DNI John Ratcliffe has declassified the Appendix to the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA). [Source Document Here] The appendix known as “Annex A” was the material the FBI and CIA did not include in the body of the ICA; however, it was used to brief congress.  [NOTE: the document quality/clarity is very poor as released]

There was always suspicion that “Annex A” was the ridiculous claims by FBI source Christopher Steele; those suspicions are confirmed today.  The ICA was written in late December ’16 & early January 2017, and the purpose was to politicize intelligence by making outlandish claims of the Trump-Russia conspiracy the official position of the U.S intelligence apparatus (CIA, FBI, DOJ and NSA).

[Link to Original pdf]

The “Annex A” supporting the narrative was made out of claims by Christopher Steele. The two-page document is stunningly obtuse by design; and despite the FBI knowing the purpose of Christopher Steele, the Annex pretends not to know his agenda.

By keeping the ridiculous Steele claims in the annex the FBI was able to use the claims and yet afford themselves plausible deniability under the pretense of non-verification.  When James Comey briefed President Trump about the claims he pretended not to know the political intents of the information; and worse still, he covered-up that Clinton’s campaign had paid for the information.  A stunningly political move based on deception.

In many ways the refusal of the FBI, CIA and DOJ to admit their knowledge of the material from Chris Steele is the biggest example of how those same agencies were playing politics.   None of the Steele claims were based on actual evidence; everything was hearsay, gossip, innuendo and entirely made-up.  The agencies knew this and yet they pretended not to know the motives for the fraudulent intelligence.

As bad as it was to not clearly disclose to FISA court the Steele Dossier had been paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign, it was far worse to not disclose this to President-elect (and outgoing President) in the intelligence community assessment.

Deceptive and fraudulent official intelligence documents, purposefully designed to achieve a political agenda, outline a level of serious misconduct even beyond the fabricated claims within the Carter Page FISA application.

The release of this “Annex A” document shows something beyond the willfully blind intentions of James Comey and John Brennan, and speaks to an intentional effort to fabricate claims against the incoming administration on the weakest of possible grounds.

Our research previously outlined how the December 29th, 2016, Joint Analysis Report(JAR) on Russia Cyber Activity was a quickly compiled bunch of nonsense about Russian hacking.

The JAR was followed a week later by the January 7th, 2017, Intelligence Community Assessment. The ICA took the ridiculous construct of the JAR and then overlaid a political narrative that Russia was trying to help Donald Trump.

The ICA was the brain-trust of John Brennan, James Clapper and James Comey. While the majority of content was from the CIA, some of the content within the ICA was written by FBI Agent Peter Strzok who held a unique “insurance policy” interest in how the report could be utilized in 2017. NSA Director Mike Rogers would not sign up to the “high confidence” claims, likely because he saw through the political motives of the report.

(JUNE 2019 – New York Times) […] Mr. Barr wants to know more about the C.I.A. sources who helped inform its understanding of the details of the Russian interference campaign, an official has said. He also wants to better understand the intelligence that flowed from the C.I.A. to the F.B.I. in the summer of 2016.

During the final weeks of the Obama administration, the intelligence community released a declassified assessment that concluded that Mr. Putin ordered an influence campaign that “aspired to help” Mr. Trump’s electoral chances by damaging Mrs. Clinton’s. The C.I.A. and the F.B.I. reported they had high confidence in the conclusion. The National Security Agency, which conducts electronic surveillance, had a moderate degree of confidence. (read more)

Questioning the construct of the ICA is a smart direction to take for a review or investigation. By looking at the intelligence community work-product, it’s likely USAO John Durham will cut through a lot of the chatter and get to the heart of the intelligence motives.

Apparently John Durham is looking into just this aspect: Was the ICA document a politically engineered report stemming from within a corrupt intelligence network?

The importance of that question is rather large. All of the downstream claims about Russian activity, including the Russian indictments promoted by DAG Rod Rosenstein and the Mueller team, are centered around origination claims of illicit Russian activity outlined in the ICA.

If the ICA is a false political document…. then guess what?

