Against the backdrop of all things DC swamp, this move was entirely predictable.  No-one takes over as chair of the SSCI without senate leadership having (blackmail) material on the appointee to have full control over their activity.  Marco Rubio is fully compromised.

Today Mitch McConnell announces that Senator Marco Rubio will replace Richard Burr as chairman of the notoriously corrupt Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI):

MITCH McCONNELL – “I am glad to announce that Senator Marco Rubio has accepted my invitation to serve as Acting Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

“The senior senator for Florida is a talented and experienced Senate leader with expertise in foreign affairs and national security matters. Senator Rubio was the natural choice for this temporary assignment on the basis of accumulated committee service. His proven leadership on pertinent issues only made the decision easier.

“Senator Rubio has spent a decade as a leading member on the Intelligence and Foreign Relations Committees. His care for our nation’s security, advocacy for our values and interests, and vigilance toward threats have earned a national reputation. On subjects ranging from China and Russia to Iran and North Korea to tyranny and unrest in our own hemisphere, Senator Rubio has been on the case for years.

“By and large, our nation’s intelligence professionals are dedicated, hard-working men and women who counter foreign threats and keep Americans safe. They deserve all the resources and support Congress can provide. But as recent years have made painfully clear with respect to federal law enforcement, we also need proactive leadership from within and thorough oversight from Congress to keep partisan bias and political interference out of these sensitive activities.

“I appreciate the Acting Chairman’s commitment to lead on all these fronts during this temporary assignment — to help ensure the intelligence community stays ahead of our adversaries, out of politics, and out of the press.” (link)

To understand numerous layers within the overall dynamic it is important to remember Rubio was a never-Trumper.  Nikki Haley, Trey Gowdy and Marco Rubio formed the trio of GOPe advocates to defend the interests of the deep state during campaign 2016.  The original opposition research into Trump by Fusion-GPS came as an outcome of Rubio supporters initiating and funding the research.  That effort evolved into the Steele Dossier after team Rubio dropped funding in March 2016; and the Clinton campaign took over.

There has long been an open secret within DC that Rubio was a compromised individual and there was/is a considerable amount of blackmail material known about him.

As a result of the FBI investigation into SSCI leaks by security director James Wolfe, covert communications in the spring of 2017 between SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner and Christopher Steele were discovered.

Six months after Warner was conspiring with Christopher Steele… (in October of 2017), the FBI questioned Senator Warner’s staff and requested the messaging information.

Mark Warner’s efforts with Chris Steele were February through May 2017.  Warner waited until he was caught, then told the committee about his “no paper trail” attempts to coordinate with Steele in October 2017.  The contacts and text messages were later made public in February 2018.

As soon as the covert SSCI communications surfaced (Feb ’18); which were part of the overall committee effort to remove President Trump; chairman Richard Burr and Marco Rubio provided cover by claiming Warner was honest with them in October 2017.

The committee was notified in October 2017, yet not a single member of the SSCI (R or D) demanded Vice-Chairman Mark Warner make an immediate, full and public disclosure of the VERY SERIOUS conflict he engaged in.  Instead the committee waited until after the covert communication was public in February 2018 and then Burr and Rubio defended Warner.

The SSCI is the enabler for a weaponized intelligence apparatus.  McConnell appointing Marco Rubio to the position of acting chair of the committee is simply more swamp defensive positioning.

That’s the larger backdrop to frame this recent tweet by President Trump:

When you peel back all of the layers of the ‘remove trump’ effort; and when you overlay those efforts in individual pieces to see the ramifications in 2020; it is clear one of the biggest scandals continues to revolve around the SSCI and the failure of the DOJ to prosecute James Wolfe for the leak.

Once the Dept. of Justice Wolfe decision was made… it set into action a chain of events that continues to go forward to today.  It’s like the old saying about once you tell a lie you have to tell another lie to cover the original lie; and then another lie to cover the lie about the original lie; and the sequence continues….

This is so far outside the bounds of traditional judicial activity it is unprecedented.  In the case against Michael Flynn the court appointed amicus curiae, essentially a court appointed outside lawyer enlisted to prosecute the case despite the DOJ withdrawal motion, John Gleeson has now filed a motion requesting: (1) a briefing schedule, (2) oral arguments; and (3) the possibility of interviewing witnesses.

Within Mr. Gleeson’s motion (link here) he will file his amicus brief on June 10th, and asks Judge Sullivan to set up a briefing schedule and allow him to make oral arguments.

Why would John Gleeson get the chance for a hearing to make an oral argument within the court, yet Flynn’s defense team couldn’t get a hearing scheduled on his original motion to withdraw his plea?  This is ridiculous.

