It would appear that congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, in a thirst for media exposure, has officially decided to remove any remaining semblance of credibility.
After a series of political stunts intended to generate a far-left narrative for open borders, the loon from New York has officially gone bananas:
In addition to migrants having to drink from toilets, Ms. Cortez claims she was threatened to be raped by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials conducting a tour for a congressional delegation. However, according to Homeland Security journalist Anna Giaritelli none of this happened.
Factually, as reported, AOC began screaming during a U.S. Customs and Border Protection briefing and refused to tour the facilities. Even AOC’s most staunch supporters are having a difficult time defending their moonbat lightbringer on this one.
(WASHINGTON) New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez screamed at federal law enforcement agents “in a threatening manner” during a visit to a U.S. Border Patrol facility in El Paso, Texas, and refused to tour the facility, according to two people who witnessed the incident.
A group of 14 House Democrats, including Ocasio-Cortez, and their aides kicked off their visit to the region around 11 a.m. MT Monday at the El Paso Station on Hondo Pass Drive. The group was standing inside the station near an area where migrants are held when Ocasio-Cortez left them to sit inside a nearby holding area with a family as the other lawmakers and aides were briefed on station operations.
“She comes out screaming at our agents, right at the beginning [of the tour] … Crying and screaming and yelling,” said one witness who said he was stunned by the outburst in front of approximately 40 people. (more)
SCOOP: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., screamed at federal law enforcement agents “in a threatening manner” during a visit to a U.S. Border Patrol facility in El Paso, Texas, Monday afternoon and refused to tour the facility, according to two people who witnessed it.
Mike Morell was the Deputy CIA Director when President Obama and Hillary Clinton botched the joint 2011 CIA and State Department operation “Zero Footprint” in Libya.
“Zero Footprint” was the covert operation initiated by Secretary of State Clinton and CIA Director Leon Panetta. Director Panetta left the CIA just before the operation went sideways and resulted in the attack on the Benghazi State Dept./CIA annex September 11th, 2012. General David Petraeus was the new CIA Director when the Benghazi attack happened. Immediately, General Petraeus became a risk. [Deep Background]
After the Benghazi attack, the relationship between journalist Paula Broadwell and General Petraeus was used by ODNI James Clapper to remove the CIA Director.
Immediately after the election of 2012 CIA Director David Petraeus resigned (Nov 9th) and interim CIA Director Morrel took over. This is why Petraeus never testified about CIA operations to the Senate panel investigating Benghazi, Mike Morrel took his place.
Morrel’s job was to provide cover for the background operation (2010, Zero Footprint) where Obama, Clinton and Panetta provided covert weapons, including shoulder fired missiles, to Libyan “rebels”, aka Libyan al-Qaeda. AND Morrel’s second role was to cover for the extended CIA operation (2011-2012) where the CIA was buying back those missiles and shipping them into Syria for use overthrowing the Assad regime; the second operation was based out of the secret (at the time) State Dept/CIA facility in Benghazi.
Morrel was essentially the CIA narrative ‘fixer’. He was up to his eyeballs in the cover-up behind Benghazi 2012 and 2013. After Acting Deputy Morrel testified to congress about the CIA involvement around Benghazi, and the issues of terrorism vs. Islamic movie (happy squirrel chase) etc. Mike Morrel was replaced at the CIA by John Brennan.
To reward for services rendered, both Hillary Clinton and CBS immediately hired Mike Morrel. CBS News President David Rhodes -who hired Morrel- is the brother of the White House’s Ben Rhodes; who wrote the false ‘talking points’ about the You Tube video as motive for the Benghazi attack.
Morrel provided the cover for President Obama, Secretary Clinton, Director Panetta and all of the schemes surrounding the covert missile delivery to Libya, redistribution to Syria, and financing through Qatar.
Fast forward to today…. Now a CBS News senior national security contributor, Michael Morell appears with The Wilson Center’s Jean Lee to discuss the future of North Korean relations after President Trump’s historic meeting with Kim Jong Un.
