Expressing the righteous indignation that many political observers feel today, Fox host Lou Dobbs interviews Michael Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell.
As Ms. Powell rightly notes: “We’ll keep it going until they get it right”… and indeed she will. We should all be as fortunate to have such defense in our corner when targeted by the full weight of the administrative state. :::spit:::
In November 2019 activist Federal District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson ruled former White House counsel Don McGahn must appear before Congress; however, she also ruled McGahn retained the ability to “invoke executive privilege where appropriate” during his appearance. The central issue is separation of power.
The White House appealed the ruling to the DC appellate court on constitutional grounds, and on February 28, 2020, a three judge panel from the DC circuit agreed with the White House position. The House of representatives could have appealed the decision; however, instead, the main lawfare activist, House counsel Doug Letter, took a different approach and sought to argue the case based around their right to enforce a subpoena.
Today a politically divided DC appeals court panel ruled the House can’t go to the judicial branch to enforce legislative subpoenas because there is no statute giving the legislative chamber the authority to force the executive branch to enforce an action against its own constitutional interests.
DC Via Politico – […] “The decision is likely to spark a renewed debate over the House’s power of “inherent contempt” — its long-dormant ability to fine or jail witnesses who refuse to comply with its oversight requests.
Though courts have acknowledged this power exists, it has been in disuse since World War II. The House has emphasized that resorting to such heavy-handed tactics would only worsen government dysfunction. Court proceedings are far more desirable — to the House and to society — House counsel Doug Letter has argued during the House’s legal battles.
The new ruling appears to leave in place one other option for enforcing House subpoenas: the threat of criminal prosecution for contempt of Congress. However that option does not seem viable in cases involving fights over demands for testimony or records from the executive branch, since the Justice Department has long taken the position that it will not prosecute in cases where an official or ex-official was complying with a presidential assertion of executive privilege. (more)
The permanent political coup, led by the primary Lawfare activists who have infected the DOJ and all bodies politic, continues… Everything is tenuous.
All of this judicial turmoil is a downstream result from electing Barack Obama to fundamentally transform America in 2008. Where we are today can be traced to the continuum that many warned about more than a decade ago.
I have a standing rule never to write about current events in a state of anger; forgive me for violating my own standard… this is infuriating (albeit not unexpected). The two-tiered judicial process to target a ‘transparently innocent’ man continues. [Links Below]
As anticipated, on the last day prior to DC Circuit Judge Griffith departure, the DC en banc panel has rejected the Flynn writ of mandamus and now sends the case back to Judge Emmet Sullivan for final disposition. One way of looking at this is the DC circuit attempting to save face for Judge Sullivan by granting him the ability to do the right thing.
Another way of looking at this is a judicial stall tactic allowing the case to drag on even further until after the election. [60-page ruling pdf here – also available here]
As expected the majority of the panel hung their argument on the fact that Judge Sullivan had not yet ruled prior to the request for the writ of mandamus; and as an outcome Sullivan should be allowed to reach final disposition. As noted: “we expect the District Court to proceed with appropriate dispatch“…
The unopposed motion to dismiss the case against Michael Flynn is now back in the court of presiding Judge Emmet Sullivan.
Flynn’s defense counsel Sidney Powell ‘could’ appeal the full panel ruling to Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts for an emergency stay (not likely) reinforcing the original ruling (mandamus enforcement); or Powell could wait and see whether Judge Sullivan returns to judicial norms and allows the dismissal of the case prior to seeking any higher intervention (more likely). The latter approach just extends the timeline further.
As CTH noted last week the timing of this was predictable with Judge Griffith exiting the court. Additionally: “the DC appeals court likely doesn’t want this decision being reviewed any further (SCOTUS). It would make sense for the DC panel to seek a face-saving exit for Sullivan that doesn’t put Flynn’s defense in a position to appeal to Supreme Court Justice Roberts for intervention.” This appears to be the path the DC Circuit has taken.
Another possible option, albeit rather stark -highly unlikely- and loaded with implications, would be for the DOJ to simply refuse further case engagement completely.
