Conspiracy or No Conspiracy, That is the Question Debated by diGenova and Dershowitz….


You can call it a soft-coup, or you can call it politicization of the DOJ and FBI, but the end result is the same – the intentional effort to manipulate, influence, and ultimately subvert an election for the presidency of the United States.  ~SD

During a Friday night segment of Sean Hannity former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova and former federal defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz debate whether the actions taken by:

….President Obama, Hillary Clinton, the DNC, Crowstrike, Fusion-GPS, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, John Brennan, James Clapper, Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, John P Carlin, Mary McCord, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, James Baker, Michael Kortan, David Laufman, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Samantha Power, Lisa Monaco, Denis McDonough, Jim Rybicki, Glenn Simpson and Christopher Steele…

…in 2016, were all just accidentally working in exactly the same direction; on exactly the same processes and political approaches with intelligence use by government institutions; in accidental alignment,… or, perhaps, it was all coordinated.

diGenova says ‘coordinated’. Dershowitz says ‘accidental’.

While we wait for the underlying IG evidence release, you decide:

Alan Dershowitz Discusses DNC Lawsuit, Robert Mueller, James Comey, Michael Cohen, etc…


Law Professor Alan Dershowitz appeared on Fox News weekend to discuss the DNC lawsuit, Robert Mueller, and the ongoing FBI issues with James Comey.

President Trump Tweets: “Pakistani Mystery Man” – Media Run From Story Like Political Ebola…


You can always tell when President Trump hits upon a subject the media is desperate to avoid covering.  Yesterday President Trump tweeted about the “Pakistani Mystery Man” and the transparent media avoid the story like political Ebola.

Learn About Pakistani Mystery Man HERE

The Susan Rice CYA Memo Gains Additional Context…


Two months ago Andrew McCarthy wrote an article in National Review discussing the email President Obama’s National Security Adviser Susan Rice sent to herself on inauguration day 2017.  With the latest discoveries from James Comey’s admissions amid the headlines the February article by McCarthy is very prescient. {see here}

Susan Rice emailed herself to create a record surrounding a January 5th, 2017, meeting between top White House officials and senior intelligence members.  It was the next day, January 6th, when FBI Director James Comey briefed President-Elect Trump on part of the Clinton-Steele dossier.  With hindsight, the White House meeting (1/5/17) and the Trump Tower briefing (1/6/17) take on additional meaning.

The departing administration’s highly-politicized intelligence apparatus, Comey (FBI), Brennan (CIA) and Clapper (DNI), conspired -strategically- to weaponize false intelligence in order to create a media narrative that would damage, and hopefully eliminate, the incoming president and his administration.  With full measure of context, contrast against the identifiable behavior that followed; and accepting the FBI team was working diligently on an “insurance policy” agenda; there is no other way to look at these events.

In his article, McCarthy rightly sets the stage:

[…] Let’s think about what was going on at that moment. It had been just a few days since Obama imposed sanctions on Russia. In that connection, the Kremlin’s ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, had contacted Trump’s designated national-security adviser, Michael Flynn. Obama-administration leadership despised Flynn, who (a) had been fired by Obama from his post as Defense Intelligence Agency chief; (b) had become a key Trump supporter and an intense critic of Obama foreign and national-security policy; and (c) was regarded by Yates and Comey as a possible criminal suspect — on the wayward theories that Flynn’s contacts with Kislyak could smack of a corrupt quid pro quo deal to drop the sanctions and might violate the never invoked, constitutionally dubious Logan Act.

What else was happening? The Justice Department and FBI had gone to the FISA court on October 21, 2016, for a warrant to spy on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. That warrant relied largely on the Steele dossier, which alleged a criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin involving (a) a cyberespionage operation against the 2016 election, (b) corrupt negotiations regarding the sanctions, and (c) the Kremlin’s possession of “kompromat” that would enable the Putin regime to blackmail President-elect Trump.

Significantly, by the time of this January 6 meeting with Trump, the 90-day surveillance period under the FISA warrant would have had just a bit over two weeks left to run — it was set to expire just as Trump was to take office. (Reporting suggests that there may also have been a FISA warrant on Paul Manafort around this time.) The Obama administration was therefore confronting a deadline if the FISA warrant was to be renewed while Obama was still in power. The officials in the meeting would need to figure out how the investigation could continue despite the fact that its central focus, Trump, was about to be sworn in as president.  (read more)

McCarthy accurately predicted two-months-ago that James Comey did not brief President Trump on the full content of the Clinton-Steele Dossier. This suspicion has been confirmed as fact by the recent admissions of James Comey himself.

January 5th, 2017, an Oval Office meeting with President Obama, VP Joe Biden, James Comey (FBI), Michael Rogers (NSA), John Brennan (CIA), James Clapper (ODNI), Sally Yates (DOJ) and Susan Rice.   At the conclusion of the briefing, President Obama asks Sally Yates and James Comey to remain.  Together with Susan Rice, this is where the “by the book” CYA comment comes into play. As recounted by Rice: “President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.

January 6th, 2017, the Trump Tower meeting with President-elect Trump, VPE Mike Pence, Mike Flynn, etc.  Where James Comey asks for a private discussion with the President-elect:

(Link To Comey Memos)

June 8th, 2017 – Vice-Chairman Senator Mark Warner (D) questions Comey during Senate Intelligence Committee hearing [Transcript Source]:

♦ Mark Warner […] I know members have said and press have said that if you were — a great deal has been made whether the president — whether you were asked whether the president was the subject of any investigation. My understanding is prior to your meeting on January 6th you discussed with your leadership team whether or not you should be prepared to assure then President-Elect trump that the FBI was not investigating him personally. Now my understanding is your leadership team agreed with that. But was that a unanimous decision? was there any debate about that?

♦ James Comey: Wasn’t unanimous.One of the members of the leadership team had a view that although it was technically true we did not have a counterintelligence file case open on then President-Elect trump. His concern was because we’re looking at the potential, again, that’s the subject of the investigation, coordination between the campaign and Russia because it was president trump, President-Elect trump’s campaign, this person’s view was inevitably his behavior, his conduct will fall within the scope of that work and so he was reluctant to make the statement that I made. I disagreed. I thought it was fair to say what was literally true. There is not a counterintelligence investigation of Mr. Trump. And I decided in the moment to say it given the nature of our conversation.

One member of the FBI leadership team, a “he”, with understanding of the full scope of the counterintelligence operation, disagreed with Director Comey making an obtuse, disingenuous and highly misleading statement to President Trump that he was not under an FBI counterintelligence investigation.

Obviously there was a counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign, and by extension presidential candidate Donald Trump.   However, as noted in the Susan Rice email describing the content of the January 5th, 2017, White House meeting – the intent of the outgoing administration was to keep president-elect Trump under investigation, yet not allow him to know he was under investigation.  Hence the briefing on only the most “salacious and unverified content of the dossier”.

The goal of the “insurance policy” was to frame the target.  Therefore the target must be played by the officials doing the framing.

However, one official within the leadership of the FBI thought it was wrong to be disingenuous with discussions and briefing for an incoming President.  That one senior FBI official was a “he”.

Now who do you think that “he” was?

This same “he”:

.

The same “he” who was scheduled to testify to the House Intelligence Committee; but for some mysterious reason the request to interview “him” and four others (Page, Strzok, Ohr and Baker) were all dropped.

The same “he” who, along with the four others, remains employed.

The same “he” who, unlike the four others, has never been removed, suspended, demoted or isolated from his job; and the same “he” who remains in his position through today.

North Korea Agrees To Unconditional Denuclearization, Suspends Missile Tests, Shuts Down Testing Facility…


In the past 48 hours South Korea (Moon Jae-in) and North Korea (Kim Jong-un) have been working out the details of their upcoming summit.  Within the discussions between North and South Korea some stunning news has surfaced.

♦ Yesterday Moon Jae-in announced that North Korea had agreed to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula without any preconditions or expectations of changes in the relationship between the U.S. and South Korea:

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea has expressed its commitment to “complete denuclearization” of the Korean Peninsula and is not seeking conditions, South Korean President Moon Jae-in said on Thursday, as the United States vowed to maintain “maximum pressure” on Pyongyang.

[…] “I don’t think denuclearization has different meanings for South and North Korea,” Moon said during a lunch with chief executives of Korean media companies. “The North is expressing a will for a complete denuclearization.”

“They have not attached any conditions that the U.S. cannot accept, such as the withdrawal of American troops from South Korea,” he continued. “All they are talking about is the end of hostile policies against North Korea, followed by a guarantee of security.”  (read more)

As the summit discussions continued today; and to assure the previous U.S. envoy CIA Director Mike Pompeto; and in affirmation of direct talks with President Trump; North Korea made an even more stunning statement from the Korean Central News Agency:

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has declared he will suspend nuclear and missile tests starting Saturday, and that he will shut down the site where the previous six nuclear tests were conducted.

“From April 21, North Korea will stop nuclear tests and launches of intercontinental ballistic missiles,” the Korean Central News Agency said in a report Saturday morning.

This came out of a meeting of the central committee of the ruling Worker’s Party of Korea held Friday to discuss policy issues related to “a new stage” in a “historic” period.

“The North will shut down a nuclear test site in the country’s northern side to prove the vow to suspend nuclear test,” KCNA reported.

This comes less than a week before Kim is due to meet with South Korean president Moon Jae-in in the first inter-Korean summit in 11 years. Moon has said that Kim is willing to discuss denuclearization and that he will not insist on American troops being withdrawn from South Korea as part of any deal.  (read more)

Exactly a year ago, April 20th, 2017, the headlines were:

North Korea nuclear threat: should California start panicking?”  (LINK)

Today, April 20th, 2018:

“North Korea willing to accept ‘complete denuclearization’ without conditions” (LINK)

“North Korean leader suspends nuclear and missile tests, shuts down test site”  (LINK)

Why?

Because, Trump.


Representatives from Canadian, Mexican and the U.S. are in the deepest weeds within NAFTA negotiations and some of the proposals are flat out nuts.

Within the auto-sector the “Rules of Origin” continue to be one of the biggest sticking points.  The U.S. position is that 80% or more of a vehicle made in the U.S., Mexico or Canada should be made from parts from the U.S., Mexico or Canada, ie. North America.  Canada and Mexico are trying to argue for lower North American content because they want more Asian/Chinese parts in American automobiles. [Reuters Link]

On its face their position is ridiculous.  Canada and Mexico are not arguing for more Canadian and Mexican content; they are arguing for more Chinese content.  The U.S. is arguing for more North American content.  Canada and Mexico want to support China’s economy; the U.S. wants to support Canada, Mexico and the U.S. economy.   Let that sink in for a moment.

In an effort to enhance their ridiculous position, Canada and Mexico have come up with a proposal that is, well, bananas. Can/Mex want the United States to tax vehicles made in Canada and Mexico.  Stop. Re-read that.  Yes, that is correct.  Canada and Mexico want Chinese parts so badly, they are arguing for the U.S. to tax American (NAFTA) automobiles.

Nuts.

The reasoning is simple -albeit twisted as hell- and goes back to the fatal flaw in NAFTA as it exists.  Canada and Mexico have created economic models within their multinational corporate manufacturing processes where they import parts from China, Asia and Europe – assemble them – then ship those goods duty free into the U.S. market.

Canada and Mexico are used by European, Asian and Chinese companies as a backdoor into the U.S. where they can avoid tariffs.  This is part of their business model.

In an effort to attempt to find agreement with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, Canada (Freeland) and Mexico (Guajardo) have proposed that their auto industry be treated as an import and apply the 2.5% trade tariff customary for imported automobiles.

Well, what the hell good is NAFTA, a trilateral trade agreement, if we are going to treat Canada and Mexico as countries needing import duties?   This is nonsense.

Canadian News –  NAFTA negotiating teams will keep bargaining through the weekend in an effort to get a deal by early May.

The political ministers leading the process are currently leaving Washington, but will be back next week.  Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland calls it a perpetual negotiating round.  She said the talks continue to focus primarily on automobiles, which she describes as the heart of the new agreement.

Sources say negotiators are now extremely close to an agreement on that issue and are discussing fine details. (link with video)

Meanwhile, U.S.T.R. Lighthizer is considering pulling out of NAFTA if an agreement on principle can be reached.  That strategy forces to congress to sign-on to the renegotiated trade deal or face allowing NAFTA to end.

DOJ Inspector General Investigating James Comey for Release of Classified Memos…


According to Fox News Catherine Herridge reporting, Inspector General Michael Horowitz is investigating the unauthorized distribution of classified memos by former FBI Director James Comey.   The Wall Street Journal is also reporting that two of the four memos Director Comey gave to his friend Daniel Richman contained classified information.

According to the WSJ report: “At least two of the memos that former FBI Director James Comey gave to a friend outside of the government contained information that officials now consider classified, according to people familiar with the matter, prompting a review by the Justice Department’s internal watchdog.”

It is further reported that James Comey redacted elements of one memo himself in an effort to protect secrets before he handed the documents over to his friend Daniel Richman.  Comey made the self-determination that no another memo contained classified information.  However, after he left the FBI officials upgraded the second memo content to “confidential” after a review.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is now conducting an investigation into the releases of the memo and the overall circumstances surrounding the releases. Previously Comey stated he considered the memos personal records and not government documents. He told congress he wrote them and authorized their release to the media “as a private citizen.”

Mr. Comey gave four total memos to Columbia Law School professor Daniel Richman. In an earlier congressional review of the issues Senator Chuck Grassley reviewed all of the memos and submitted questions to the DOJ about the classification issues.  During the Grassley review three memos were considered unclassified at the time and one was said to contain classified information.

DNC Files Frivolous Campaign Lawsuit, Trump Campaign Responds: We Look Forward To Discovery…


In a pathetic attempt to keep pushing the vast Russian conspiracy narrative; and trying to get out in front of growing evidence that former Obama administration, government officials, DNC and weaponized government conspired to assist Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 presidential bid; the DNC has filed a lawsuit against the Trump campaign accusing their opposition of what they are transparently guilty of.

New York – The Democratic National Committee on Friday filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against Russia, the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks that alleges a massive conspiracy to swing the 2016 election in favor of the president.

The complaint, filed in federal court in Manhattan, alleges that top Trump campaign officials conspired with the Kremlin to damage Hillary Clinton and help Trump by hacking the DNC’s computers and publishing stolen emails on WikiLeaks.

“No one is above the law,” reads the beginning of the DNC’s complaint, which was obtained by The Post.

“In the run-up to the 2016 election, Russia mounted a brazen attack on American Democracy. The opening salvo was a cyber attack on the DNC, carried out on American soil,” said the lawsuit, filed by lawyer Michael Eisenkraft. (link)

It’s actually a predictable strategy given the nature of the current pendulum swing and the increased likelihood multiple political operatives are about to find themselves in the investigative spotlight.  By driving the political divisive narrative harder, the Democrats will attempt to say any criminal investigative findings are political.

The DNC lawsuit will most likely be dismissed as frivolous.  However, in the event it is allowed the proceed the Trump campaign can stand to gain a great deal of information during the discovery phase.  The Trump team respond:

[…]  If this lawsuit proceeds, the Trump Campaign will be prepared to leverage the discovery process and explore the DNC’s now-secret records about the actual corruption they perpetrated to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Everything will be on the table, including:

♦How the DNC contributed to the fake dossier, using Fusion GPS along with the Clinton Campaign as the basis for the launch of a phony investigation.
♦Why the FBI was never allowed access to the DNC servers in the course of their investigation into the Clinton e-mail scandal.
♦How the DNC conspired to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination over Bernie Sanders.
♦How officials at the highest levels of the DNC colluded with the news media to influence the outcome of the DNC nomination.
♦Management decisions by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Donna Brazile, Tom Perez, and John Podesta; their e-mails, personnel decisions, budgets, opposition research, and more. (link)

Anatomy of a Political Smear Confirmed – James Comey January Briefing Was Scripted by Clapper and Brennan To Create Media Narrative…


Generally I would not refer so strongly to a prior discussion thread if the latest information did not absolutely confirm was was originally suspected.

On January 10th, 2017 we discussed “The Anatomy of a Modern Political Smear“, where we connected the dots, as they were happening in-real-time between James Comey, the Obama intelligence community and the media, specifically CNN. {Please See Here}

Yesterday, two events happened which absolutely confirm -with demonstrable certainty- what we immediately saw over 15 months ago.  The first event was the appearance of James Comey on CNN to discuss his book. In part of the questioning by Jake Tapper, Comey admitted his January 6th briefing of the Steele Dossier content was ONLY about the Russian hookers, pee-tapes, and ridiculous sexual accusations against the President-elect. [CNN Transcript]:

TAPPER: So, let’s talk about the investigation and what you can talk about it. In January, 2017 when you met with President Trump and you did that oral presentation of what’s in that two page memo, summarizing the Steele dossier. We know from the book that you talked about these unverified allegations involving him and prostitutes.

Did you brief him about any — any of the other things in the Steele dossier, claims that his associates, Michael Cohen or Paul Manafort, were potentially working with the Russians? Or was it only about the prostitutes?

COMEY: It was only about the salacious part of it.

TAPPER: Why? Why only about that?

COMEY: Because that was the part that the leaders of the intelligence community agreed he needed to be told about because we knew it and thought it was about to become public. And if it was true, we didn’t know whether it was true, it would be important to let him know this as part of a defensive briefing. (link)

The second event, was the actual release of the Comey memo describing that January 6th, 2017, briefing as directed by “the leaders of the intelligence community”.  We now know exactly who was giving that instruction:

That’s the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper.

So, exactly as we anticipated in January of 2017, the entire briefing of the President was a set-up to create a media narrative.  After affirming that Comey carried out the objective, James Clapper then leaked the salacious details of the story to CNN.  CNN then ran with the story using the hook of ‘the president has been briefed on this material’ etc.

Immediately thereafter, literally hours later, Buzzfeed published the Clinton-Steele Dossier under the auspices of it being newsworthy because CNN was now reporting on it.

This was transparently a set-up at the time we saw it happening, and the current releases of information confirm exactly that.  The intelligence apparatus, namely DNI James Clapper and FBI Director James Comey, conspired to weaponize false intelligence in order to create a media narrative that would damage the incoming president and his administration.  There is no other way to look at these events.

The reason we know James Clapper (DNI) and John Brennan (CIA), not James Comey, was the structured leak to CNN was specifically because CNN made a subtle mistake.  On January 10th, 2017, CNN claimed the intelligence briefing included giving President Trump a two-page document:

[…]  The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials. […]    CNN has confirmed that the synopsis was included in the documents that were presented to Mr. Trump (link)

…However, we know from James Comey’s memo and his own statements about the briefing there were no documents provided.   That means the two national security officials that were leaking details to CNN, and made the mistake about Comey giving Trump the documents, were John Brennan and James Clapper.

As Michael Horowitz investigates the Comey memos, and their subsequent leaking to Daniel Richman, there’s a strong possibility this connection will be made by his investigative unit.  Heck, if not, they just read it right here.

Additionally, at the time media were fixated on President Trump’s push-back against the media reports of the dossier specifically because President-elect Trump was focused on the ‘Pee-tape” aspect.  We now know the reason for that perspective was simply because Comey never briefed the President-Elect on any other part.  He only discussed the Russian hookers, and ridiculous nonsense.

Again, back to the not-so-subtle errors in the January 10th, 2017, CNN report, because they were relaying information from Clapper and Brennan:

[…] The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials. (link)

No, actually, President-elect Trump was never briefed on “Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government.”  James Comey, stated he never mentioned anything except the Russian hookers and pee-pee nonsense.  So again, CNN was reporting on what Clapper and Brennan thought Comey had done and they were getting some of the more nuanced details incorrect.

This entire set-up is particularly Machiavellian when you look at what DNI James Clapper was saying publicly at the time.  Remember this release:

Publicly DNI James Clapper is saying the next day (Jan 11th) the intelligence community does not have any confirmation as to the reliability of the Clinton-Steele dossier.  Yet the previous day Clapper was leaking details of that dossier to CNN.

Lastly, and perhaps more consequentially, remember the FBI used the dossier to get the FISA warrant against Carter Page on October 21st, 2016 claiming to the FISA court the information therein was reliable.  However, the DNI is saying three months later the dossier is NOT reliable.

Bastards.

All.Of.Them.

Timeline:

January 10th, 2017 – CNN Frames “Russian Narrative” – The anatomy of a media smear (link).
January 11th, 2017 – President Trump confronts CNN – “You are fake news” (link)
January 12th, 2017 – Confronted by the Trump Transition Team, independent NBC and Fox News Reporting, CNN’s Anderson Cooper attempts to defend CNN Propaganda (link)
January 15th, 2017 – Bob Woodward calls out CNN, Jake Tapper, John Brennan and James Clapper for false statements and indefensible politicization of institutional U.S. intelligence agencies (link)

trump-tweet-woodward-1

trump-tweet-woodward-2

In essence the week beginning January 10th, 2017 was the origin of the vast ‘Muh Russia’ conspiracy/collusion narrative against the incoming administration.  The CNN report pushed by Jake Tapper was the distribution of leaked information James Clapper and John Brennan.  This false narrative was specifically the origin of the “collusion” angle.

tapper-scuitto-perez-bernstein-clapper-comey-rogers-brennan

 

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/376855452/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-OzRxMFpl7rNk07sKZZlv

Key DOJ and FBI Names Likely to Surface Amid IG Investigative Reports and Referrals…


With Inspector General Michael Horowitz submitting a criminal referral for fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe; and with knowledge of federal prosecutor John Huber paralleling Horowitz for months within the investigation; it might be worthwhile going through the names of some officials likely to surface in the next few days/weeks.

The most interesting people in the ongoing investigation are those principals who clearly were in/around the center of 2015/2016 activity; were caught in 2017, yet remain inside the FBI and DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) ie. Main Justice.

♦James Baker – The former FBI chief legal counsel and close adviser to FBI Director James Comey.  In addition to coordinating the “small group” activity to exonerate Hillary Clinton, Baker was also a recipient for some of the Comey Memos of recent release. This puts Baker in a position to understand the “insurance policy” described by FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Counsel Lisa Page. Additionally, Baker would be able to identify the level of knowledge and participation of Director Comey, and is therefore perhaps the biggest risk to Comey specifically.  December 21st, 2017, Baker was removed from any responsibility but remains inside the FBI in some capacity; he is therefore considered a cooperating co-conspirator for the FBI Inspection Division (INSD), IG Horowitz and likely prosecutor Huber.

♦Lisa Page – The former designated counsel from Main Justice assigned to assist Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.  We know from open-sourced information; from her own released text messages; and from congressional releases, that Lisa Page was the person who provided the text messages to INSD and the Inspector General. Page’s account of the media leak instructions she received from McCabe conflicted with her boss, and ultimately led to the proof of McCabe’s false statements.  Lisa Page was the connective bridge within the team joining the DOJ-NSD to the FBI operation.  Obviously Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok were working closely at the heart of the “small group” activity.  They were the footsoldiers carrying out the orders passed down from Lynch/Yates (DOJ) and Comey/McCabe (FBI).   After cooperating with the INSD and IG investigation, Page quit the Mueller team mid-summer 2017.  Lisa Page is still employed within the DOJ.

♦Peter Strzok – The responsibility within the FBI operation to clear Clinton and open an investigation against political opponent Donald Trump fell heavily upon FBI Agent Peter Strzok.  Strzok was advanced to the #2 position within the FBI counterintelligence unit as an outcome of his participation.  In addition to working with FBI counsel Lisa Page, underneath Andrew McCabe, Strzok was the FBI contact and liaison with Christopher Steele and the foreign intelligence apparatus that were assisting in their goals.  When the INSD and IG evidence of the conspiracy began to surface Peter Strzok was removed from the Mueller investigation and demoted within the FBI.  However, Strzok remains employed within the FBI and is likely another cooperating witness/co-conspirator.

♦Bruce Ohr – Former Deputy Asst. Attorney General Bruce Ohr is the most exposed official on the DOJ-NSD side of the operation. Bruce Ohr has been questioned at least 12 times about his involvement by INSD and IG investigators.  Ohr has been demoted twice as an outcome of those sessions.  It is likely Ohr was the central Main Justice official for the use of gathering intelligence and sharing with Fusion-GPS and Christopher Steele.  Bruce’s wife, Nellie Ohr, was also a participant and was hired by Fusion-GPS in May 2016 during the apex of opposition research into Donald Trump and the campaign team.  With Nellie Ohr’s subject matter expertise of Russian spy and trade-craft, together Bruce and Nellie are likely the central figures in the creation of, and laundry for, the Clinton/Steele Dossier and the larger Russian narrative.  Bruce Ohr remains employed within DOJ-NSD in some function; and likely a cooperating witness along with his wife.

♦Bill Priestap – The only central character within the FBI leadership apparatus that remains entirely intact despite his central role in the counterintelligence operation against candidate Donald Trump.  Priestap was agent Peter Strzok’s immediate boss; however, it is unknown how much influence Priestap held over the activity of Strzok.  Released text messages indicate Strzok was reporting more to Andrew McCabe during both the Clinton and Trump operations. All officials at the top of the FBI have either been removed or quit, with the exception of Bill Priestap.  It is highly likely he has been cleared for any intentional wrongdoing and has no issues cooperating with INSD and IG investigators.  Because of the importance of his role, Priestap likely knows the full context of how the FISA Title-1 application against U.S. person Carter Page was assembled and used.  Priestap is also mentioned in the Nunes memo contradicting the claims of Comey, McCabe, Brennan (CIA) and Clapper (DNI).

♦Dana Boente – The former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia [EDVA] during the Clinton and Trump operation, the view of Boente as seen from the top tier officials conducting the political operations was that Boente was not in alignment with their goals. After Sally Yates was fired from the DOJ, the Trump administration used Dana Boente as a temporary AG until Jeff Sessions could be confirmed.  After Sessions confirmation Boente remained the head of the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) until the end of 2017.  In his positions throughout 2016 and 2017 Boente likely knows the political activities that were ongoing within Main Justice.  Dana Boente left the DOJ at the end of 2017 and was hired by FBI Director Christopher Wray to replace James Baker as chief legal counsel in the FBI.

The four officials removed but remaining inside both the FBI and DOJ are likely cooperating witnesses for the FBI Inspection Division investigative unit (INSD), DOJ Inspector General Horowitz and Federal Prosecutor John Huber.  Those four key officials are: James Baker (FBI), Lisa Page (DOJ/FBI), Bruce Ohr (DOJ) and Peter Strzok (FBI).

Additional investigative information from key officials with insider knowledge would come from Bill Priestap (FBI) and Dana Boente (DOJ/FBI).

The former administration officials with varying degrees of legal risk, who clearly participated in the politicization of the DOJ and FBI, would include:

♦AG Loretta Lynch (quit); ♦AAG Sally Yates (fired); ♦DOJ-NSD Head John Carlin (quit); ♦DOJ-NSD Head Mary McCord (quit); ♦Deputy Asst. AG David Laufman (quit); ♦FBI Director James Comey (fired); ♦FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe (fired); ♦FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki (quit); ♦FBI Director of Communications, Michael Kortan (quit).

Each of these DOJ and FBI officials are specifically outlined with knowledge of the activity that was taking place within the operation to clear and advance the campaign of Hillary Clinton and block and impede the campaign of Donald Trump.  However, these are only the DOJ and FBI officials.

Within the larger intelligence apparatus – the CIA Director, John Brennan, and Office of Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, are also participants. A key figure to reveal their prior corrupt activity is current NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers.

Additionally, there are known former State Department and White House officials who understood, supported and likely directed much of the activity.

The key to reaching the wider network of Obama officials is to work outward from the known corrupt “small group” within the center of the DOJ and FBI operation.  IG Horowitz and Prosecutor Huber appear to be focused on exactly that approach.

The added investigative element of the FISA application and fraud upon the FISA court is where the expanded investigative element will surface.  FISA abuse, and the subsequent political unmasking of people therein, will extend the investigation beyond the DOJ/FBI and into the larger intelligence community and other Obama cabinet officials.