Everything about this interview, including the narrative surrounding Kim Jong-Un, is pure CIA horsepucky…. all of it. Notice how Morell is reliant upon the affirmation of specific talking points on the page notes in front of him.
This is all part of one big con-job by over indulged institutionalists who have held court over Washington DC for years. Once you see the strings on the Marionettes, you just can’t watch the pantomime without seeing them.
.
All of the opposition to Donald Trump is one long continuum of self-interest and risk management.
Details are beginning to emerge about the agreement between Democrats and Robert Muller surrounding his closely constructed upcoming testimony.
The baseline here is very important. As we have outlined throughout, and especially since the Democrats won the mid-term election, the Mueller “team” is closely coordinating with the Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and Cummings group about how best to continue the efforts of the Weissmann and Mueller small group within the DOJ and FBI.
The connective tissue between House Democrats and the “Small Group” within the FBI (Weissmann and Mueller lead), is the Lawfare group. As noted in the text message between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok; and as noted in the hiring of former FBI legal counsel James Baker; and as noted in the Nadler and Schiff hiring of Lawfare members for their staff; the coordination between the seditious group (DOJ/FBI) and the politicians is crystal clear.
CTH advised everyone to pay close attention to the details in the agreements between Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and the corrupt team led by Robert Mueller. Everything they are doing is based on a coordinated plan between ideologues. The effort to remove President Trump is one long continuum… it has not stopped. The Mueller testimony is just another part of this process.
Here’s some of the transparently sketchy details as outlined by staff leaks to NBC. Remember, these legislative “staff members” are part of the Lawfare group (I cannot emphasize this enough):
WASHINGTON — After months of negotiations, former special counsel Robert Mueller has agreed to testify before the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees on July 17, but his willingness still comes with some parameters, according to a congressional aide with knowledge of the arrangement with Mueller’s office.
There will be two open sessions with Mueller and two closed sessions with his staff.
Pay attention to how these are being structured. Two open sessions with limited questions, and only one opportunity for questions by each member of the committee.
The House Judiciary Committee will have to choose which of its members are able to ask Mueller questions during its open session. Unlike the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Judiciary Committee is quite large, almost double in size, so only 22 of its 41 members will be present for the open session, the aide said.
The details of the agreement between the committees and Mueller’s office are still being worked out, a second congressional aide said, and could still change.
Judiciary Committee members who do not get to ask questions of Mueller will still be able to attend a closed session with Mueller’s staff following the open testimony, where they will be able to ask about material that was redacted from the public eye.
Notice the closed session without Mueller. This is with Andrew Weissmann and the key members of his investigative unit. This is the heart of the real corruption. Mueller is only the figurehead. Weissmann is the real lead, and the closed door session allows the Democrats to use the Weissmann testimony.
Each member of the Intelligence Committee will be able to ask Mueller questions for five minutes in the open session before following up in a similar closed session.
Limiting the exposure of Mueller is a way for Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler to mitigate the risk. Only one round of questions.
In the closed sessions, the Intelligence Committee will have access to the unredacted version of volume I of the Mueller report, which focuses on the question of collusion and conspiracy with the Russian government, while the Judiciary Committee will have access to the unredacted version of volume II, which focuses on obstruction of justice.
Nice trick here. Notice the closed door sessions are not classified. This is the way for Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler to get the material -the innuendo and suspicion- injected into their narrative.
The unredacted content will be discussed; that means all of the investigative pathways, including the maliciously corrupt false trails will be put into the discussion. AND the politicians are free to talk about any/all content of that discussion because it is not classified.
Neither committee will have access to any information that is redacted for purposes of protecting information provided to the grand jury.
Although there will be no transcript of the closed sessions, they are not considered classified, so members may discuss what they heard.
The first congressional aide said members of both committees will not be restricted in what they can ask Mueller, but they do expect he will largely stick to the information he provided in the report. (link)
Without a transcript, there will be no factual record of the testimony behind closed doors. This allows Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and staff to make any claim about the content, regardless of the level of falsity, and there’s no factual way for rebuttal. This is by purposeful design.
Again, the use of Robert Mueller is part of the soft-coup effort. Mueller was selected for this role by the internal DOJ and FBI group who carried out the investigation. The real scheming is by the team directly under Mueller; and Mueller gets to play the role of willfully blind to the scheme. Again, by design.
Mueller didn’t select his team; the pre-existing team of corrupt officials selected him.
Andrew McCabe and James Baker, were the two guys who put the pressure on Rosenstein to select Robert Mueller. James Comey, Andrew McCabe, James Baker, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, Sally Yates, Mary McCord, Mike Kortan, James Rybicki, Andrew Weissmann, David Laufman, John Carlin, and many more are all collectively connected to this effort.
Additionally, all those aforementioned individuals are connected to Benjamin Wittes and the Lawfare Group.
Not enough people understand the role of the Lawfare group in the corruption and political weaponization of the DOJ, FBI and larger intelligence community.
What Media Matters is to corrupt left-wing media, the Lawfare group is to the corrupt DOJ and FBI.
All of the headline names around the seditious conspiracy against Donald Trump assemble within the network of the Lawfare group.
Three days after the October 21st, 2016, FISA warrant was obtained, Benjamin Wittes outlined the insurance policy approach.
FBI Director James Comey, FBI Legal Counsel James Baker, Comey memo recipient Daniel Richman, Deputy AG Sally Yates, Comey friend Benjamin Wittes, FBI lead agent Peter Strzok, FBI counsel Lisa Page, Mueller lead Andrew Weissmann and the Mueller team of lawyers, all of them -and more- are connected to the Lawfare group; and this network provides the sounding board for all of the weaponized approaches, including the various new legal theories as outlined within the Weissmann-Mueller Report.
The Lawfare continuum is very simple. The corrupt 2015 Clinton exoneration; which became the corrupt 2016 DOJ/FBI Trump investigation; which became the corrupt 2017 DOJ/FBI Mueller probe; is currently the 2019 “impeachment” plan. Weissmann and Mueller delivering their report evolved the plan from corrupt legal theory into corrupt political targeting. Every phase within the continuum holds the same goal.
The current “impeachment strategy” is planned-out within the Lawfare group.
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.
Remember, Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller didn’t come into this process as an ‘outsider’, and Mueller didn’t select his team. The corrupt Lawfare team inside government (FBI Counsel James Baker, DOJ Deputy Andrew Weissmann, FBI Deputy McCabe etc.) already knew Mueller. The team had established personal and professional connections to Mueller, and they brought him in to lead the team.
When you realize that Robert Mueller didn’t select the team; rather the preexisting team selected their figurehead, Robert Mueller; then results make sense. Robert Mueller can never be allowed to testify to congress without extremely tight controls because if questioned Mueller actually has very little understanding of what took place.
A disconcerting aspect to the Lawfare dynamic is how current U.S. Attorney General William Barr has knowledge of this. Barr knows and understands how the Lawfare network operates. Barr is from this professional neighborhood. Like Mueller, Barr also knows these people.
“As a matter of law. In other words, we didn’t agree with the legal analysis- a lot of the legal analysis in the report. It did not reflect the views of the department. It was the views of a particular lawyer or lawyers“…
Under Eric Holder, Sally Yates, Loretta Lynch, Tom Perez, Robert Mueller, James Comey and Andrew McCabe, the focus of the DOJ and FBI became prismatic toward politics and tribalism. All of the hired senior lawyers and officials had to be aligned with the political intents of the offices.
[CIA Director John Brennan brought the same political goals to an intelligence apparatus that held a preexisting disposition of alignment, see Mike Morell: “I ran the CIA now I’m endorsing Hillary Clinton”.]
Their agencies were used against their ideological enemies in large operations like Fast-n-Furious, IRS targeting, Gibson Guitar etc. And also smaller operations: Henry Louis Gates, George Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, Ferguson, Baltimore etc. All of these activist Lawfare examples were pushed and promoted by an allied media.
Many of the ‘weaponized’ approaches use radical legal theory (ex. disparate impact), and that ties into the purposes and methods of the Lawfare Group. The intent of Lawfare is described in the name: to use Law as a tool in Warfare. The ideology that binds the group is the ideological outlook and purpose: using the legal system to target political opposition.
Alan Dershowitz appears with two panel members of the ‘Tick-Tock-Boom club’ to discuss the potential of Robert Mueller’s testimony.
.
On the issue of the May 16th, 2017, Mueller trip to the White House raised by ‘tick-tock’ chairman Greg Jarrett, his emphasis is on the wrong syllable.
If Mueller does appear before congress the substance of Mueller’s White House visit should be ignored, and his status within the visit should be the focus. Not to beat a dead horse, but the purpose of Rosenstein taking Mueller to the White House had nothing to do with Mueller as a candidate for FBI Director.
Congress needs to skip the BS, and get right to the heart of the issue. Here is five Minutes of rapid fire questions for Mueller on this subject:
♦On May 16, 2017, were you applying to become FBI Director?
♦Why did you go to the White House?
♦When did Rod Rosenstein contact you about going to the White House?
♦When did Rod Rosenstein first contact you about becoming special counsel?
♦Did you speak to any members of the DOJ or FBI prior to going to the White House?
♦Were there conversations about a possible ‘special counsel position’ prior to May 16th, 2017?
♦Were you aware President Trump was under investigation prior to your conversation of May 16th, with President Trump?
♦Were you aware of the nature of the investigation, prior to May 16, 2017?
♦Were you aware of the possibility of being appointed ‘special counsel’?
♦Did you take any recording devices into the Oval Office meeting?
♦Did you own the cell phone you left in the Oval Office on May 16, 2017?
♦Between the afternoon Oval Office meeting and the next day announcement to the Gang-of-Eight by Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe, when exactly did you agree to become special counsel?
♦How did Rod Rosenstein contact you between May 16, 2017 and early morning May 17, 2017, about becoming special counsel?
♦Did you immediately agree to become special counsel when asked?
♦How much time transpired between Rosenstein asking you to become special counsel and your acceptance of the position?
See where this line of questioning goes?
The dynamic here is pretty damned obvious.
There was less than 24 hours between the time Mueller and Rosenstein were in the Oval Office (May 16th), and the time Rosenstein told the Gang-of-Eight that Mueller was appointed Special Counsel (May 17th).
That’s not a lot of time for discussion and contemplation by Mueller. Yet, Rosenstein confirmed Mueller’s appointment to the Gang-of-Eight less than 24 hours after the oval office meeting.
So it stands to reason the first contact about the position happened prior to the May 16th Oval Office meeting. If accurate, Mueller was aware Trump was under investigation, AND Mueller was aware he could be special counsel to take over the investigation prior to the Oval Office meeting.
I’ll bet you a dozen donuts the entire purpose of the Oval Office meeting with Mueller was part of the FBI investigation…. and Mueller’s cell phone wasn’t actually Mueller’s cell phone… it was an FBI phone set up so that McCabe’s investigators could listen to the conversation with the target of the investigation, President Trump.
Occam’s Razor – A former FBI Director… meeting with the president of the United States… in the oval office…. in the middle of one of the more consequential time-periods in history… immediately after the firing of the former FBI Director… with family and a network of friends curious as to the outcome…. who is also communicating with the Deputy Attorney General… doesn’t *accidentally* leave his cell phone in the Oval Office.
That background allows people to absorb the intent and motivations of the Special Counsel investigation. How many people even know Robert Mueller interviewed President Donald Trump six days after the FBI launched a criminal “obstruction of justice” investigation, and ten months after the FBI launched the counterintelligence investigation….
..The May 16, 2017, Mueller meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office.