CTH noted several months ago if the DOJ just refused further participation in the case, it would put Judge Sullivan in a very odd position of holding hearings where no prosecution shows up. However, this case is so far outside the normal boundaries of judicial proceedings anything is possible.
Here’s the embed pdf of the ruling. Judge Griffith (extreme anti-Flynn activist) representing the opinion of the court. Judges Rao and Henderson (who originally agreed to the writ) writing the dissent.
.
No two cases highlight the two-tiered system of justice like the comparative behind National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and SSCI Security Director James Wolfe.
In the Wolfe case corrupt elements of the judicial system allowed a transparently guilty man to escape accountability because it would have exposed massive multi-branch government corruption on an institutional scale that is almost unfathomable. Wolfe leaked top-secret classified documents at the request of members within the Senate Intelligence Committee. The DOJ then hides the wrong-doing.
In the Flynn case a transparently innocent man is framed by corrupt elements within the same institution, the FBI, by defining what the word “sanctions” means. A corrupt DOJ then transfers the corrupt intent into the judicial branch using a clear political agenda.
Anger…
FUBAR.
If Vladimir Putin was willing to help President Barack Obama seal the misbegotten Iranian nuclear deal, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, then chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA),was not. His resistance made him a target, especially once he started advising candidate Donald Trump. As to who launched the disinformation campaign against Flynn, the jury is still out. Best evidence, however, suggests forces within the CIA working in tandem with its friends in the media.
The co-conspirators started publicly setting the trap with a February 2016 Reuters article teasingly titled, “Trump being advised by ex-U.S. Lieutenant General who favors closer Russia ties.” https://reut.rs/2EwzoEL This was a bold gambit. As recently as July 2015 Obama was telling Tom Friedman of the New York Times, “We would have not achieved this [Iran nuclear] agreement had it not been for Russia’s willingness to stick with us and the other P5-Plus members in insisting on a strong deal.” https://nyti.ms/3jaDTnz
Obama praised Putin a year after Putin annexed the Crimea. That invasion was so much water under the bridge for Obama but apparently not for Flynn. Just months later, it was considered newsworthy that Flynn would advise Trump to “work more closely with Russia to resolve global security issues.”
“Flynn raised eyebrows among some U.S. foreign policy veterans,” wrote Steve Holland and Mark Hosenball of Reuters, “when he was pictured sitting at the head table with Putin at a banquet in Moscow late last year celebrating Russia Today, an international broadcasting network funded by the Russian government.” The reporters’ “three sources,” all said to be “former foreign policy officials,” failed to mention that Flynn had been briefed by the DIA before the dinner and debriefed afterwards.
What made me suspicious about this article was the Mark Hosenball byline. Hosenball appears to have been carrying water for the intelligence community (IC) for at least twenty years, maybe twice that long. To say the least, he has a curious background.
Hosenball moved to England when he was 17 to attend school. After spending a year in England and three in Ireland, he moved back to England to become a reporter. This information comes from a 1977 British appeals court document explaining why the United Kingdom chose to deport the 25-year-old Hosenball “in the interests of national security.”
“The Secretary of State believes that Mr. Hosenball is a danger to this country. So much so that his presence here is unwelcome and he can no longer be permitted to stay,” reads the document. Reportedly, Hosenball was one of a group of people who were “trying to obtain information of a very sensitive character about our security arrangements.” The document does not identify on whose behalf Hosenball was allegedly spying, but it affirms the government’s decision to deport him nonetheless.
The American intelligence community did not appear troubled by Hosenball’s actions. As the New York Times reported at the time, “A United States Embassy spokesman said that he knew of no United States pressure on Britain to discipline Mr. Hosenball.” https://nyti.ms/3jeLgdO Nor did the deportation seem to hurt Hosenball’s career. By 1993, he was working for Newsweek. By 1997, he was using Newsweek to spread CIA disinformation.
In 2003, I met Hosenball at the Newsweek office. At the time, I was promoting First Strike, a book I co-authored with James Sanders on TWA Flight 800, the 747 that mysteriously exploded off the coast of Long Island on July 17, 1996.
