Trey Gowdy appears on Fox News to discuss the current ‘investigative’ status and reports of Brennan -vs- Comey on the use of the Steele Dossier within the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment or ICA.

Gowdy is one of the few people, along with John Ratcliffe, who has seen the full and unredacted FISA application used against Carter Page.

.

Regarding the use of the Steele Dossier within the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment; as Gowdy notes there is a likelihood both Brennan and Comey are both correct. It goes back to a story from a couple of months ago [SEE HERE]

The exit door begins to close.  According to the latest leak provided to John Solomon the State Department information -deconstructing Chris Steele- was presented to FBI Agent Peter Strzok a week before they used Steele’s sketchy dossier to prop up the FBI FISA application on Carter Page.

John Solomon – […] The officials declined to say what the FBI did with the information about Steele after it reached Strzok’s team, or what the email specifically revealed. A publicly disclosed version of the email has been heavily redacted in the name of national security.

While much remains to be answered, the email exchange means FBI supervisors knew Steele had contact with State and had reason to inquire what he was saying before they sought the warrant. If they had inquired, agents would have learned Steele had admitted to Kavalec he had been leaking to the news media, had a political deadline of Election Day to get his information public and had provided demonstrably false intelligence in one case, as I reported last week. (read more)

It’s almost guaranteed the reason Kavelec’s email to the FBI was redacted is specifically because Ms. Kavelec used her State Dept. portal to check on travel records and noted the “Michael Cohen in Prague” story was false.  Kavalec would have easy access to State Dept. travel records.

Chris Steele told Ms. Kavalec about Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen traveling to Prague to communicate/coordinate with the Russians.  Kavalec made note of the claim:

(Page #11, pdf link)

Michael Cohen has denied ever traveling to Prague.  Special Counsel Robert Mueller has supported Cohen on this issue; passport records show Cohen has never traveled to Prague. It appears Ms. Kavalec checked her State Dept. travel records and confirmed the same.

However, the CURRENT FBI wants to hide Ms. Kavalec’s warning/notification that Steele was delivering false information about Cohen traveling to Prague:

(Page #2, pdf source – Kavalec email)

So put it all together.  Chris Steele was producing the dossier for the FBI to use.  Steele told State Dept. official Kavalec about the same information in his dossier.  The State Dept. checked, and found out the information was false. The State Dept. warned the FBI.  However, the FBI ignored the warning; and a week later used the dossier in the application for a retroactive Title-1 surveillance warrant against U.S. Person Carter Page.

To cover themselves; and because the claim was so central to the purpose of the Steele Dossier; the FBI then redacted the State Dept. warning about Michael Cohen traveling to Prague in the public email from the State Department.

Worse yet, in the application itself the FBI said the information proving Carter Page was an agent of a foreign power came from the State Dept:

(Page #2 Carter Page FISA Application – pdf source)

The false claim about Cohen’s travel to Prague has been discussed here for well over a year. [January 2018]

So, the question is:  Why is the FBI so damned committed to this Steele Dossier?

That answer is simple.  In October 2016, they needed the dossier to get the FISA warrant.  They needed the 2016 FISA warrant to cover-up for all of the unauthorized and illegal surveillance activity that was already underway throughout 2016.

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 operations.  Fusion fulfilled that objective by contracting for the Steele Dossier.

That’s why the FBI, and later the Mueller team, were/are so strongly committed to, and defending, the formation of the Steele Dossier and its dubious content.  Once they had the dossier in hand the FBI proceeded forward for an ex post facto FISA warrant.

The goal was retroactive surveillance authority. The FBI used the Carter Page FISA application. The FBI already knew Carter Page; essentially Carter Page was irrelevant, what they needed was the dossier in the system, and the FISA authority as justification.

Against the backdrop of media reports surrounding U.S. Attorney John Durham, and an investigation into potentially corrupt 2016 investigators, perhaps it’s worthwhile to pause, evaluate, reset the outlook and review the backstories.

There’s room for cautious optimism, but there’s also reason to temper expectations. First within the latest Fox News report, the following is noted:

Fox News – […] Durham, known as a “hard-charging, bulldog” prosecutor, according to a source, will focus on the period before Nov. 7, 2016—including the use and assignments of FBI informants, as well as alleged improper issuance of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants. Durham was asked to help Barr to “ensure that intelligence collection activities by the U.S. Government related to the Trump 2016 Presidential Campaign were lawful and appropriate.”

A source also told Fox News that Barr is working “collaboratively” on the investigation with FBI Director Chris Wray, CIA Director Gina Haspel, and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and that Durham is also working directly with Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who is currently reviewing allegations of misconduct in issuance of FISA warrants, and the role of FBI informants during the early stages of the investigation. (read more)

If this report is correct; and if this review parameter is accurate as described; then Durham is ONLY looking at the gross intelligence activity prior to the 2016 election.

This is pertinent because it means Durham is NOT looking at the DOJ/FBI corrupt activity that surrounds the Mueller probe, Rod Rosenstein, corrupt current FBI agents/officials; corrupt investigative outcomes and cover-ups that occurred during 2017 and 2018 (James Wolfe etc.)…  Regardless of disposition, career DOJ and FBI employees (ie. Mueller’s staff of workers), will remain safe under this limited review.  Keep this in mind.

Recently Attorney General Bill Barr delivered a farewell address during the departure of DAG Rod Rosenstein.  Many people took the highly visible back-slapping internecine send-off to mean that Rosenstein was departing as an honorable soldier; and Barr’s praise of Rosenstein was evidence of his honorable character… Et cetera, Et cetera.

But what was the alternative?

Was it possible for U.S. Attorney General William Barr to publicly outline the years-long gross abuses and inherent corruption of the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation in full public visibility?  Was it possible for him to verbally destroy the reputations of all participating members within both organizations over the past three years?  Of course not.

Think about the ramifications of brutal honesty.

If Barr was publicly and brutally honest, the political backlash would not only be nuclear in scale; but also our foreign adversaries would immediately pounce on a narrative of how this great constitutional republic was built upon lies and fraud.  The reputation of the United States law enforcement and intelligence community could likely never recover. From an intellectually honest position, clearly AG Barr had limited options.

That said, with the introduction of John H Durham, what the hell was U.S. Attorney John Huber (Utah) doing for the past two years?   Huber was previously assigned to assist Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz in November of 2017, so why is John Durham now assigned to OIG Horowitz seemingly to do the same thing?  The answer is not complex.

Originally Horowitz was assigned on January 12, 2017, to review issues related to the DOJ and FBI relating to improper conduct in advance of the 2016 election. [Read]  That original mandate led to two investigations/reports: (1) Leaks from the FBI (Andrew McCabe outlined); and (2) Overall DOJ/FBI investigative bias and political outcome. Mid-way through these investigations, November 2017,  is when Huber was assigned to assist. [Read]

In March 2018, while the two avenues of investigation were ongoing; at the request of AG Jeff Sessions; the OIG opened a third review: Potential FISA abuse [Read]  So in March 2018, Michael Horowiz has three investigations underway.

A month later, April 13, 2018, Horowitz releases the IG report on McCabe.  Now he’s down to two investigations again.  On June 14, 2018, Horowitz releases the IG report on DOJ and FBI misconduct/bias.  Now the only remaining investigation is the FISA review. This is when any visible activity by John Huber ends.  It makes sense Huber would end in/around June 2018, because Horowitz had an easily manageable, albeit important, singular review.

WASHINGTON DC – […] US Attorney John Huber in Utah is no longer involved on Russia issues. Huber had originally been tasked with looking at allegations of surveillance abuse by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, but has been in a holding pattern as the inspector general completes his review of the surveillance warrant the FBI obtained on Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page.

Huber’s review of other issues related to Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation is nearing completion, the source said.

♦ A criminal referral on McCabe for leaking to media was sent to DC U.S. Attorney Jessica Liu in April 2018.  That criminal review looks like it was dropped approximately six months later; around the same time the criminal DOJ cover-up operation for SSCI leaker James Wolfe was executed in October of 2018.  Yes, I’m saying “criminal cover-up” carried out by the DOJ to protect the multiple institutions of government who would have been severely impacted.

Throughout 2018, simultaneous to the Mueller probe’s ongoing corrupt effort; career officials within the institutions of the DOJ and FBI are transparently working with an agenda to protect the interests of the institutions.  Career mid-tier officials and investigators (ref. 40 FBI agents for Mueller etc.) remain embedded despite the top tier firings and resignations.  [Again, reference DOJ/FBI Papadopoulos operation July 2018]

A month after Wolfe was protected by a plea deal; and a month after McCabe was seemingly protected; and the same month Rosenstein provided Mueller with (the second scope memo) authority to target Mike Flynn Jr…. the mid-term election was held.

The morning after the election, President Trump fired Jeff Sessions.

Mid-November 2018: Corrupt DOJ/FBI embeds remain in place.  Mid-November 2018: President Trump does not appoint Rod Rosenstein as Acting Attorney General.

Within a week, November 14, 2018, the OLC issues guidance that Jeff Sessions former chief-of-staff, now Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, can oversee the Mueller/Weissmann probe.

♦ Now, in order to bring U.S. Attorney John H Durham into the picture, go back to the October 2018 timeline again.  •DC Attorney Jessie Liu does not charging James Wolfe with leaking classified intelligence. •DC Attorney Jessie Liu (likely, very likely) drops the criminal referral of McCabe, again a leaking issue.  Later McCabe goes on book tour.

When and Where was the criminal referral of former FBI legal counsel James Baker sent?   October 3rd, 2018, lawyers for James Baker inform Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows that their client has been under investigation for leaking to media and the prosecutor is John Durham.

So the referral for James Baker, was sent outside DC and likely was done quite a while ago. Status? Unknown. [Baker was relieved of his FBI duties in December of 2017.] There is a distinct possibility, much like Andrew McCabe, the criminal review of James Baker was previously dropped.

Via Robert Litt […] Durham’s investigation had nothing to do with the Russia investigation or the Steele dossier. I have first-hand knowledge of this because, in my former capacity as general counsel to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, I was interviewed by Durham as part of that investigation. I’m not at liberty to disclose what Durham was investigating, but it concerned events that occurred long before the 2016 election and were unrelated to Russia or the dossier. Others have reportedthat Durham has cleared Baker; I have no personal knowledge of that. (link)

While it would be false to say Durham has been investigating the origin of the Russia collusion-conspiracy investigation, he obviously has been involved in the investigative perimeter of events.  So one can presume he has a solid frame of reference:

FOX NEWS – Durham, known as a “hard-charging, bulldog” prosecutor, according to a source, will focus on the period before Nov. 7, 2016—including the use and assignments of FBI informants, as well as alleged improper issuance of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants.

CNN – […] Barr is working in close collaboration with CIA Director Gina Haspel, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and FBI Director Christopher Wray, the source said.

[…] The source said Durham and Barr are doing a comprehensive review, and Durham is with working with the Justice Department’s Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, as well. (read more)

♦ Who was the CIA Deputy Director of the National Clandestine Service for Foreign Intelligence and Covert Action over Europe, while John Brennan and Peter Strzok were running their European 2016 counterintelligence operations?….

That would be current CIA Director Gina Haspel.

Bottom line:  This Barr “investigation” could end up with accountability; or this Barr “investigation” could unearth so much institutional corruption and gross malfeasance that Barr will stand at a podium and duplicate recent events:

Time will tell.

This is good to see.  Finally President Trump indicates he is well aware of the intents and motives of FBI Director Christopher Wray covering for the illegal coup effort:

President Trump may have been aware of Chris Wray’s corrupt disposition prior to today; however, this is the first visible indication he understands the internecine organization of it.  Hopefully we can start the countdown clock to Wray’s exit.

Next up, Chris Wray’s #1 strategic hire, current FBI Legal Counsel Dana Boente.

In 2015 the DOJ-OIG (office of inspector general) requested oversight of the DOJ National Security Division.  It was Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58 page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the DOJ-NSD.

When John Carlin resigned as Asst. Attorney General in charge of the DOJ National Security Division in October 2016 he was replaced by Principal Deputy Asst. Attorney General and Chief of Staff, Mary McCord.  After President Trump took office on January 20th, 2017, Sally Yates was Acting AG and Mary McCord was in charge of the DOJ-NSD.

Yates and McCord were the two Main Justice officials who then engaged with White House Counsel Don McGahn on January 26th, 2017, regarding the General Flynn FBI interview conducted on January 24th.  The Trump-Russia Collusion Conspiracy was the headline.

On January 30th, 2017, Sally Yates was fired for refusing to defend the Trump travel ban from extremist countries.  Yates was replaced on January 31st by the U.S. Attorney from the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA), Dana Boente.

With his shift to Main Justice Dana Boente was Acting Attorney General, and Mary McCord was Asst. AG in charge of the DOJ-NSD.  Boente was in the Acting AG position from Jan 31st, 2017, until Jeff Sessions was confirmed on February 8th, 2017.

When Jeff Sessions became AG, Dana Boente became Acting Deputy AG, a role he would retain until Rod Rosenstein was confirmed on April 25th, 2017.   [Mary McCord remained head of the DOJ-National Security Division]

On March 2nd, 2017, Dana Boente was one of the small group who participated in a conversation that led to the recusal of Jeff Sessions from anything related to the 2016 election.  This recusal included the ongoing FBI counterintelligence investigation known as Crossfire Hurricane, which was later picked up by Robert Mueller.

The other attendees for the recusal decision-making meeting (see above schedule) included Sessions’ chief of staff Jody Hunt; Criminal Chief in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland, Jim Crowell; Deputy Assistant Attorney General (DAAG) in the Department of Justice National Security Division Tash Gauhar (FISA lawyer); and Associate Deputy Attorney General Scott Schools.  [Note: Tash Gauhar was lawyer for FBI Clinton case; and Scott Schools was part of drafting Clinton exoneration letter.]

The Main Justice group influenced Jeff Sessions to recuse.

With AG Jeff Sessions recused on March 2, 2017, FBI Director James Comey now reported to Acting Deputy AG Dana Boente.  [Technically, Boente is still EDVA U.S. Attorney and is only ‘acting’ as Deputy AG]  Additionally, on March 31st, 2017, President Trump signs executive order 13787 making the U.S. EDVA Attorney the 3rd in line for DOJ succession.

Question:  If Dana Boente was appointed “Acting Attorney General” on January 31st, 2017 (he was), then why did Don McGahn need to draw up XO 13787 on March 31st, 2017… especially after confirmed AG Jeff Sessions was already in place Feb 9th?

The answer likely has to do with a sign-off needed for FISA.

See the issue?

How does somebody (unknown) advise White House Counsel Don McGahn to draw up an executive order so that Boente can sign a FISA…. without telling Don McGahn the reason why AG Sessions can’t sign off on the FISA?   See the issue now?

In the period between March 2nd and April 25th – With AG Sessions recused, and without a Deputy AG confirmed, Dana Boente is simultaneously:

• U.S. Attorney for EDVA
• Acting Deputy AG.
• Acting AG for all issues related to Sessions recusal.

It is James Comey and Dana Boente who sign the April 2017 FISA renewal for Carter Page.

(Page #271 – Carter Page FISA Application)

This dynamic would later become important as notes Boente took from conversations with James Comey became evidence for Mueller’s expanded obstruction investigation.  [3/2/17 Mary McCord is still head of DOJ-NSD]

Somehow Acting Deputy AG Dana Boente’s personal and handwritten notes were mysteriously leaked to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.

[Backstory Here]

On April 20th, 2017, Mary McCord announces her intent to resign from the DOJ National Security Division effective with the confirmation of Deputy AG nominee Rod Rosenstein.

On April 25th, 2017, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein is confirmed.   Rosenstein now takes over the responsibilities held by Acting DAG Dana Boente; this includes the FBI counterintelligence probe.

On May 9th, 2017, FBI Director James Comey is fired.

On May 10th, 2017, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe opens a criminal ‘obstruction of justice investigation’ of President Trump to parallel/compliment the ongoing counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign and administration.

On/Around May 11th, 2017, Mary McCord departs.  Dana Boente now becomes the Asst. Attorney General and head of the DOJ National Security Divison.  Simultaneously retaining role as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of VA.

On May 16th, 2017, Rosenstein takes Robert Mueller to the White House to meet President Trump. On May 17th, Rosenstein appoints the Robert Mueller special counsel probe. On May 18th, 2017, Scott Schools authorizes Robert Mueller:

And we’re off to the Trump-Russia-Collusion-Obstruction races…

With hindsight it is now clear the various players inside Main Justice and the FBI had a vested interest in maintaining the assault against Trump. By now everyone can see the bigger goal was against the office of POTUS. [“obstruction” etc.]  All of the personnel moves should be reviewed with hindsight of the larger anti-Trump objective in mind.

Against the known fraud that was the Trump-Russia Collusion-Conspiracy narrative, there are no visible people who didn’t participate in one form or another.

Dana Boente was head of DOJ-NSD from May 11th, 2017 through end of October 2017 when he officially announced his intent to retire.  However, the timeline gets cloudy here because Boente said he was staying on until an official replacement was announced. There’s no indication of when he actually left the DOJ-NSD or the EDVA role.

On January 23rd, 2018, FBI Director Christopher Wray announces Boente has shifted over to the FBI to be Chief Legal Counsel (replacing James Baker).  As Mueller is using 19 lawyers, and 40 FBI investigators, Boente now becomes a legal adviser to Christopher Wray while the Mueller probe is ongoing.

As we recently discovered, Mueller’s lead FBI agent for the corrupt Russia collusion-conspiracy investigation, was David W. Archey.  Archey was selected by Robert Mueller when FBI Agent Peter Strzok was removed.  The Mueller probe took over the counterintelligence investigation in May 2017, a few months later Special Agent Peter Strzok was removed (July) and David W. Archey was brought in:

As David Archey arrives in August 2017, Mueller is getting the new scope memo from Rod Rosenstein.  There’s little doubt the entire FBI group would have known the Trump-Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative was false.  So Archey status as lead agent has to be considered *corrupt/sketchy*; FBI activity was likely focused on the obstruction angle.

Interestingly at the conclusion of the Mueller investigation Archey was promoted by Christopher Wray to head of the Richmond, Virginia FBI field office (March 4, 2019).  This field office overlaps with another FBI/DOJ filing from the EDVA.

The April 11th, 2019, recently released Julian Assange indictment stems from the EDVA.  From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:

(Link to pdf)

However, on Tuesday April 15th more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….

The investigation took place prior to December 2017, it is coming from the EDVA where Dana Boente was still, presumably, U.S. Attorney.  The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until April of 2019.

Why the delay?  Here’s where it gets interesting….

This FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”

(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.

Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”

Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)

It would appear the FBI took keen interest after this August 2017 meeting and gathered specific evidence for a grand jury by December 2017.  Then the DOJ sat on the indictment (sealed in March 2018) while the Mueller probe was ongoing; until April 11th, 2019, when a coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was launched. Assange was arrested, and the indictment was unsealed (link).

To me, as a person who has researched this three year fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, JAR report(needed for Obama in December ’16), and political ICA (January ’17); this looks like a Deep State move to control Julian Assange because the Mueller report is dependent on Russia cybercrimes…. AND that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story.

The Mueller/Rosenstein report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election.  This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview.  There’s the motive to shut Assange down.

The DNC hack claim is contingent upon analysis by Crowdstrike computer forensics who were paid by the DNC to look into the issue.  The FBI was never allowed to review the servers independently.   Almost all independent research into this DNC hack claim also challenges the claims of a Russia hack of the DNC servers.

Dana Boente was part of the group who advised Sessions to recuse.  Boente later authorized the second renewal of the Title-one surveillance warrant and worked with James Comey.  Boente then leaked his Comey notes to the media, essentially to support Comey’s narrative about Trump; and participated from within the FBI as legal counsel to Chris Wray who told everyone in July 2018 there was no political bias in the FBI… but hey, everyone is going to bias training….. and pay no attention to the 40 “rank and file” FBI agents who were investigating an invisible Trump Russia-Collusion-Conspiracy for two years.

Seriously?

There are no “good guys” in this. There are no “white hats” here. Certainly not Mueller, Rosenstein, Wray, Bowditch or Boente.  Instead, this is a matrix of broad interests positioned only to benefit and sustain the status quo of the administrative state; and protect the larger community from the Trump disruption.

In the end it all comes back to the same series of questions. Who was recommending to President Trump that he retain and promote DOJ and FBI officials who were part of the anti-Trump Russia collusion-conspiracy program?

Someone who knew the system but would still be vulnerable to peer influence.  Someone who would take counsel and advice on who was needed and where. Someone in a position of influence with President Trump.  Someone who could steer these placements from a position of advisement close to the President. [It sounds like Don McGahn]

Appointing Rod Rosenstein as DAG was one of those key placements.

Appointing DC U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu was another.

♦From Rosenstein we get: Mueller, Chris Wray, David Bowditch and Dana Boente.

♦Meanwhile Jessie Liu quashed cases against: Awan bros, James Wolfe, Greg Craig and quite possibly Andrew McCabe.

Chris Wray and Dana Boente then began providing cover…

FUBAR

If this were anyone except Judiciary Committee member John Ratcliffe, it would be easier to ignore…. but it’s not.  John Ratcliffe is a very tempered and deliberate voice; he has a strong reputation in DC and doesn’t speak in riddles, hype, or disingenuous terms.

During an interview with Maria Bartiromo discussing the recent comments by former FBI Director James Comey, Ratcliffe replied [Must Watch at 04:10 ]:

[@04:10] “Gosh, y’ know, as I listen to that, Jim Comey is proud and wouldn’t change a thing? Really?  He’s proud that he put Peter Strzok in charge of investigating Donald Trump? The same Peter Strzok who, while he was investigating Donald Trump, promised to “f*ck” him and to “stop” him?  He’s proud of his hand-picked deputy director, Andrew McCabe who lied under oath; lied to the inspector general, and has been criminally referred for that?

And we know Jim’s proud of himself, but the inspector general found him insubordinate, and many of us believe that he either is or should beunder investigation for violating the espionage act; for recording his conversations with President Trump in the oval office, and then intentionally leaking classified information to start this investigation”…

Note: “is, or should be”.  So there’s a possibility of “is”.

Remember, Ratcliffe is one of only a handful of people who saw, and continues to see, all of the highly classified intelligence documents (fully unredacted) currently under consideration for declassification by President Trump.  Ratcliffe was also strongly considered for the U.S. Attorney General position.  This is a deliberate man.

Setting an optimistic tone, Representative John Ratcliffe expresses an unusual amount of confidence in U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr.

(IG Report on Andrew McCabe Leaking to Media)