The Mueller Report shows there never was a Trump Russia-Collusion-Conspiracy case to begin with; and with the report showing how most of Mueller’s investigative time was spent gathering evidence for an ‘obstruction case’; and with new revelations from Andrew McCabe, John Dowd and Mueller officials overlayed on the previous Strzok/Page texts; we can now clearly reconcile the May 16th, 2017, meeting between President Trump, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller. Here’s how…
FBI Director James Comey was fired on Tuesday May 9th, 2017. According to his own admissions (NBC and CBS), Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe immediately began a criminal ‘obstruction’ investigation the next day, Wednesday May 10th; and he immediately enlisted Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
These McCabe statements line up with with text message conversations between FBI lawyer Lisa Page and FBI agent Peter Strzok – (same dates 5/9 and 5/10):
It now appears that important redaction is “POTUS” or “TRUMP”. [Yes, this is evidence that some unknown DOJ officials redacted information from these texts that would have pointed directly to the intents of the DOJ and FBI. [WARNING: Don’t get hung on it.]
The next day, Thursday May 11th, 2017, Andrew McCabe testifies to congress. With the Comey firing fresh in the headlines, Senator Marco Rubio asked McCabe: “has the dismissal of Mr. Comey in any way impeded, interrupted, stopped, or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigation, or any ongoing projects at the Federal Bureau of Investigation?”
McCabe responded: “So there has been no effort to impede our investigation to date. Quite simply put, sir, you cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.”
However, again referencing his own admissions, on Friday May 12th McCabe met with DAG Rod Rosenstein to discuss the issues, referencing the criminal ‘obstruction’ case McCabe had opened just two days before. According to McCabe:
… “[Rosenstein] asked for my thoughts about whether we needed a special counsel to oversee the Russia case. I said I thought it would help the investigation’s credibility. Later that day, I went to see Rosenstein again. This is the gist of what I said: I feel strongly that the investigation would be best served by having a special counsel.” (link)
Recap: Tuesday: Comey Fired; Wednesday: McCabe starts criminal ‘obstruction’ case; Thursday: McCabe testifies to congress “no effort to impede”; Friday: McCabe and Rosenstein discuss appointing a Special Counsel.
After the weekend, Monday May 15th, McCabe states he and Rosenstein conferred again about the Special Counsel approach. McCabe: “I brought the matter up with him again after the weekend.”
Now, overlaying what we know now that we did not know in 2018, to include the John Dowd interview and McCabe admissions, a very clear picture emerges.
On Tuesday May 16th, Rod Rosenstein takes Robert Mueller to the White House to talk with the target of the ‘obstruction’ criminal investigation, Donald Trump, under the ruse of bringing Mueller in for a meeting about becoming FBI Director.
Knowing McCabe launched a criminal obstruction investigation six days earlier (May 10th); and knowing Mueller was ineligible for the position of FBI Director; this “meeting” looks entirely different.
This meeting looks like an opportunity to gather evidence for the obstruction case.
Heck, perhaps this meeting was even recorded as part of the FBI investigation.
Remember the Rosenstein ‘wear a wire‘ debates? Well, did Rosenstein need to actually wear a wire, or did soon-to-be appointed Special Counsel Robert Mueller just carry the recording device into an undercover deposition?… Consider:
WASHINGTON – Andrew McCabe, the disgraced former acting FBI director, reveals in his new book that Robert Mueller temporarily left his cell phone behind after a meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office and that the phone “later had to be retrieved.”
McCabe did not explain why he included the detail in his book.
McCabe says that Mueller left the phone behind after Trump had interviewed Mueller as a potential candidate to replace James Comey as FBI director. The interview reportedly took place in the Oval Office just one day before Mueller had been appointed special counsel in the so-called Russia collusion case. (more)
Oh, I think I know why McCabe included the detail in his book… leverage.
In combination with the ‘wear a wire’ comments, McCabe’s stealth book note is a shot across the bow to Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller. Only the insider ‘small group’ would understand what McCabe is threatening. It’s a get out of jail free card that McCabe played to escape the clutches of the 2018 DC criminal referral.
McCabe telling Rosenstein: Don’t try to put yourself of a pedestal and act like you were not a direct participant in the investigation of President Trump; remember the May 16th, operation? And, guess what…. it looks like it worked.
[This would explain why DC U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu dropped the case against McCabe?]
The next day, Wednesday May 17th, 2017, Rod Rosenstein and Andrew McCabe go to brief the congressional “Gang-of-Eight”: Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, ¹Devin Nunes, Adam Schiff, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Richard Burr and Mark Warner.
… […] “On the afternoon of May 17, Rosenstein and I sat at the end of a long conference table in a secure room in the basement of the Capitol. We were there to brief the so-called Gang of Eight—the majority and minority leaders of the House and Senate and the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. Rosenstein had, I knew, made a decision to appoint a special counsel in the Russia case.”
[…] “After reminding the committee of how the investigation began, I told them of additional steps we had taken. Then Rod took over and announced that he had appointed a special counsel to pursue the Russia investigation, and that the special counsel was Robert Mueller.” (link)
Immediately following this May 17, 2017, Go8 briefing, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein notified the public of the special counsel appointment.
According to President Trump’s Attorney John Dowd, the White House was stunned by the decision. [Link] Coincidentally, AG Jeff Sessions was in the oval office for unrelated business when White House counsel Don McGahn came in and informed the group. Jeff Sessions immediately offered his resignation, and Sessions’ chief-of-staff Jody Hunt went back to the Main Justice office to ask Rosenstein what the hell was going on.
Now, with hindsight and full understanding of exactly what the purposes and intents were for Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein to bring Robert Mueller to the White House, revisit this video from June 2017:
.
The DOJ (Rosenstein) and FBI (McCabe) activity in coordination with the Robert Mueller team was always about the obstruction case from day one; heck, from even before Robert Mueller was appointed.
The totality of all primary effort has always been to protect the ruse of the Russia investigation by throwing out nonsense Russian indictments and keeping Manafort, Flynn and Papadopoulos (the original spygate targets) under control…. while the focus was on building the obstruction case against President Trump. Remember what FBI Agent Peter Strzok said:
…”you and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely, I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.”
Mueller’s investigative ‘small group’ were the people inside Main Justice (DOJ) and FBI headquarters who redacted the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages, and removed messages and communication antithetical to their goals.
As Devin Nunes outlined recently the Mueller team also kept key documents and information away from congress; stalled any effort to expose the unlawful aspects of “SpyGate’ and the fraudulent foundation behind the Carter Page FISA application; and undermined any adverse discoveries in the leak investigations (James Wolfe) writ large.
This investigative small group didn’t change when Mueller arrived, they just retooled the focus of their effort based on new leadership and new objectives. Those who created the Trump-Russia collusion/conspiracy case of 2016, evolved into creating the Trump obstructing justice case of 2017, 2018 and 2019.
Everything Mueller and Rosenstein were doing in late 2017 and throughout 2018 was intended to drag-out the Russia conspiracy narrative as long as possible, even though there was no actual Trump-Russia investigation taking place. The goal for the “small group” was to bury the risk by Democrats winning the 2018 mid-terms.
It was always the “obstruction” investigation that could lead to the desired result by Mueller’s team of taking down President Trump through evidence that would help Pelosi and Nadler achieve impeachment . The “obstruction case” was the entirety of the case they were trying to make from May 2017 through to March 2019.
All of the hostile DOJ and FBI action toward the people within the targeting of the investigation: Targeting Michael Flynn and Mike Flynn Jr; Paul Manafort’s early morning no-knock FBI raid; Michael Cohen’s FBI office raid; Roger Stone’s FBI and SWAT team raid; etc… All of it, was designed to provoke President Trump into taking action that would further fuel the ‘obstruction‘ case. It was all BAIT.
[¹] Now we know why House Speaker Paul Ryan moved to sideline Devin Nunes under the cloud of an ethics investigation.
Fox News contributor Dan Bongino and Fox News correspondent-at-large Geraldo Rivera respond to the latest news that Robert Mueller has agreed to testify to the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees on Wednesday, July 17th.
[Toward the end of the panel segment Mr. Bongino has some additional insight into the Michael Flynn situation]
Well, it looks like the gang has a plan… the details are sketchy, but the picture of the construction is visible. According to Adam Schiff, Robert Mueller has agreed to deliver congressional testimony to a “joint panel” of the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, on July 17th.
♦ First, to frame the narrative for the appearance, HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff releases a letter signed by *only* Nadler and Schiff, that “threatened” a subpoena. This subpoena letter is a prop for a pre-planned theatrical event. How do we know? Because only Schiff and Nadler signed it (no coordination with ranking members). It’s an optic to set the cornerstone for a narrative that Schiff and Nadler want Mueller’s appearance.
♦ Second, the joint committee approach is also part of the strategy. With 40 members from both committees there will intentionally only be ONE ROUND of questions. The size of the committee is part of the design to protect Robert Mueller. Those who follow politics closely will immediately note this motive.
Knowing Mueller was in deep discussions with Schiff and Nadler to coordinate the appearance, the optic of the letter and the size of the committee are the first two immediate flares that indicate a staged performance is being set-up.
Here’s the letter:
Three days ago CTH shared: “Shifty, Pelosi and Nadler have to be very careful with Mueller to avoid exposing the coordinated enterprise behind the two-year Rosenstein, Weissmann and Mueller scheme. It will be interesting to see how they plan it out.”
Now we have a little more information. Watch what details surface over the next few weeks; just like the letter and the joint committee issues, I guarantee you we’ll see the construct of a completely manufactured event.
Keep watching.
Adam Schiff
✔@RepAdamSchiff
Robert Mueller has agreed to testify before Congress pursuant to subpoena. Russia attacked our democracy to help Trump win. Trump welcomed and used that help. As Mueller said, that should concern every American. And now, every American will get to hear directly from Mueller.
In March 2017 CTH first highlighted statements by Evelyn Farkas that described a coordinated effort from within the Obama administration to push political opposition research, gathered by the intelligence community, into the media.
Jay Sekulow now discovers documents that highlight the Obama administration’s efforts in their last days in office. This effort backstops Farkas’s earlier statements. First, from Sekulow:
(Via Fox Op-ed) – Stunning new information just released by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) shows that the Obama administration stepped up efforts – just days before President Trump took office – to undermine Trump and his administration.
The ACLJ, where I serve as chief counsel, has obtained records that show the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, under Director James Clapper, eagerly pushed to get new procedures as part of an anti-Trump effort. The procedures increased access to raw signals intelligence before the conclusion of the Obama administration, just days before President Trump was inaugurated.
By greatly expanding access to classified information by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, the Obama administration paved the way for a shadow government to leak classified information – endangering our national security and severely jeopardizing the integrity and reputation of our critical national security apparatus – in an attempt to undermine President Trump.
The documents confirmed what we suspected: the Office of the Director of National Intelligence rushed to get the new “procedures signed by the Attorney General before the conclusion of this administration,” referring to the Obama administration.
The documents also reveal that Robert Litt, who worked in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, told the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense’s Director of Intelligence Strategy, Policy, & Integration: “Really want to get this done … and so does the Boss.” Presumably “the Boss” is a reference to Director Clapper.
And documents the ACLJ received that were produced by the National Security Agency show that NSA officials discussed that they “could have a signature from the AG as early as this week, certainly prior to the 20th of Jan.” In other words, certainly before President Trump’s inauguration. (more from Sekulow)
Overlay Sekulow’s January 2017 documents with the statements from Evelyn Farkas and a clear picture emerges. Here’s Farkas from March 28, 2017:
[TRANSCRIPT] “I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.”
“Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.”
“So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to [Democrat politicians].”
With the help of MSNBC, simultaneous to her admission of first-hand specific knowledge of the administration spying on candidate and president-elect Trump, Ms. Evelyn Farkas outed herself as the key source for a March 2017 New York Times report which discussed President Obama officials leaking classified information to media.
Considerable irony jumps to the forefront when you recognize, the New York Times tried on March 1st, 2017, to protect Evelyn Farkas as the source of their reporting by stating:
“More than a half-dozen current and former officials described various aspects of the effort to preserve and distribute the intelligence, and some said they were speaking to draw attention to the material and ensure proper investigation by Congress. All spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing classified information, nearly all of which remains secret.” (link)
One of the reasons why the Flynn legal situation is so interesting is not really because of Flynn himself; but rather because the Flynn situation is a likely example of President Obama’s surveillance network in operation.
Tenuous legal theories (Logan Act) and obscure laws (technical FARA violations) appear to have been exploited by DOJ administration officials, in close ideological alignment with the Lawfare Group. In association with overall Obama administration officials, the fellow travelers used the legal system to create a DC surveillance network.
At the 30,000 ft. level Obama’s surveillance network looks like this:
• White House identifies a target; •passes request to the DOJ National Security Division (middlemen); •who then use the auspices of possible FARA violations to pass the instructions to the FBI contractors; •who data-mine the NSA database.
•The FBI results are then passed back to the DOJ-NSD; •who weaponize the information for FISA applications (becomes legal cover); and •pass the authorized surveillance (spying) results back to the White House etc.
It’s a circle of surveillance activity that could encompass almost every politician in Washington DC as they network with foreign lobbyists and special interests.
Those warrants then permit surveillance and the unwitting targets can infect anyone they come into contact with.
Using this process unwitting targets would be carrying surveillance like an ebola virus, and the Obama administration would be monitoring almost everyone in Washington DC.
Throughout the weaponized process there’s an element of plausible deniability, and a tenuous legal justification to protect the participants. If questioned the first line of defense would be to assert National Security; and almost all of the activity would be considered “classified”.
Obviously the purposes and intents of the surveillance would be political. However, by using The Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA), there’s a useful legal cover story. Exploiting the NSA database also ties in neatly to this process. The database is how the FBI would get the evidence for the DOJ-NSD FISA applications.
Restrictions on Title III 4th amendment privacy protections are worked-around by using Title-1 national security claims; and conveniently everything around FISA is classified.
It is not coincidental that Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn were all charged or threatened with FARA violations. Additionally, in the one known FISA application Carter Page was called an “agent of a foreign government”.
Extending the legal theory into action, the Special Counsel, and particularly DOJ prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, can be viewed as simply charging forward with a pre-existing process all the special counsel participants were familiar with.
Michael Flynn is a case-study in the exact type of target this process would be perfect to ensnare. [Explained Here] Now, whether what’s left of Flynn’s case is enough to drag this political surveillance system into the sunlight is yet to be seen. However, as explained, this is why Flynn’s case is so interesting.
That said, here’s the status hearing from yesterday:
Per DOJ IG, FARA prosecutions are very rare. 7 in 50+ years.
The reason for this may be that the NSD has decided to focus on 18 USC 951.
Why Section 951? Because they can go after “political or non-political activities of agents under the control of foreign governments.”
Techno Fog@Techno_Fog
The NSD Officials say “a Section 951 case generally involves espionage-like or clandestine behavior… or a connection to an intelligence service”
Meanwhile, the FBI’s system “commingles both FARA and Section 951 cases.”
There’s no reason to prosecute FARA violations when the more robust Section 951 is available for intelligence collection.
Case in point: General Flynn.
Potential charge: Not FARA (618) but Section 951.
Techno Fog@Techno_Fog
Section 951 (foreign agent) would have been the tool used to gain a FISA warrant on Flynn – whether through the Turkey work or through the IC’s use of Halper.
This may also explain Judge Sullivan’s freak out over “treason” and Mueller’s mention of the Espionage Act re: Flynn.
E Jean Carrol made headlines recently with her rather bizarre and sketchy claims of a forced sexual encounter with Donald Trump in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room two decades ago. President Trump denies even knowing who she is…. but the media, well, you know…. OrangeManBad; so anything goes.
In addition to personifying an abject lack of credibility Ms. Carrol just imploded on CNN with Anderson Cooper, explaining her definition of rape is not sexual, nor doe it include sex. However, before getting to that recent development, a historic reference to Ms. Carrol is, well, weird.
(h/t BAXT3R) In 1995 E. Jean Carroll shares her unique perspectives on an Esquire article, “Do Women Love Men?” and discusses changing gender roles with Charlie Rose:
At this point it’s difficult to imagine anyone lending credibility to this claim. Then again, this is 2019, and the media is fraught with Trump Derangement Syndrome.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 