In that pivotal election year, surely with a nod from the Clinton White House, the CIA quietly masterminded the disinformation campaign that followed TWA 800’s destruction. After sixteen months of behind-the-scenes chicanery, the CIA assured America that what the eyewitnesses actually saw was not a missile streaking toward the 747, but the fuselage of the burning, climbing 747 rocketing upwards some three-thousand-plus feet after its fuel tank had blown up spontaneously. As would happen again in 2016, the FBI publicly fronted for the CIA. In a presidential election year, the media, of course, played along.
At the time, no reporter endorsed the CIA’s fraudulent scenario more enthusiastically than did Hosenball. His Newsweek article on the subject began with a dig at “conspiracy theories” and went nowhere positive from there. https://bit.ly/3lk50OM CIA analysts had convinced Hosenball that “infrared images captured by spy satellites” proved its theory of the plane’s demise. This revelation came as news to the FBI. Its comprehensive summary issued just a week before Hosenball’s November 1997 article did not once mention the word “satellite.”
The NTSB’s final report made only vague mention of “infrared sensor information from a U.S. satellite” and that in reference to the CIA’s video recreation. The New York Times avoided the subject altogether. Yet here was Hosenball saying that the CIA had “spy satellites designed to monitor unfriendly foreign countries pointed at the Eastern Seaboard.”
This was bunk. If the satellites showed what Hosenball claimed, federal officials would not have needed the CIA’s trumped up zoom climb animation. Surely, too, the FBI and NTSB would have used the data to buttress their shaky, inconclusive summaries. In a letter to then congressman John Kasich two months after the press conference, the CIA quietly buried the subject: “No satellite imagery of the disaster exists.” This translates, “No satellite imagery exists that would help us make our case.”
Hosenball uncritically embraced the CIA video. Under his byline, Newsweek ran a fully affirmative, nine-frame, full-color recreation captioned with the unlikely boast, “CIA Photos.” For Hosenball, the video provided a necessary rebuttal to “speculation about a mystery missile.” As he told the story, “some” of the “244” FBI witnesses claimed to have seen a streak of light arcing across the sky. In reality, 258 of the 736 official FBI witnesses claimed to have seen a missile or missiles attacking the plane, several of whom were pilots.
Had Hosenball been sporting a CIA nametag he could not have done more to legitimize the agency’s crude rewrite of history. As it happens, his Newsweek writing partner at the time was Michael Isikoff. I met with both of them. Neither had any interest in seeing the information Sanders and I had gathered.
Oh, yes, that was the same Michael Isikoff who in September 2016 first revealed that intelligence officials were investigating Trump adviser Carter Page’s “private communications with senior Russian officials.” Christopher Steele was Isikoff’s direct source. A few weeks after the article’s publication in Yahoo News, the DOJ and the FBI packaged the Isikoff article along with the Steele dossier in their application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), specifically to monitor Carter Page.
Renegade Rolling Stone reporter Matt Taibbi was the only journalist on his side of the barricades to say what should have been obvious to everyone in the media: “Being on any team is a bad look for the press, but the press being on team FBI/CIA is an atrocity, Trump or no Trump.”
To check out Jack Cashill’s new book, Unmasking Obama, or his previous book, TWA 800: The Crash, The Cover-up, The Conspiracy, please see cashill.com.
The U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) held a press conference today to announce the successful rescue and location of 39 children from sex trafficking rings in/around the Atlanta Georgia area. [Video and press release]
.
Washington, DC – The U.S. Marshals Service Missing Child Unit, in conjunction with the agency’s Southeast Regional Fugitive Task Force, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) and Georgia state and local agencies, led a two-week operation in August in Atlanta and Macon, Georgia, to rescue endangered missing children.
“Operation Not Forgotten” resulted in the rescue of 26 children, the safe location of 13 children and the arrest of nine criminal associates. Additionally, investigators cleared 26 arrest warrants and filed additional charges for alleged crimes related to sex trafficking, parental kidnapping, registered sex offender violations, drugs and weapons possession, and custodial interference. The 26 warrants cleared included 19 arrest warrants for a total of nine individuals arrested, some of whom had multiple warrants.