Yep, the entire narrative from the JAR and ICA is part of a big fraud. [Which it is]

Information available as of 29 December 2016 was used in the preparation of this product.

Scope: This report includes an analytic assessment drafted and coordinated among The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and The National Security Agency (NSA), which draws on intelligence information collected and disseminated by those three agencies. It covers the motivation and scope of Moscow’s intentions regarding US elections and Moscow’s use of cyber tools and media campaigns to influence US public opinion. The assessment focuses on activities aimed at the 2016 US presidential election and draws on our understanding of previous Russian influence operations. When we use the term “we” it refers to an assessment by all three agencies.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Germany and former Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard “Ric” Grenell appears for a discussion with Lou Dobbs about the echo-chamber within Washington DC and the internecine relationship to the intelligence apparatus.

Ric Grenell makes a really good point when he connects how the DC political resistance would not attend the Trump inauguration, and how that same attitude just continued throughout.  President Trump’s outsider status made him a risk to the interests of the administrative state.  The DC system will not accept a ‘people’s president’, they demand approval authority permitting only one of their UniParty tribe.

.

• When Democrats won the White House in ’92 Republicans helped the transition.
• When Democrats lost the White House in ’00 they created chaos. They destroyed the telephones and computers, punched holes in the walls, spray painted and cut the furniture, and the Clinton’s even stole the furnishings down to the dishes.
• When Democrats won the White House in ’08 Republicans helped the transition.
• When Democrats lost the White House in ’16 they weaponized the intelligence apparatus to destroy the incoming administration. Leaked intelligence to the media; and unmasked incoming officials to create chaos and fabricate lies.

Notice a pattern?

The DC circuit court of appeals has oral arguments scheduled for this coming Friday as the DOJ and Flynn defense both request intervention.  In the interim the underlying case continues in Judge Emett Sullivan’s court.  Part of that underlying case activity was a request by Sullivan for an Amicus briefing by court appointed lawyer John Gleeson.

John Gleeson is essentially filling an assignment by the judge to assume the role of prosecutor and inform the court through an amicus briefing.  That brief was filed today [pdf available here and below].  Within the brief, and counter to the position of the DOJ with new information, Gleeson claims the predicate for the investigation of Flynn was valid and sets out to launch his argument from that foundation.

In essence Gleeson is defending the origin of Spygate/Obamagate and all the downstream consequences from that originating decision; one of those origination issues was an investigation of Michael Flynn; and one downstream consequence was an interview of Flynn under the guise of the dubious originating investigation authority.

Assuming the role of “Spygate” defender is an interesting effort by John Gleeson; considering that Gleeson should have little knowledge about new discoveries into the DOJ and FBI predication activity in 2016.  The discoveries by USAO John Durham (Spygate in total) and USAO Jeff Jensen (Flynn case specific) should be unknown to Gleeson as he attempts to frame his argument.

When you read the brief, it does make you wonder if Gleeson might be attempting to frame the current Flynn argument from the perspective of justifying the total Spygate operation. This approach would be of benefit to the corrupt DOJ and FBI small group who are viewed to have purposefully weaponized their agencies for political intents.  From that perspective Gleeson (Lawfare) would be using his Amicus role to build the small group defense.

By taking this approach Gleeson opens himself up to the collapse of his position, right out of the gate, if the valid predicate he is assuming does not exist.  Of course this assumes the DOJ might be willing to highlight the specifics on why the Gleeson predicate is invalid, in the counter to his Amicus brief.

The predicate is critical.  The DOJ has dropped the case specifically by saying the predicate to investigate General Michael Flynn was invalid; ergo all consequences from that corrupt investigation, including the questioning of Flynn on January 24, 2017, are materially and fundamentally flawed.   Gleeson must maintain the investigative predicate if he is to argue a false statement within the Flynn interview was a material lie.  This is a tenuous approach if Gleeson doesn’t know the most recent evidence that may have destroyed the predicate.

From that position John Gleeson then argues that Michael Flynn perjured himself in front of the court by admitting to a lie he now says did not take place.  Of course Gleeson omits any aspects to the plea being coerced under duress as the special counsel threatened his family (Flynn Jr.) with arrest if he didn’t take the plea.

