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”.
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.
Sidney Powell is a lawyer doing stellar work as our nation’s number one MAGA lawyer. She has helped General Flynn with his case involving a politicized and corrupt Justice Department. Her book, “Licensed to Lie,” is must reading for all Americans. Sidney was kind enough to send us a signed copy and it’s riveting reading. She’s a very smart and courageous watchdog who has been doing a great job at exposing the corruption among ambitious, power-seeking federal prosecutors.
To begin, recall recently, after damning evidence surfaced of a corrupt FBI prosecution of an innocent 3-Star Star General, Fed Judge Emmet Sullivan was directed by the DOJ to vacate the conviction. The DOJ had already moved to drop the case. But instead, the Judge refused to reverse the plea deal and now acts like the entire matter is still a fair case. But why??
Question: Surprised the Judge overseeing Lt. Gen. Flynn’s Fed Prosecution isn’t angry at FBI shenanigans, but now doubles-down to save this half-aborted monster? Despite manifest problems with Gen. Flynn’s prosecution, Judge Emmet Sullivan might pursue perjury or contempt charges against Michael Flynn, apparently convinced defendant and family have not suffered enough.
So “contempt” is for Flynn’s “perjury” for admitting he lied to the Judge. Huh? Confused yet? Is it immaterial to Sullivan that Flynn was misled, did not receive Due Process, was menaced with a dead law, and threatened with jail and by family prosecutions? His FBI file was set aside when it was decided he answered honestly – before being reopened to slander Flynn and use this for propaganda purposes.
WHAT MOTIVATES JUDGE?
Some theories bouncing around the internet follow: Did Obama’s people contact this judge to stress how incredibly important it was to hang onto some element of the Russia Investigation as being ethical to protect the FBI and Intelligence community? Did the judge realize his failure to notice the contrived nature of this case would ruin his reputation for probity? Perhaps the judge is a true believer in the progressive wing of grievance leftism? Maybe the judge just doesn’t like military folks, or Flynn specifically and still thinks he is a sellout? Perhaps he accepts “progressive” politics, where adherence to pragmatism means that the outcome equals justice?!! Or maybe this is all more gas-lighting.
Obdurate refusal to cooperate leads to several disruptive decisions. Now what? Sadly, this will reinflate all pompous windbags who’ve spent 3 years lecturing us about how corrupt Trump’s staff is. But is there really a sound argument to convict Flynn for anything?
JUDGE GLEESON ARRIVES OPPOSED
Sullivan requested amicus briefs from any party. Further, Sullivan appointed former Fed Judge John Gleeson, to help on the DOJ’s request, ruling on the perjury charges. Gleeson judging Gen. Flynn is shocking, having just published an anti-Flynn screed. Wrote Gleeson, “Flynn’s guilt has already been adjudicated. So if the court finds dismissal would result in a miscarriage of justice, it can deny the motion, refuse to permit withdrawal of the guilty plea and proceed to sentencing.” But what if the court made a mistake, or if serious misconduct profoundly affecting the prosecution was exposed?
Does Gleeson’s choice expose liberalism’s worst error – conceit? Should the FBI prevail even in Due Process busting scenarios? There must be a rational reason for all the Trump hate which started with the FBI before he entered office. Maybe Trump imbalances what progressives feel is the natural order – leadership by Ivy League scions, as naturally socialist as philosophy professors.
LEFTISM’S INFLUENCE
Some might say the general problem with America is the shocking number of high officials across the nation whose values, thinking skills and habits are completely compromised by progressive fables – such as Marxism. And should you doubt Sullivan’s leftist passions, he once sent out an email to his entire federal email list for a Global Warming convention, then was taken to the woodshed for apparent open leftist ideology by the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals.
PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT
Whatever the story, Judge Sullivan still has an absolute duty to insure the US Federal Court does not perpetrate crimes or aid in the stripping of American citizens of their civil rights. This has nothing to do with personal feelings. And how does Sullivan square all of the dishonest elements of this prosecution? And the fact that Flynn was considered innocent until FBI “leadership” decided his case would be rewritten to make a prosecution? Whatever happened to Prosecutorial Misconduct?
The theory of prosecuting Gen. Flynn for perjury in a case where he suffered reckless bias, frame-ups and deceit by the FBI would, according to one blogger – be like charging a girl rent for her time spent in a closet where she was hiding from a convicted pedophile frantically kicking in doors to find her.
If an FBI agent is not conducting a formal, predicated, announced investigation of a suspect – how can a person be charged with lying to the authorities?
NATURAL LAW JUSTICE
Regarding rules which the Natural Law places on liberal democracy, John Finnis has written:
Deeper and more demanding than any constitutional or other legal limits on governments are the moral principles and norms which natural law theory considers to be principles and norms of reason, and which are limits, side-constraints, recognized in the conscientious deliberations of every decent person. The public responsibilities and authority of rulers do not exempt them from these limits:” no intentional killing of the innocent; no rape; no lies; no non-penal enslavement, and so forth. The reassertion of the truths that there are indeed such limits on government, and that they can well be articulated in the relatively modern language of truly inviolable rights (is essential). See Liberalism and Natural Law Theory, John Finnis.
But if Flynn’s conviction is upheld, the Fed Government will now stand for the proposition that regardless of how many rules or laws cops break for a conviction, it doesn’t matter. For as long as there is a guilty plea – even if the charge is based upon bogus charges emanating from casual comments made to government workers, not under oath – the state can always claim a victory.
The point here is that all rulers and judges are under a moral, higher law which does not allow hoax setup prosecutions and kangaroo courts. And that general fairness and common sense can never be set aside, even when members of the society pursue their ambitions for greater power. And so targeting Gen. Flynn to trick him into pleading guilty to embarrass Trump and punish the General for supposed past sins is nothing short of evil, which no leader is justified to pursue.
Earlier today President Trump was again ‘subtle as a brick through a window’ in a tweetrequesting the senate get serious in exposing Obamagate and the soft coup effort:
Unfortunately, due to the dynamics of the UniParty, Mitch McConnell is very unlikely to take any action to expose prior misconduct; it would be against McConnell’s interests.
The Senate was not a passive entity in the various hoaxes against President Trump. Factually, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and individual senators themselves, were active participants. As a result just like AG Barr knows any discussion of SSCI security director James Wolfe’s non prosecution would expose DOJ corruption, so too does Mitch McConnell know senate investigations would expose senate corruption in both parties.
Republican members like John McCain actively participated; and republican members like Richard Burr willfully allowed the framework to continue. Don’t forget it was Republican Senator Marco Rubio who first came to the defense of Democrat SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner when the covert communication with Chris Steele became evident.
In the big picture, the big ugly picture, republicans are just as complicit as democrats within all of the efforts to remove President Trump. To this day the GOP controlled Senate Intelligence Committee is still spitting out reports defending the previous administration and proclaiming the vast Russian election conspiracy is genuine and real (it isn’t).
CTH readers are not blind to the DC structure where republicans and democrats are two wings of the same bird. Co-dependent no more! This is the Last Refuge because we no longer allow ourselves to suffer from ‘battered conservative syndrome‘. On these pages we identify our republican abusers openly.
If ever President Trump was to go full wolverine on the corrupt GOP it would be the Big Ugly. Alas, we are familiar with the political dynamic and fully accept that Mitch McConnell would rather give leadership to Chuck Schumer than lose his power, influence and affluence.
Anxious Trump voters have been understandably frustrated by the lack of speed with which President Trump is able to force the MAGA agenda onto an unwilling DC political apparatus. However, once you understand the Uniparty agenda the scope of the challenge is much easier to see.
How did the House write a $3 trillion legislative spending package when the legislators were not even in Washington DC? Short version: they didn’t, the lobbyists did.
President Trump’s administration is adverse to the interests of the entire DC political system. It’s a big club, and he’s confronting it. Mitch McConnell has no incentive to help President Trump.
Remember…. Congress does not write laws or legislation, special interest groups do. Lobbyists are paid, some very well paid, to get politicians to go along with the need of the legislative group.
When you are voting for a Congressional Rep or a U.S. Senator you are not voting for a person who will write laws. Your rep only votes on legislation to approve or disapprove of constructs that are written by outside groups and sold to them through lobbyists who work for those outside groups.
While all of this is happening the same outside groups who write the laws are providing money for the campaigns of the politicians they need to pass them. This construct sets up the quid-pro-quo of influence, although much of it is fraught with plausible deniability.
This is the way legislation is created.
If our frame of reference is not established in this basic understanding we can often fall into the trap of viewing a politician, or political vote, through a false prism.
The modern origin of all legislative constructs is not within congress.
“we’ll have to pass the bill to, well, find out what is in the bill” etc. ~ Nancy Pelosi 2009
“We rely upon the stupidity of the American voter” ~ Johnathan Gruber 2011, 2012.
Once you understand this process you can understand how politicians get rich. Mitch McConnell is not going to disrupt this system.
When a House or Senate member becomes educated on the intent of the legislation, they have attended the sales pitch; and when they find out the likelihood of support for that legislation; they can then position their own (or their families) financial interests to benefit from the consequence of passage. It is a process similar to insider trading on Wall Street, except the trading is based on knowing who will benefit from a legislative passage.
The legislative construct passes from K-Street into the halls of congress through congressional committees. The law originates from the committee to the full House or Senate. Committee seats which vote on these bills are therefore more valuable to the lobbyists. Chairs of these committees are exponentially more valuable.
Now, think about this reality against the backdrop of the 2016 Presidential Election. Legislation is passed based on ideology. In the aftermath of the 2016 election the system within DC was not structurally set-up to receive a Donald Trump presidency.
If Hillary Clinton had won the election, her Oval Office desk would be filled with legislation passed by congress which she would have been signing. Heck, she’d have writer’s cramp from all of the special interest legislation, driven by special interest groups that supported her campaign, that would be flowing to her desk.
Why?
Simply because the authors of the legislation, the originating special interest and lobbying groups, were spending millions to fund her campaign. Hillary Clinton would be signing K-Street constructed special interest legislation to repay all of those donors/investors.
Congress would be fast-tracking the passage because the same interest groups also fund the members of congress.
President Donald Trump winning the election threw a monkey wrench into the entire DC system…. In early 2017 the modern legislative machine was frozen in place.
The “America First” policies represented by candidate Donald Trump were not within the legislative constructs coming from the K-Street authors of the legislation. There were no MAGA lobbyists waiting on Trump ideology to advance legislation based on America First objectives.
As a result of an empty feeder system, in early 2017 congress had no bills to advance because all of the myriad of bills and briefs written were not in line with President Trump policy. There was simply no entity within DC writing legislation that was in-line with President Trump’s America-First’ economic and foreign policy agenda.
Exactly the opposite was true. All of the DC legislative briefs and constructs were/are antithetical to Trump policy. There were hundreds of file boxes filled with thousands of legislative constructs that became worthless when Donald Trump won the election.
Those legislative constructs (briefs) representing tens of millions of dollars worth of time and influence were just sitting there piled up in boxes under desks and in closets amid K-Street and the congressional offices. Legislation needed to be in-line with an entire new political perspective, and there was no-one, no special interest or lobbying group, currently occupying DC office space with any interest in synergy with Trump policy.
Think about the larger ramifications within that truism. That is also why there was/is so much opposition.
No legislation provided by outside interests means no work for lobbyists who sell it. No work means no money. No money means no expense accounts. No expenses means politicians paying for their own indulgences etc.
Politicians were not happy without their indulgences, but the issue was actually bigger. No K-Street expenditures also means no personal benefit; and no opportunity to advance financial benefit from the insider trading system.
Without the ability to position personal wealth for benefit, why would a politician stay in office? The income of many long-term politicians on both Republican and Democrat sides of the aisle was completely disrupted by President Trump winning the election. That is one of the key reason why so many politicians retired immediately thereafter.
When we understand the business of DC, we understand the difference between legislation with a traditional purpose and modern legislation with a financial and political agenda.
Mitch McConnell has the system. President Trump has the people.
Former Chief Asst. U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy has an article written today pointing to the primary issue about former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn: “The Real Story is When Flynn Was Not Unmasked” – READ HERE.
McCarthy has reviewed the documents; looked at the research; reviewed what the IG said was not happening; and came to the same conclusion as CTH. The Obama surveillance of Flynn did not include ‘unmasking’ because the collection was not incidental.
McCarthy points the media’s incurious compass needle toward the CIA, but don’t expect any DC media to follow it. The truth is adverse to MSM interests. There’s only one way for the Flynn-Kislyak call and content to be tracked, captured, discussed and shared by the Obama administration without the unmasking between 12/29/16 and 01/04/17. A reverse targeted intercept on Flynn through Kislyak. [CIA/NSA] Read McCarthy Column Here
The previous administration, and their resistance defenders in the current administration embedded within the DOJ and FBI, are desperate to avoid any admission that incoming NSA Michael Flynn was under surveillance. As soon as they can no longer hide the surveillance story, the shift to question the predicate of the Mueller investigation starts.
President Obama’ entire team (staff, officials, politicians); along with Republican allies like Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell et al; along with DOJ, FBI and IC preservationists like Bill Barr, Chris Wray et al; along with the entire DC media apparatus do not want to admit the Trump administration was under surveillance by the Obama administration. However, they can’t hide it because it happened.
On the Flynn 302 (the research evidence and documents are clear):
• The 302 was written by Joe Pientka on January 24, 2017.
• The 302 was edited by Peter Strzok prior to Feb 10, 2017.
• The 302 was re-edited by Lisa Page on Feb 10, 2017.
• Michael Flynn was fired on Feb 13, 2017.
• The 302 was discussed again on Feb 14, 2017.
• Andrew McCabe approved the edits on Feb 14, 2017.
• The 302 was officially finalized on Feb 15, 2017.
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 