“The U.S. Marshals Service is fully committed to assisting federal, state, and local agencies with locating and recovering endangered missing children, in addition to their primary fugitive apprehension mission,” said Director of the Marshals Service Donald Washington. “The message to missing children and their families is that we will never stop looking for you.”
These missing children were considered to be some of the most at-risk and challenging recovery cases in the area, based on indications of high-risk factors such as victimization of child sex trafficking, child exploitation, sexual abuse, physical abuse, and medical or mental health conditions. Other children were located at the request of law enforcement to ensure their wellbeing. USMS investigators were able to confirm each child’s location in person and assure their safety and welfare.
The Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015 enhanced the U.S. Marshals’ authority to assist federal, state, and local law enforcement with the recovery of missing, endangered or abducted children, regardless of whether a fugitive or sex offender was involved. The Marshals established a Missing Child Unit to oversee and manage the implementation of its enhanced authority under the act. (read more)
Carter Page appears on Fox News for an interview with Maria Bartiromo to discuss a book he is publishing about the DOJ and FBI targeting him for surveillance and identifying him as “an agent of a foreign government” in 2016 and 2017.
Interestingly, Page notes [@02:56] he had five interviews with the FBI in March of 2017, and he connects those interviews to the possibility of leaks to the Washington Post. However, it would be interesting to find out the exact dates of those interviews because the FISA application identifying him, leaked by James Wolfe, was delivered to the SSCI on March 17, 2017, as a “read and return” document. It was after March 17th when the Washington Post wrote the article mentioned by Carter Page.
.
There is strong circumstantial evidence when the FISA application was delivered to the SSCI on March 17, 2017, that only James Wolfe and SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner reviewed it. First, it was “read and return”, back to the equity provider, FBI SSA Brian Dugan. Second, if any other member of the SSCI had reviewed the application it’s doubtful they would have been requesting to review it in December ’17 and early ’18. Common sense would indicate only Warner and Wolfe saw the application, and Warner never informed the committee of his review; hence their later requests.
Additionally, another unusual aspect to the FISA application delivery surrounds the 2018 letters written by Chairman Nunes (HPSCI) and Chairman Bob Goodlatte (House Judiciary) to presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer, where both chairman were being blocked by the special counsel from obtaining the FISA application and both were seeking to gain it from the FISA Court.
Collyer informed Goodlatte and Nunes that their request of January 16, 2018, was putting the judicial branch in a precarious position between the executive branch and the legislative branch.
Judge Collyer informed the committee chairman they needed to exhaust all other possible remedies for production prior to requesting intervention by the judicial branch.
However, notably in her return correspondance to the legislative bodies, FISC Judge Collyer never informed Nunes and Goodlatte about the FISA application having previously been provided to the legislative branch in March 2017.
She never mentioned it….. Why not?
One possibility for not informing the legislative branch is that Judge Collyer knew FBI Agent Brian Dugan was using the FISA application as part of his leak investigation, and the need to retain investigative value kept her from revealing the March 2017 delivery.
The original request from Nunes and Goodlatte was January 16, 2018. The response from Collyer was February 15, 2018, which is really interesting.
On February 9th, the text messages between Senator Mark Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer Adam Waldman were released. On February 13th, the DOJ informed Ali Watkins about the court order granting FBI Agent Brian Dugan the authority to capture and review her text messages, phone and email communications. All of these events are connected.
FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer responded to the January request from the House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte. (full pdf’s below – #1 and #2)
There was an underlying issue not being discussed within the communication – yet visible in the corner amid their engagement. That issue was the possibility SSA Brian Dugan may have modified the FISA documents as part of his leak investigation.
When the Dugan investigative file was then reviewed by the special counsel (due to their primary investigative authority) the Mueller team needed to cover the modification; hence their release of that specific document on July 21, 2018, came with redactions of all dates.
The special counsel would have received this investigative file from Dugan in the middle to end of January 2018. Around the same time Nunes and Goodlatte were writing letters to Judge Collyer.