Instead Gleeson’s argument is that Flynn’s guilty plea now represents a violation of law, perjury, because the defendant is now saying his guilt admission was false testimony.

Gleeson, argues Flynn should be punished at sentencing for lying about crime he was coerced to plead guilty to, and which he did not commit. Madness.

It’s an interesting read and there are likely several people who held interest in the careful way John Gleeson constructed his argument.  However, it may all be a moot point depending on the outcome of the DOJ DC circuit appeal, and the possibility the superior court may just tell Judge Sullivan to stop the games and accept the withdrawal.

Here’s the Amicus Filing:

.

Fox News with Bret Baier broadcasts the second segment of their interview with U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr.  The interview begins with a discussion of recent rioting and the activist groups who participated in looting, arson and attacks against police.

AG Barr notes the ‘spygate’ investigation into DOJ and FBI conduct so far indicates that for the first time in American history, the police and national security apparatus was used to spy on the Trump campaign.  Additionally, the AG cautions people not to read into the lack of indictments as the investigation remains ongoing.

Senator Lindsey Graham appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss last weeks testimony by former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein.  It remains clear that part of Graham’s purpose for discussing the FISA fraud and the Spygate operation is to enhance his reelection bid.

However, all of that said, the key point of this video is buried deep at 05:47: “I made a request to interview the case agent and the intel analyst, and there were two other people, who interviewed the [primary] sub-source for three days in January, again in March and again in May, they’re denying me the ability to do that, I’m going to keep working the system”…

Unfortunately Ms. Bartiromo did not catch the phrase “they are denying me the ability to do that”, and she never asked who “they” are.  The impression is the FBI is blocking Graham from interviewing the FBI investigators.  You decide.  WATCH:

Who is blocking the FBI from testifying?

Why hasn’t Agent Joe Pientka been made available by the FBI?

Who is “they” in the phrase: “they’re denying me the ability to do that”?

.

Senator Lindsey Graham appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss last weeks testimony by former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein.  It remains clear that part of Graham’s purpose for discussing the FISA fraud and the Spygate operation is to enhance his reelection bid.

However, all of that said, the key point of this video is buried deep at 05:47: “I made a request to interview the case agent and the intel analyst, and there were two other people, who interviewed the [primary] sub-source for three days in January, again in March and again in May, they’re denying me the ability to do that, I’m going to keep working the system”…

Unfortunately Ms. Bartiromo did not catch the phrase “they are denying me the ability to do that”, and she never asked who “they” are.  The impression is the FBI is blocking Graham from interviewing the FBI investigators.  You decide.  WATCH:

Who is blocking the FBI from testifying?

Why hasn’t Agent Joe Pientka been made available by the FBI?

Who is “they” in the phrase: “they’re denying me the ability to do that”?

.

A really good interview as Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report talks to Richard “Ric” Grenell (Former Acting Director of National Intelligence & Former US Ambassador to Germany) about the Deep State, President Trump, how tech is disrupting diplomacy with international partners and gives an insider’s look at how Antifa could be affected by President Trump.

Richard first gives an insider’s take on what exactly the “deep state” is. He shares how the DC elites make decisions for the rest of America while bearing little to no consequences for them. Richard discusses how Donald Trump has functioned as a disrupter to the way that Washington DC operates. Richard also discusses what Donald Trump refers to as Obamagate.

Richard gives an insider’s look at how Barack Obama and his administration weaponized intelligence agencies like the FBI, CIA, and NSA to investigate Michael Flynn using James Comey and how this led to Russiagate hysteria. Finally he discusses what tactics could be used to deal Antifa for their connection to the violent riots across the country.

General Michael Flynn’s defense counsel Sidney Powell calls-in to FBN for an interview with Jackie Deangelis to discuss the latest motions and briefs in the ongoing appeal to the DC Circuit Court for a writ of mandamus.

As Ms. Powell notes the oral arguments before the appeals court will take place a week from today.  WATCH: