main Street Americans benefit from the position of President Trump, all of Wall Street’s multinational and Big AG senators are opposed to Trump’s effort to secure the border.

Mitch McConnell, John Barrasso, Roy Blunt, John Thune, Jodi Ernst, Chuck Grassley, Kevin Kramer, Mike Rounds, Pat Roberts, Corey Gardner et al, are willing to support legislation to rebuke the president and keep the U.S-Mexico border in a continued state of crisis and collapse.

Senator Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican, predicted that the Senate would have enough votes to override a presidential veto of any measure that would keep Trump’s tariffs on Mexico from going into effect June 10.

“You’ve heard of people who are war weary,” Cramer said. “Senate Republicans are tariff weary.” (link)

POTUS Trump is disrupting the global order of things in order to protect and preserve the shrinking interests of the U.S.  He is fighting, almost single-handed, at the threshold of the abyss.  Our interests, our position, is zero-sum. Our opposition seeks to repel and retain the status-quo. They were on the cusp of full economic victory over the U.S.

The Senate “Decepticon Caucus” is outlined in this list.  All of the republicans on this list would vote to rebuke the President (keep it handy):

Hopefully they will follow through with their threats.  Then President Trump will veto their open-border position…. then they will have to override the President’s veto and voters will finally get to see the scale of the corruption within Mitch McConnell’s crew.

LONDON/MEXICO CITY (Reuters) – Defying increasing criticism from within his own party, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he would likely go ahead with new tariffs on imports from Mexico to pressure it to clamp down on rising numbers of migrants entering the United States.

Trump told a news conference in London he expected to impose 5% tariffs on Mexican imports from Monday, citing the high number of mostly Central American immigrants crossing the U.S. southern border with Mexico.

In a last-ditch attempt to find a resolution, a Mexican delegation including Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard is set to take part in talks at the White House on Wednesday afternoon, hosted by U.S. Vice President Mike Pence. Trump will be in Europe to commemorate the anniversary of D-Day.

[…] The president warned Republicans in Congress not to block his efforts. “I don’t think they will do that. I think if they do, it’s foolish,” he said.

But Republican senators warned that the White House may not have their backing, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell saying there was “not much support” among other Republicans for the tariffs. The threat has spooked global markets and put the ratification of a three-way trade pact between the two countries and Canada that took over a year to negotiate in doubt.

The tariffs have also been criticized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and industry groups on concerns about increased costs for U.S. businesses and consumers.

Mexico exports a broad array of goods to the United States, ranging from cars, auto parts and televisions to popular brands of beer. Toyota Motor Corp said on Tuesday tariffs on Mexican imports could cost the automaker’s major suppliers as much as $1 billion. (read more)

In these economic endeavors President Trump is disrupting decades of financial interests who use the U.S. as a host for their ideological endeavors.  President Trump is confronting multinational corporations and the global constructs of economic systems that were put in place to the detriment of the host (USA) ie. YOU.  There are trillions at stake; it is all about the economics; everything else is chaff and countermeasures.

Familiar faces, perhaps faces you previously thought were decent, are now revealing their alignment with larger entities that are our abusers.

To remind ourselves how Minority and Majority Senator McConnell took down the threat of the Tea Party revisit these old articles:  CNN Part I and CNN Part II  both showcase how McConnell works.   Then do some research on how McConnell worked with Haley Barbour in Mississippi [SEE HERE].

Yes, Democrats are the opponents.  However, the far more urgent MAGA enemy is Mitch McConnell.

(LINK)

In the Weissmann/Mueller case against Michael Flynn there are two material points of evidence central to the underlying issue:

1. The FBI 302 report written by agent Joe Pientka; as an outcome of the interview of Michael Flynn January 24th, 2017, conducted by Peter Strzok and Pientka.
2. The recording/transcript of the December 29th, 2016, phone call intercept between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

According to the special counsel position Flynn lied about the 12/29/16 phone call content during the 1/24/17 FBI interview. However, this always appeared to be a sketchy claim.  Seemingly suspecting something was amiss, in two separate court demands, Judge Emmet Sullivan requested production of both the Flynn 302 and the transcript of the call.

The special counsel’s office (Brandon Van Grack), and the DC U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu, refused to provide the underlying evidence to the court.  Instead they informed the court the material was irrelevant to their prosecution of Flynn:

(Source pdf)

The recordings are part of the underlying case against Flynn, upon which the FBI questioning took place. However, the DOJ claimed the recordings are not part of the prosecution for “lying to FBI investigators” aspect; therefore, no recordings would be produced.

It seems like a very odd parsing of evidence presented to the court (for sentencing), and underlying evidence never shown to the court, used in prosecuting.  It is also worth noting within this position; and considering the plea agreement was signed in November of 2017; the defense team was likely never provided the FD-302 written by Pientka, and/or the transcript of the call.

The outstanding question was: will judge Emmet Sullivan accept the position of the prosecution and allow non-production?   Today we get the answer:

(source)

So the judge is accepting the position of the special counsel prosecutors.

Apparently Flynn will be sentenced without anyone ever looking at the underlying evidence and comparing the claim of “lying” against the call transcript and interview.

It is speculation, but perhaps the reason for dropping everything “as is” relates to the potential for the institutions of government, specifically as it relates to FISA abuse, to be badly damaged [assuming Flynn was under FISA authorized surveillance].

The Sullivan determination allows everyone to exit the case without further scrutiny.

BACKSTORY…

On December 29, 2016, President Obama announced a series of sanctions against Russians who were located in Maryland. This was Obama’s carefully constructed response to provide additional validity to the Joint Analysis Report. After fueling the Russia conspiracy for several weeks the Obama administration knew this action would initiate a response from both Russia and the incoming Trump administration.

After the December 29, 2016, sanctions against Russia, the Obama IC were monitoring Kislyak communications and watching for contact with the incoming Trump administration.

Additionally, it is suspected Flynn may have been under a FISA surveillance warrant which seems confirmed by the Weissmann/Mueller report. The FBI intercepted, recorded, and later transcribed the conversation. [Notice how Judge Sullivan says: “and any other audio recordings”; ie he’s suspecting additional surveillance.]

In the January 2017 background, the media were continuing to follow the lead from the Obama White House, and Intelligence Community (writ large), by fueling a narrative that any contact with Russians was proof of collusion of some sort. In addition, the communications team of the Obama White House, DOJ, FBI and aggregate IC began pushing a narrative surrounding the obscure Logan Act.

The ridiculous Logan Act angle was promoted by Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and targeted to infer that any action taken by the Trump campaign prior to taking office was interference with the political Obama Russia action. Any contact with Russian government officials would be evidence of collusion. That was the plan. DOJ Deputy AG Sally Yates was in charge of pushing the Logan Act narrative to the media.

The first two weeks of January 2017 was a merging of two necessary narratives: (1) Russian interference; and (2) the Logan Act. Each deployed against any entity who would counter the Russia narrative story.

The media were running this dual narrative 24/7 against the incoming Trump officials and demanding repeated answers to questions that were framed around this story-line.

On January 3rd, 2017, the new congressional year began. SSCI Vice-Chair Dianne Feinstein abdicated her position within the Gang-of-Eight, and turned over the reigns to Senator Mark Warner. Warner was now the vice-chair of the SSCI; and a Go8 member.

On January 6th, 2017, the Obama White House published the Intelligence Community Assessment, and declared:

We assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence. (pdf link)

It is not coincidental the ICA was “high confidence” by Brennan and Clapper; and less confidence by Mike Rogers (NSA).

With the Flynn Dec. 29, 2016, transcript in hand, the DOJ and FBI began aiding the Logan Act narrative with Obama intelligence officials supporting the Russia Conspiracy claims and decrying anyone who would interfere or counter the official U.S. position.

On January 14th, 2017, the content of the communication between Flynn and Kislyak was leaked to the Washington Post by an unknown entity. Likely the leak came from the FBI’s counterintelligence operation; the same unit previously carrying out the 2016 campaign spying operations. [Andrew McCabe is highly suspected]

The FBI CoIntel group (Strzok, McCabe etc.), and the DOJ-NSD group (Yates, McCord etc.) were the largest stakeholders in the execution of the insurance policy phase because they were the epicenter of spygate, fraudulent FISA presentations and the formation of the Steele Dossier.

The media leak of the Flynn conversation with Kislyak was critical because the DOJ/FBI were pushing a political narrative. This was not about legality per se’, this effort was about establishing the framework for a preexisting investigation, based on a false premise, that would protect the DOJ and FBI. The investigation they needed to continue evolved into the Mueller special counsel. This was all insurance.

The Flynn-Kislyak leak led to Vice-President Mike Pence being hammered on January 15th, 2017, during a CBS Face the Nation interview about Trump campaign officials in contact with Russians. Pence was exceptionally unprepared to answer the questions and allowed the media to blend questions about campaign contacts with necessary, and entirely appropriate, transition team contacts.

•Sunday January 15th, 2017 – VP-elect Mike Pence appears on Face The Nation. [Transcript Here]

JOHN DICKERSON: But there’s a distinction between that feeling about the press and legitimate inquiry, as you say, that the Senate Intelligence Committee is doing.

Just to button up one question, did any advisor or anybody in the Trump campaign have any contact with the Russians who were trying to meddle in the election?

MIKE PENCE: Of course not. And I think to suggest that is to give credence to some of these bizarre rumors that have swirled around the candidacy. (link)

*NOTE* The incoming administration was under a false-narrative siege created by the media. At the time (early Jan, 2017) ‘any contact’ with Russians was evidence of meddling/election-collusion with Russians. VP-elect Mike Pence poorly answered the question from Dickerson from a very defensive position.

The toxic media environment and Mike Pence speaking poorly during a Face The Nation interview now became a much bigger issue.

Once Vice-President Mike Pence made the statement that Flynn had no contact with anyone from Russia etc. any contradictory statement from Flynn would make Pence appear compromised. Michael Flynn is now contrast against Pence’s false point without clarification. As National Security Advisor Flynn was interviewed by the FBI on January 24th, nine days after Pence made his comments.

•Tuesday January 24th – Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn was interviewed at the WH by the FBI.

During this ambush interview, disguised as a meeting, FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Agent Joe Pientka were contrasting Vice-President-elect Pence’s statements to CBS against the known action of Mike Flynn. [Flynn has three options: either (1) Flynn contradicts Pence, or (2) he tells a lie; or (3) Flynn explains Pence misspoke, those were his options.]

How Flynn responded to the line of inquiry, and explained/reconciled the difference between Pence’s statement on Jan 15th and what actually took place on December 29th, 2016, is why the FBI ended up with the initial conclusion that Flynn wasn’t lying.

It is within this dynamic where the FD-302 reports, written by Strzok and Pientka, then became the subject of political manipulation by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

The FBI knew the content of the Flynn call with Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in. The FBI were intercepting those communications. So when Pence said no-one had any contact on January 15th, the FBI crew IMMEDIATELY knew they had an issue to exploit.

We see the evidence of the FBI knowing they had an issue to exploit, and being very nervous about doing it, in the text messages between Lisa Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok who would end up doing the questioning of Flynn.

The day before the Flynn interview:

♦January 23, 2017, the day before the Flynn interview, Lisa Page says: “I can feel my heart beating harder, I’m so stressed about all the ways THIS has the potential to go fully off the rails.” Weird!

♦Strzok replies: “I know. I just talked with John, we’re getting together as soon as I get in to finish that write up for Andy (MCCABE) this morning.” Strzok agrees with Page about being stressed that “THIS” could go off the rails… (Strzok’s meeting w Flynn the next day)

[We’re not 100% sure who “John” is, it is highly likely to be Johnathan Moffa;  However, we know “Bill” is Bill Priestap, FBI Deputy Director in charge of Counterintelligence. And “Jen” is Jennifer Boone, FBI counterproliferation division]

So it’s the day before they interview Flynn.

Why would Page & Strzok be stressed about “THIS” potentially going off the rails?

The answer is simple: they knew the content of the phone call between Mike Flynn and Sergey Kislyak because they were listening in, and they were about to exploit the Pence statement to CBS. In essence they were admitting to monitoring Flynn, that’s why they were so nervous. They were planning and plotting with Andrew McCabe about how they were going to exploit the phone-tap and the difference in public statements by VP Mike Pence.

There’s a good possibility Flynn was honest but his honesty contradicted Pence’s national statement on CBS; and Flynn likely tried to dance through a needle without being overly critical of VP-elect Pence misspeaking. Remember, the alternative: if Flynn is brutally honest, the media now runs with a narrative about Vice-President Pence as a national liar.

•Wednesday January 25th, 2017, – The Department of Justice, National Security Division, (at this timeframe Mary McCord was head of the DOJ-NSD) – received a detailed readout from the FBI agents who had interviewed Flynn. Yates said she felt “it was important to get this information to the White House as quickly as possible.”

•Thursday January 26th – (morning) Yates called White House Counsel Don McGahn first thing that morning to tell him she had “a very sensitive matter” that had to be discussed face to face. McGahn agreed to meet with Yates later that afternoon.

•Thursday January 26th – (afternoon) Sally Yates traveled to the White House along with a senior member of the DOJ’s National Security Division, “who was overseeing the matter”, that is Mary McCord. This was Yates’ first meeting with McGahn in his office, which also acts as a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF).

Yates said she began their meeting by laying out the media accounts and media statements made by Vice President Mike Pence and other high-ranking White House officials about General Flynn’s activity “that we knew not to be the truth.”

According to Sally Yates testimony, she and Mary McCord presented all the information to McGahn so the White House could take action that they deemed appropriate. When asked by McGahn if Flynn should be fired, Yates answered, “that really wasn’t our call.”

Yates also said her decision to notify the White House counsel had been discussed “at great length.” According to her testimony: “Certainly leading up to our notification on the 26th, it was a topic of a whole lot of discussion in DOJ and with other members of the intel community.”

•Friday January 27th – (morning) White House Counsel Don McGahn called Yates in the morning and asked if she could come back to his office.

•Friday January 27th – (late afternoon) According to her testimony, Sally Yates returned to the White House late that afternoon. One of McGahn’s topics discussed was whether Flynn could be prosecuted for his conduct.

Specifically, according to Yates, one of the questions *McGahn asked Yates: “Why does it matter to DOJ if one White House official lies to another?” She explained that it “was a whole lot more than that,” and reviewed the same issues outlined the prior day.

[*If you consider that McGahn was trying to thread the needle between Mike Pence’s poorly worded response to CBS, and Michael Flynn’s FBI questioning that came after Pence’s statement, McGahn would see the no-win situation Flynn was in during that inquisition.]

McGahn then expressed his concern that taking any action might interfere with the FBI investigation of Flynn, and Yates said it wouldn’t: “It wouldn’t really be fair of us to tell you this and then expect you to sit on your hands,” Yates claims to have told McGahn.

McGahn asked if he could look at the underlying evidence of Flynn’s conduct, and she said they would work with the FBI over the weekend and “get back with him on Monday morning.”

•Friday January 27th, 2017 – (evening) In what appears to be only a few hours later, President Trump is having dinner with FBI Director James Comey where President Trump asked if he was under investigation. Trump was, but to continue the auspices of the ongoing investigation, Comey lied and told him he wasn’t.

This why the issue of how the FBI agents write the 302 summary of the Flynn interview becomes such an important facet. We see that dynamic again playing out in the messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok; with Andrew McCabe providing the guidance.

Don’t forget, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was likely the person who leaked the content of the Mike Flynn phone call between Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak to the Washington Post. A massive leak of highly classified information:

Within the case against Michael Flynn, prosecutor Brandon Van Grack later filed a cover letter attempting to explain the reason for the Flynn interview on January 24th, 2017, and a delay in the official filing of the interview notes (FD-302) on February 15th, 2017, and then another edit on May 31st, 2017.

To explain the FBI delay, Van Grack claimed the FD-302 report “inadvertently” had a header saying “DRAFT DOCUMENT/DELIBERATIVE MATERIAL” (screen grab)

What the special counsel appeared to be obfuscating was a process of deliberation within the investigative unit, headed by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, surrounding the specific wording of the 302 report on the Flynn interview. Likely how best to word the FBI notes for maximum damage.

In late 2018 Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack was attempting to hide the length of the small group deliberations within the FBI. In hindsight it seems he did not want the court to know Andrew McCabe was involved in shaping how the Flynn-302 was written.

However, we know there was a deliberative process in place, seemingly all about how to best position the narrative, because we can see the deliberations in text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok: See below (note the dates):

The text message conversation above is February 14th, 2017.

The Michael Flynn FD-302 was officially entered into the record on February 15th, 2017, per the report:

The interview took place on January 24th, 2017. The FD-302 was drafted on January 24th, and then later edited, shaped, and ultimately approved by McCabe, on February 14th, then entered into the official record on February 15th.

It was a deliberative document from the outset. Thanks to the Strzok/Page text messages we know the cover letter from the Special Counsel is misleading. The Feb 15th, 2017, date was the day after McCabe approved it (three weeks after the FBI interview).

May 17th, 2017, Robert Mueller was assigned as special Counsel. Then, the FD-302 report was re-entered on May 31st, 2017, removing the header; paving the way for Mueller’s team to use the content therein.

This level of overt corruption, and corrupt intent within the special counsel, is one of the more brutally obvious reasons why authorizing Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein should be regarded as participating in a political framing against the Trump White House.

The FBI interpretation of the Flynn interview was the way the DOJ and FBI could control the interview content; and specifically because the only recourse Flynn would have to contradict that FBI interpretation would be to compromise the Vice President… Flynn cannot openly challenge the structure of the narrative within the 302 outline.

See what happened?

Does it all make sense now?

Do you see why there are reports of the second FBI agent, Joe Pientka, saying he didn’t believe Flynn lied to them in the interview. Likely because Flynn didn’t lie; but the McCabe crew jumped on the opportunity to frame a lose/lose. Either Flynn accepts a version of the 302 report where he lied; or, Flynn has to take the position that Vice President Mike Pence lied to the nation in the CBS Face The Nation interview.

See how that went down?

However, after Weissmann and Mueller enter the picture, they need to force Flynn to admit to the construct of the 302 as presented. For that they need some leverage.

The original authorization for the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller was May 17th, 2017. The recently released Weissmann report shows there were two additional scope memos authorizing specific targeting of the Mueller probe. The first scope memo was August 2nd, 2017, OUTLINED HERE, and is an important part of the puzzle that helps explain the corrupt original purpose of the special counsel.

The second scope memo was issued by Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller on October 20th, 2017. The transparent intent of the second scope memo was to provide Weissmann and Mueller with ammunition and authority to investigate specific targets, for specific purposes. One of those targets was General Michael Flynn’s son, Michael Flynn Jr.

As you review the highlighted portion below, found on pages 12 and 13 of the Weissmann report, read slowly and fully absorb the intent; the corruption is blood-boiling:

This second scope memo allowed Weissmann and Mueller to target tangentially related persons and entities bringing in Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn Jr. Additionally this memo established the authority to pursue “jointly undertaken activity“.

The four identified targets within the original July 2016 investigation, “Operation Crossfire Hurricane”, were George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and Carter Page. (See HPSCI report):

General Flynn was under investigation from the outset in mid-2016. The fraudulent FBI counterintelligence operation, established by CIA Director John Brennan, had Flynn as one of the early targets when Brennan handed the originating electronic communication “EC” to FBI Director James Comey on/around July 31st, 2016.

The investigation of General Flynn never stopped throughout 2016 and led to the second investigative issue of his phone call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak:

Page #12 October 20th, 2017, Scope Memo:

The first redaction listed under “personal privacy” is unknown. However, the second related redaction is a specific person, Michael Flynn Jr.

In combination with the October 2017 timing, the addition of Flynn Jr to the target list relates to the ongoing 2016/2017 investigation of his father for: (1) possible conspiracy with a foreign government; (2) unregistered lobbying; (3) materially false statements and omissions on 2017 FARA documents; and (4) lying to the FBI.

This October 20th, 2017, request from Weissmann and Mueller aligns with the time-frame were special counsel team lawyers Brandon L. Van Grack and Zainab N. Ahmad were prosecuting Michael Flynn and cornering him into a guilty plea.

Getting Rosenstein to authorize adding Mike Flynn Jr. to the target list (scope memo #2) meant the special counsel could threaten General Flynn with the indictment of his son as a co-conspirator tied to the Turkish lobbying issue (which they did) if he doesn’t agree to a plea. Remember: “jointly undertaken activity“.

Forcing a plea for ‘lying to investigators‘ by threatening prosecution for FARA violations was the identical strategy used against both George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn.

The October 20th, 2017, expanded scope memo authorized Mueller to start demanding records, phones, electronic devices and other evidence from Mike Flynn Jr, and provided the leverage Weissmann wanted. After all, Mike Flynn Jr. had a four month old baby.

The amount of twisted pressure from this corrupt team of prosecutors is sickening. A month later, General Flynn was signing a plea agreement: