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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

.

I’m not going to spend a great deal of time on this because the story is just affirmation and takes away from research and value-added discussion.

Tonight Fox News is reporting on the efforts of Senator Mark Warner to make secret and off-the-record contact with Christopher Steele in March of 2017.   Warner, a rabidly partisan Democrat, is the minority Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.  The Majority Chairman is Richard Burr (R-NC) and also corrupt as hell.  Not surprisingly, Burr is covering for Warner.  –You can read the STORY HERE–

Throughout the entire story-line behind the ongoing conspiracy to destabilize the presidency of Donald Trump we have pointed out that Mark Warner and Richard Burr were compromised.  The corruption within the Senate Intelligence Committee is specifically why House Intel Chairman Devin Nunes, House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, do not share information with the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The corrupt Senate Intel Committee, and all their corrupt staff members, are cut-off from contact with those who are fighting the corruption.  Everyone on the committee has been compromised by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman participating with, and being in ideological agreement with, the Uniparty conspiracy effort to take-down President Trump. Yes, that includes Marco Rubio, James Lankford and Tom Cotton. None of them can be trusted.  [If Lankford and/or Cotton quit the committee in the next 72 hours we can re-evaluate them, but only them.]

Never-Trust-Any-Of-These..

..EVER!

Six months after Warner was conspiring with Christopher Steele… (in September of 2017), the Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz, questioned Senator Warner’s staff and requested the messaging information.

Warner discovered he was busted.

Mark Warner then told the committee about his contacts.  Richard Burr and Marco Rubio are providing cover by claiming Warner was honest with them in September.

CTH caught on to the corruption immediately after the inauguration in January 2017 when Diane Feinstein quit the committee and was replaced by Mark Warner.  This is why we have been saying for over a year to ignore the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The scary thing is that Warner and Burr are members of the Gang-of-Eight intelligence oversight.  That is Alarming !!  That should scare the crap out of anyone who understands what national intelligence information these senate conspirators are briefed about.

I shall not spend any more time on them.  Seriously, I don’t even look in the direction of anything that they touch… it is all manipulation, misinformation and disinformation.  There is absolutely no value in anything from the Senate Intelligence Committee because it has been entirely corrupted.

100% corrupted.  Entirely useless.

That’s why Devin Nunes, Chuck Grassley, Bob Goodlatte and Michael Horowitz don’t share any information with Richard Burr… The good guys act like Burr doesn’t exist, and I follow that recommendation happily.

This is the team to follow:

When it comes to the issues that really matter; the issues of serious importance; ignore all voices that are not part of the above.  The good guys have a plan; the bad guys (including Warner and Burr) don’t know the plans of the good guys.

Researchers will share the value of pausing, going back, and looking upon previous information with new insight gained from current discoveries.  In hindsight there are many contexts that shape a new understanding.  Fired FBI Director James Comey ran a corrupt and heavily political organization. He himself helped to shape the politics of it.

On Comey’s watch he allowed the FBI to become a weaponized tool against political enemies.   The upper-level officials within the FBI are now under scrutiny as their actions are increasingly transparent in their political motives.  With James Comey sitting in the sunlight, I doubt there is a more apropos example for the value of hindsight-review than to visit the 2016 writing of Benjamin Wittes.

Mr. Wittes is a close personal friend of Mr. Comey, and was the go-between used by Director Comey to leak information to the media, and specifically to the New York Times.

Three days after the FBI secured the FISA “Title-1” surveillance authority over former Trump campaign official Carter Page (using the Clinton-Steele Dossier), Benjamin Wittes wrote a column in his blog titled: “What if Trump Wins” – “We need an insurance Policy“.

Excerpt:

October 24th, 2016 […]  The point is that there is no reason at this stage to imagine that the legislature will be a viable venue for push-back, which is a shame considering the powerful set of tools at its disposal.

The Coalition of All Democratic Forces should certainly see what kind of use it might make of the legislature, but realistically, we should probably expect that the coalition’s job in Congress will be to prevent Trump from passing anti-democratic legislation. That is, the task in Congress will be a negative one of denying Trump the use of the Article I powers, not the positive one of the coalition’s using them itself.

That leaves the tool that will certainly be available: the courts. The courts have a few obvious advantages, starting with hundreds of independent judges of both parties whom Trump cannot remove from office and who don’t have to face his supporters in forthcoming elections.  (read more)

I strongly suggest everyone go back and read the entire October 24th, 2016 article written by James Comey’s close friend. –SEE HERE– While you are reading it remind yourself of what has taken place in the fourteen months since President Trump did actually win the election.

Compare the writing of Benjamin Wittes to the actions taken by the DOJ, the FBI, James Comey and every participant inside the enterprise.

With hindsight applied, that October 24th 2016 outline could be considered a road-map for how the DOJ and FBI intelligence apparatus, specifically the “small group” within it, conspired to carry out exactly what Wittes was suggesting.

Even the “insurance policy” language used by Comey’s friend strikes a familiar cord.

No doubt about it… the removal of a democratically elected President Donald J Trump was “their plan” all along.  Transparently planned and openly discussed prior to the election.

.

.

Another longtime FBI official quits today. According to Fox News Catherine Herridge reporting, FBI Asst. Director Michael Kortan (aka text message “Mike”), the head of the FBI Public Affairs Office, has announced he is retiring.

Mike Kortan was previously exposed by FBI Agent Peter Strozok as having specific information that the investigation into Hillary Clinton was manipulated by the “small group”. “Mike’s”  job was to sell the ruse as a valid investigation.

WASHINGTON – The longtime head of public affairs at the FBI — who was a confidant of former director James Comey — is planning to retire, Fox News has learned.

A notice went out this week for a retirement get-together for Michael Kortan scheduled for Feb. 15. Since 2009, Kortan has served as assistant director for public affairs, an influential job that controlled media access. He also served under former director Robert Mueller, now leading the Russia probe.

The FBI confirmed to Fox News that Kortan is retiring.

It’s unclear whether the retirement was long-planned or in any way precipitated by recent events. The FBI emphasized he was finishing 33 years of service. (read more)

Boy-o-boy this prior Peter Strzok tweet, as read by Bob Goodlatte on January 25th, is striking a nerve:

“Jim”, aka James Baker (FBI Chief Legal Counsel) was removed in January.
“Mike” aka Michael Kortan (FBI Asst. Director Public Affairs) quits today.
“Dave” aka David Bowdich (Assoc. Dep. Director of FBI)
“Trisha” aka Trish Beth Anderson (Office of Legal Counsel, FBI)

At first, the context behind the September 10th, 2016, message was elusive, however it is now clear.

On September 2nd, 2016, during the (pre-election) apex of the FBI providing the documents behind their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of her personal email, and the subsequent decision by FBI Director James Comey not to pursue criminal charges therein, the FBI released their investigative files:

September 2nd, 2016 FBI Press Release:

“Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter.

We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI’s electronic FOIA library.” (link)

The FBI was under pressure to release their investigative documents.  On Sept 2nd, 2016 the release included the FBI investigative notes (FD-302’s) from the questions and answers during Hillary Clinton’s interview.  This investigative release was big news at the time.

The 302’s are the specific FBI forms used to document interviews/interrogations. They detail questions asked and answers given as well as who was present during the interview.

Inside the September 2nd, 2016, FBI release were two files:

•One file was 47 pages (full pdf here) and includes a full summary of the Clinton email investigation.

•The second file is 11 pages (full pdf here) and is the actual FBI investigator notes during the Hillary Clinton interview.

This second file is the “FD-302” (embed at the bottom for reference).  This is the 302 file FBI Agent Peter Strzok is referencing in the text message to Lisa Page.  Remember, Peter Strzok was one of the FBI people who actually interviewed Hillary Clinton.

What FBI Agent Peter Strzok is admitting in the September 10th text message, is that there are details within the interview of Hillary Clinton that he (and others) intentionally withheld from the September 2nd, 2016, release.