In the traditional sense, to the extent that traditional applications can be considered in this bizarre situation, the amicus would present a written briefing to the court for the judge to consider; and that’s it.   However, Mr. Gleeson appears to be requesting his amicus status to be elevated to the position of intervening authority where he replaces the prosecution.

A request for a briefing schedule?  The only purpose of Judge Sullivan allowing a briefing schedule would be to drag this case out as long as possible.  Perhaps that is the goal; we shall see in his decision on this ridiculous request.

“Any additional factual development” would seem to imply Mr. Gleeson is planning to spend time investigating facts that are not currently before the court; including the possibility of Mr. Gleeson interviewing witnesses.

If Judge Emett Sullivan grants anything even close to the requests within this motion he will be operating so far outside of judicial boundaries an appellate court must intervene.

Seriously, this is Lawfare madness in the extreme.

During a press conference to outline new evidence in the Pensacola terror case, Attorney General William Barr coordinated a pre-staged question from the media. Responding to a question about President Trump’s tweets the AG said: based on his knowledge of the Durham probe so far, he does not expect the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into former President Barack Obama or Vice President Joe Biden.

Curiously within the statement Bill Barr notes: “what happened to the president during the 2016 election and throughout the first two years of his administration was abhorrent”, within that statement he is now saying the activity by special counsel Mueller was part of the “grave injustice”.

.

Full Presser below:

.

Representative Doug Collins of Georgia appears for an interview with Maria Bartiromo to discuss holding China accountable and the ongoing revelations surrounding the Obama administration targeting of Michael Flynn and President Trump.

More than a week after CBS first constructed their editorial narrative they finally released the full interview between Catherine Herridge and AG Bill Barr.  Many people read the transcript; however, thankfully Michael Sheridan excerpts a portion of the video that doesn’t come across in the transcript.

When the attorney general is questioned about “still having confidence” in FBI Director Christopher Wray, a newly articulated hesitancy is visible that doesn’t come across in the transcript. WATCH:

.

Since February 2019 Bill Barr has been a staunch and very public defender of Chris Wray. However, with new revelations about recent FBI efforts to block the release of information as it relates to Michael Flynn, it now appears the AG has less confidence.

This shift is important because as the public have a renewed focused on the question of who illegally leaked Flynn’s communication with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, there has always been a rather curious contrast issue with the known classified intelligence leaking of James Wolfe.  If finding Flynn’s leaker is important then why didn’t the DOJ/FBI take action when they found a classified intelligence leaker in 2018?

The position of Bill Barr today is a direct result of decisions made by the DOJ and FBI in the Fall of 2017 & Summer of 2018. The events surrounding the leaking of the FISA warrant used against U.S. person Carter Page, and the 2018 DOJ decision not to prosecute SSCI Security Director James Wolfe for those leaks.

The Summer of 2018 was the fork in the road for the DOJ and FBI.

Attorney General Jeff Session was recused, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein was in charge and the Mueller investigation was ongoing. That was when the DOJ made a decision not to prosecute Wolfe for leaking classified information. DC U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu signed-off on a plea deal where Wolfe plead guilty to only a single count of lying to the FBI.

If the DOJ had pursued the case against Wolfe for leaking the FISA application, everything would have been different.  The American electorate would have seen evidence of what was taking place in the background effort to remove President Trump. We would be in an entirely different place today if that prosecution or trial had taken place.

Three 2018 events revealed the Wolfe issue:

EVENT ONE – On February 9th, 2018, the media reported on text messages from 2017 between Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Mark Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer, a lobbyist named Adam Waldman.

EVENT TWO – Four months after the Mark Warner texts were made public, on June 8th, 2018, another headline story surfaced.  An indictment for Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Security Director James Wolfe was unsealed on June 7th, 2018.

EVENT THREE – Slightly less than two months after release of the Wolfe indictment, another headline story.  On July 21st, 2018, the DOJ/FBI declassified and publicly released the FISA application(s) used against former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.

♦ Later on December 14th 2018 a fourth albeit buried public release confirmed everything.  The FBI filed a sentencing recommendation proving it was the Carter Page FISA that was leaked by Wolfe:

A prosecution of Wolfe would have exposed a complicit conspiracy between corrupt U.S. intelligence actors and the United States senate (SSCI). Two branches of government essentially working on one objective; the removal of a sitting president. The DOJ decision not to prosecute Wolfe for leaking the classified FISA application protected multiple U.S. agencies and congress.

In 2018 DAG Rod Rosenstein could not prosecute James Wolfe without exposing ‘seditious‘ activity within the U.S. government itself.  Not pretend sedition or theoretical sedition, but an actual pre-planned subversive operation with forethought and malice.

The 2018 decision in the Wolfe case is critical. That’s the fork in the road. If the Wolfe prosecution had continued it would have undoubtedly surfaced that key government officials and politicians were working together (executive and legislative).

Additionally, amid a series of documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee [SEE HERE] there is a rather alarming letter from the DOJ to the FISA Court in July 2018 that points toward another institutional cover-up.   [Link to Letter]

In the cover letter for this specific release to the Senate Judiciary and Senate Intelligence committees, the DOJ cites the January 7, 2020, FISA court order:

Keep in mind that prior to this release only the FISA court had seen this letter from the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD).  As we walk through the alarming content of this letter I think you’ll identify the motive behind the FISC order to release it.

First, the letter in question was sent by the DOJ-NSD to the FISA Court on July 12, 2018.  It is critical to keep the date of the letter in mind as we review the content.

Aside from the date the important part of the first page is the motive for sending it. The DOJ is telling the court in July 2018: based on what they know the FISA application still contains “sufficient predication for the Court to have found probable cause” to approve the application.   The DOJ is defending the Carter Page FISA application as still valid.

However, it is within the justification of the application that alarm bells are found. On page six the letter identifies the primary participants behind the FISA redactions:

As you can see: Christopher Steele is noted as “Source #1”.  Glenn Simpson of Fusion-GPS is noted as “identified U.S. person” or “business associate”; and Perkins Coie is the “U.S-based law firm.”

Now things get very interesting.

On page #8 when discussing Christopher Steele’s sub-source, the DOJ notes the FBI found him to be truthful and cooperative.

This is an incredibly misleading statement to the FISA court because what the letter doesn’t say is that 18-months earlier the sub-source, also known in the IG report as the “primary sub-source”, informed the FBI that the material attributed to him in the dossier was essentially junk.

Let’s look at how the IG report frames the primary sub-source, and specifically notice the FBI contact and questioning took place in January 2017 (we now know that date to be January 12, 2017):

Those interviews with Steele’s primary sub-source took place in January, March and May of 2017; and clearly the sub-source debunked the content of the dossier itself.

Those interviews were 18-months, 16-months and 14-months ahead of the July 2018DOJ letter to the FISC.   The DOJ-NSD says the sub-source was “truthful and cooperative” but the DOJ doesn’t tell the court the content of the truthfulness and cooperation.  Why?

Keep in mind this letter to the court was written by AAG John Demers in July 2018.  Jeff Sessions was Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein was Deputy AG; Christopher Wray was FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy, and Dana Boente is FBI chief-legal-counsel.

Why would the DOJ-NSD not be forthcoming with the FISA court about the primary sub-source?  This level of disingenuous withholding of information speaks to an institutional motive.

By July 2018 the DOJ clearly knew the dossier was full of fabrications, yet they withheld that information from the court and said the predicate was still valid.  Why?

It doesn’t take a deep-weeds-walker to identify the DOJ motive.

In July 2018 Robert Mueller’s investigation was at its apex.

This letter justifying the application and claiming the current information would still be a valid predicate therein, speaks to the 2018 DOJ needing to retain the validity of the FISA warrant…. My research suspicion is that the DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller had already extracted from the fraudulent FISA authority.  That’s the motive.

In July 2018 if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were fatally flawed Robert Mueller would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a result of its exploitation.  The DOJ in 2018 was protecting Mueller’s poisoned fruit.

If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there’s a strong possibility some, perhaps much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated… and cases were pending.  The solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid.

This is not simply a hunch, because that motive also speaks to why the FISC would order the current DOJ to release the letter.

Remember, in December the FISC received the IG Horowitz report; and they would have immediately noted the disparity between what IG Horowitz outlined about the FBI investigating Steele’s sub-source, as contrast against what the DOJ told them in July 2018.

The DOJ letter is a transparent misrepresentation when compared to the information in the Horowitz report. Hence, the court orders the DOJ to release the July letter so that everyone, including congressional oversight and the public can see the misrepresentation.

The court was misled; now everyone can see it.

The content of that DOJ-NSD letter, and the subsequent disparity, points to an institutional decision in 2018; and as a consequence the FISC ordered the DOJ to begin an immediate sequestration effort in January 2020 to find all the evidence from the fraudulent FISA application.  The proverbial fruit from the poisonous tree…. And yes, that is ongoing.

Thus ample reason for Attorney General Bill Barr to reevaluate any confidence in FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Two more big misstatements within the July 2018 letter appear on page #9.  The first is the DOJ claiming that only after the application was filed did they become aware of Christopher Steele working for Fusion-GPS and knowing his intent was to create opposition research for the Hillary Clinton campaign.  See the top of the page.

According to the DOJ-NSD claim the number four ranking official in the DOJ, Bruce Ohr, never told them he was acting as a conduit for Christopher Steele to the FBI.   While that claim is hard to believe, in essence what the DOJ-NSD is saying in that paragraph is that the FBI hoodwinked the DOJ-NSD by not telling them where the information for the FISA application was coming from.  The DOJ, via John Demers, is blaming the FBI.

The second statement, equally as incredulous, is at the bottom of page nine where the DOJ claims they had no idea Bruce Ohr was talking to the FBI throughout the entire time any of the FISA applications were being submitted.  October 2016 through June 2017.

In essence the claim there is that Bruce Ohr was working with the FBI and never told anyone in the DOJ throughout 2016 and all the way past June 29th of 2017.  That denial seems rather unlikely; however, once again the DOJ-NSD is putting the FBI in the crosshairs and claiming they knew nothing about the information pipeline.

Bruce Ohr, whose wife was working for Fusion-GPS and assisting Christopher Steele with information, was interviewed by the FBI over a dozen times as he communicated with Steele and fed his information to the FBI.  Yet the DOJ claims they knew nothing about it.

Again, just keep in mind this claim by the DOJ-NSD is being made in July 2018, six months after Bruce Ohr was demoted twice (December 2017 and January 2018).  If what the DOJ is saying is true, well, the FBI was completely off-the-rails and rogue.

Neither option speaks well about the integrity of either institution; and quite frankly I don’t buy the DOJ-NSD spin.  Why?  The reason is simple, the DOJ is claiming in the letter the predication was still valid… if the DOJ-NSD genuinely didn’t know about the FBI manipulation, they would be informing the court in 2018 the DOJ no longer supported the FISA application due to new information.  They did not do that.  Instead, in July 2018, they specifically told the court the predicate was valid, yet the DOJ-NSD knew it was not.

The last point about the July 2018 letter is perhaps the most jarring.  Again, keep in mind when it was written Chris Wray is FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy and Dana Boente is FBI chief legal counsel.

Their own FBI reports, by three different INSD and IG investigations; had turned up seriously alarming evidence going back to the early 2017 time-frame; the results of which ultimately led to the DC FBI office losing all of their top officials; and knowing the letter itself was full of misleading and false information about FBI knowledge in/around Christopher Steele; this particular sentence is alarming:

“The FBI has reviewed this letter and confirmed its factual accuracy?”

Really?

As we have just shared, the July 2018 letter itself is filled with factual inaccuracies, misstatements and intentional omissions.  So who exactly did the “reviewing”?

This declassification release raised more questions than any other in recent memory.

As we said at the time of the release, perhaps AG Bill Barr will now start asking some rather hard questions to FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Matt Taibbi writes a lengthy column calling out his colleagues for abandoning all pretense of civil liberties in an effort to ‘resist’ President Trump.

Within the column Taibbi walks-through the ridiculous Russia collusion story and notes the necessary use of the media pretending not to know what took place within the Obama administration; including what continues today in the prosecution of Flynn.

MATT TAIBBI – […] ” After Edward Snowden’s 2013 revelations about mass data collection, a series of internal investigations began showing officials were breaking rules against spying on specific Americans via this NSA program. Searches were conducted too often and without proper justification, and the results were shared with too many people, including private contractors. By October, 2016, the FISA court was declaring that systematic overuse of so-called “702” searches were a “very serious fourth Amendment issue.”

In later court documents it came out that the FBI conducted 3.1 million such searches in 2017 alone. As the Brennan Center put it, “almost certainly… the total number of U.S. person queries run by the FBI each year is well into the millions.”

Anyone who bothers to look back will find hints at how this program might have been misused. In late 2015, Obama officials bragged to the Wall Street Journalthey’d made use of FISA surveillance involving “Jewish-American groups” as well as “U.S. lawmakers” in congress, all because they wanted to more effectively “counter” Israeli opposition to Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran.  This is a long way from using surveillance to defuse terror plots or break up human trafficking rings.

I can understand not caring about the plight of Michael Flynn, but cases like this have turned erstwhile liberals – people who just a decade ago were marching in the streets over the civil liberties implications of Cheney’s War on Terror apparatus – into defenders of the spy state.  (READ MORE)

Maria Bartiromo broadcasts a taped interview with President Trump discussing the topic of Obamagate and how the IC, FBI and DOJ was weaponized against the Trump campaign and incoming administration.