Specifically, evidence withheld in the 302’s would be some of the FBI questions and some of the Hillary Clinton answers to those questions.   In essence, the FBI held back actually releasing the full account of the interview.

According to the Strzok text message, the reason for withholding some of the details of the Hillary Clinton interview is because there are “very INFLAMMATORY things” within it; and once congress finds out what was withheld the details will “absolutely inflame” them.

Peter Strzok then goes on to say when/if the full FOIA is released, presumably post-election, Jim, Trisha, Dave and Mike are going to have to figure out how to deal with the discrepancy:

…”I’m sure Jim and Trisha and Dave and Mike are all considering how things like that will play out as they talk among themselves.”

“Jim” is likely James Baker, the Chief Legal Counsel for FBI Director James Comey.

“Trish” is likely Trisha Beth Anderson, Office of Legal Counsel for the FBI.  [Anderson was hired for the DOJ, by AG Eric Holder, from Eric Holder’s law firm.]

“Dave” is likely David Bowdich, Associate Deputy Director of FBI

and “Mike” is Michael P Kortan FBI Asst. Director, Office of Public Affairs.

So it would appear, James Baker and Trisha Anderson, the legal advisers at the top of the FBI leadership apparatus, were both aware the September 2nd, 2016, FOIA release was manipulated to conceal part of Hillary Clinton’s questions and answers.

Perhaps now we can better understand the importance of this specific text message as it was released by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte.

This message by Strzok shows a team of FBI officials intentionally conspiring to withhold “inflammatory” Clinton investigation evidence, from congress. And the decision-making goes directly to the very top leadership within the FBI.

Peter Strzok justifies his knowledge of the intentionally withheld 302 interview material by claiming: “because they weren’t relevant to understanding the focus of the investigation”.  However, to evaluate the filter this investigative team are applying we only need to look at the wording of their public release which accompanied the material:

Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. (link)

They felt obligated only to release information about “classified” or “improperly stored or transmitted” information.   That’s a rather disingenuous investigation.

There’s no mention of any FBI intent to investigate action or conduct undertaken by Hillary Clinton or her team to hide the use of classified or improperly stored information; or any intent to look at a cover-up, scrubbing, or conduct that happened AFTER it was discovered that she unlawfully used a personal e-mail server during her tenure.

We can see from the wording of the FBI public release, and the overlay of the text message from interviewer Peter Strzok, a deliberate effort to inquire into only the surface issues of classified information transmission and storage.  There was no investigative intent to go beyond that, and no information released, intentionally, that might disclose any larger issues.

If the FBI was legitimately conducting an investigation, and providing the subsequent evidence from within that investigation,  the FOIA would include all material relevant to the investigation, which would include all 302 (essentially Q&A) pages. However, the set of questions and answers the FBI released on Sept. 2nd 2016 was not the full set of Questions and Answers. They withheld something, likely “inflammatory”, per FBI Agent Strzok.

FBI Agent Peter Strzok is outlining in this text message a deliberate intent to shape the Clinton interview, and then a deliberative process of filtering out only those aspects of the interview that would support their pre-determined outcome, delivered only days later.

Additionally, FBI Agent Strzok is admitting that a group of FBI officials including himself, James Baker, Trisha Anderson, Lisa Page, and likely others (McCabe, Comey) conspired together to intentionally withhold  information -derived from this interview- from congress and the American people.

REFERENCE and RESOURCES:

• FBI September 2nd, 2016, Press Release HERE
• FBI Investigative Outline released September 2nd, 2016, HERE
• FBI Investigators Notes (302’s) as Released Sept., 2nd, 2016, HERE
• Chairman Bob Goodlatte Interview Video – HERE
• September 2nd, 2016, CTH Article Discussing FBI Release HERE

File #1 of Document release – Investigation Summary:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/322860635/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-HWBLlhbfv51rhuuPdJ8r

File #2 – The Summary of Interview – The 302’s:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/322860731/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-u0DDwNVYNippWK8p67Xs

.