This interview is interesting as to how much President Trump is aware of what took place.

.

During the Obama administration the NSA database was continually used to conduct surveillance. This is the critical point that leads to understanding the origin of “Spygate”, or “Obamagate” as it unfolded in the Spring and Summer of 2016.

Initially in December 2015 there were 17 republican candidates that all could be potential targets for political surveillance and opposition research. However, when Donald Trump won New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina the field was significantly whittled. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson remained.

On Super Tuesday, March 2, 2016, Donald Trump won seven states (VT, AR, VA, GA, AL, TN, MA) it was then clear that Trump was the GOP frontrunner with momentum to become the presumptive nominee. On March 5th, Trump won Kentucky and Louisiana; and on March 8th Trump won Michigan, Mississippi and Hawaii.

The next day, March 9th, NSA security alerts warned internal oversight personnel that something sketchy was going on.

This timing is not coincidental. As FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer later wrote in her report, “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.” Put another way: attributes belonging to a specific individual(s) were being targeted and queried, unlawfully. Given what was later discovered, it seems obvious the primary search target, over multiple date ranges, was Donald Trump.

There were tens-of-thousands of unauthorized search queries; and as Judge Collyer stated in her report, there is no reason to believe the 85% non compliant rate was any different from the abuse of the NSA database going back to 2012.

As you will see below the NSA database was how political surveillance was being conducted during Obama’s second term in office. However, when the system was flagged, and when NSA Director Mike Rogers shut down “contractor” access to the system, the system users needed to develop another way to get access.

Mike Rogers shuts down access on April 18, 2016. On April 19, 2016, Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson’s wife, Mary Jacoby visits the White House. Immediately thereafter, the DNC and Clinton campaign contract Fusion GPS… who then hire Christopher Steele.

Knowing it was federal “contractors”, outside government with access to the system, doing the unauthorized searches, the question becomes: who were the contractors?

The possibilities are quite vast. Essentially anyone the FBI or intelligence apparatus was using could have participated. Crowdstrike was a known FBI contractor; they were also contracted by the DNC. Shawn Henry was the former head of the FBI office in DC and is now the President of Crowdstrike Services; a rather dubious contractor for the government and a politically connected data security and forensic company.

Henry testified to congress that Crowdstrike was an FBI contractor providing intelligence:

Additionally, James Comey’s special friend Daniel Richman was an unpaid FBI “special employee” with security access to the database. Nellie Ohr began working for Fusion-GPS on the Trump project in November 2015 and she was a CIA contractor; and it’s entirely likely Glenn Simpson or people within his Fusion-GPS network were also contractors for the intelligence community.

Remember the Sharyl Attkisson computer intrusions? It’s all part of this same network; Attkisson even names Shawn Henry as a defendant in her ongoing lawsuit.

All of the aforementioned names, and so many more, held a political agenda in 2016.

It seems likely if the NSA flags were never triggered then the contracted system users would have continued exploiting the NSA database for political opposition research; which would then be funneled to the Clinton team. However, once the unauthorized flags were triggered, the system users (including those inside the official intelligence apparatus) needed to find another back-door to continue… Again, the timing becomes transparent.

Immediately after NSA flags were raised March 9th; the same intelligence agencies began using confidential human sources (CHS’s) to run into the Trump campaign. By activating intelligence assets like Joseph Mifsud and Stefan Halper the IC (CIA, FBI) and system users had now created an authorized way to continue the same political surveillance operations.

When Donald Trump hired Paul Manafort on March 28, 2016, it was a perfect scenario for those doing the surveillance. Manafort was a known entity to the FBI and was previously under investigation. Paul Manafort’s entry into the Trump orbit was perfect for Glenn Simpson to sell his prior research on Manafort as a Trump-Russia collusion script two weeks later.

The shift from “unauthorized exploitation of the NSA database” to legally authorized exploitation of the NSA database was now in place. This was how they continued the political surveillance. This is the confluence of events that originated “spygate”, or what officially blossomed into the FBI investigation known as “Crossfire Hurricane” on July 31.

If the NSA flags were never raised; and if Director Rogers had never initiated the compliance audit; and if the political contractors were never blocked from access to the database; they would never have needed to create a legal back-door, a justification to retain the surveillance. The political operatives/contractors would have just continued the targeted metadata exploitation.

Once they created the surveillance door, Fusion-GPS was then needed to get the FBI known commodity of Chris Steele activated as a pipeline. Into that pipeline all system users pushed opposition research.