This mid to late January time-frame appears to be when Dugan’s file was scrubbed of the direct evidence tying Warner/Wolfe to the leak. It appears the special counsel then gave Warner a ‘head’s-up’ about the captured text messages that were part of Dugan’s investigation. Vice Chairman Mark Warner then coordinated a plausible justification for his communication with Waldman; and in short order, February 9, 2018, those texts were released to diffuse the controversy.
In essence, the FISA documents held by the court *may not be* identical to the FISA documents released by the Department of Justice. With good reason to suspect something was afoot, yet Dugan’s background work was unknown to Goodlatte at the time, Goodlatte was seeking to compare the DOJ copy (taken from Dugan, but he did not know that) with a clean FISC copy. In hindsight Goodlatte was on the right trail.
Here are the Collyer responses.
.
.
.
Why didn’t Judge Collyer inform the legislative branch of the prior production to the SSCI?
Why didn’t any other senators -including SSCI committee members- know the FISA application had been delivered for review and return on March 17, 2017?
Was Mark Warner the only senator who knew of the FISA production March 17, 2017?
The motive for Warner to request the FISA application in March, and then seek to leak the content, is easily identifiable. At the time (early 2017) the political resistance was trying to convince the public that Trump-Russia collusion had happened. This was an effort to undermine the administration and get a special counsel put into place.
Warner leaking the reality of the FISA application’s existence stirred the media into action because now the media could push a narrative that Trump must be colluding with Russia or there would not be a valid FBI investigation of it…. and the FISA court was validating the issue with their own approval of a FISA warrant.
The leak of the FISA application served to prove there was some measurable validity to the fraudulent claim of Trump-Russia collusion… or else, so the narrative was spun, there would not be an FBI investigation into it. That’s how the resistance drummed up the need for a special counsel to continue the operation against President Donald Trump.
That’s why Senator Mark Warner wanted to leak the FISA application; and it appears he used SSCI Security Direct James Wolfe to pull it off.
The transcript of the oral arguments from the August 11th DC Circuit Appeals court has been released. [pdf available here]. The DC Circuit held a full panel hearing to decide the outcome of the unopposed DOJ & defense motion to drop the case against Michael Flynn.
You will remember Judge Sullivan injected himself into the case by approving an amicus to argue against dismissal; this led to a request by the Flynn defense for a writ of mandamus overriding Judge Sullivan. Initially a three judge panel agreed with the writ giving Sullivan 30 days to dispose of the case; however, Sullivan appealed to the full panel (en banc). The first appellate court ruling was stayed, and the full panel heard oral arguments earlier this month. That transcript is below.
The panel of appellate judges included Judge Srinivasan, Judge Henderson, Judge Rogers, Judge Tatel, Judge Garland, Judge Griffith, Judge Millett, Judge Pillard, Judge Wilkins and Judge Rao. However, with Judge Griffith retiring at the end of this month, it is likely the ruling will be announced very soon; could be this week.
Regardless of what decision is reached, the announcement should be anticipated prior to Judge Griffith being replaced by recently confirmed Trump nominee Judge Justin Walker. That means we could see a decision announced this Friday, or by next Friday at the latest.
The judges could remove Judge Sullivan and reassign the case. In that event it’s likely the next judge would simply accept the motion to dismiss. However, the DC circuit could also deliver a ruling that allows Sullivan to retain the final disposition with strong guidance on any subsequent activity.
Given the extra-judicial path of this case essentially anything is possible. That said, the DC appeals court likely doesn’t want this decision being reviewed any further (SCOTUS). It would make sense for the DC panel to seek a face-saving exit for Sullivan that doesn’t put Flynn’s defense in a position to appeal to Supreme Court Justice Roberts for intervention.
.
.
Fox News host Maria Bartiromo has a conversation with Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsay Graham about new documents he plans to share with the John Durham team asking questions about why Hillary Clinton was provided defensive briefings while Donald Trump was not.
Interestingly, and not caught by Graham or media yet…. The documents Graham released [See Here] showed the FBI approval for the Clinton defensive briefings was David Archey. [Use CTH search function] As it turns out David Archey was hand selected by the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel to head the FBI responsibilities of the special counsel probe after they could no longer use Peter Strzok.
.
WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today released newly declassified FBI documents and communications demonstrating the Bureau’s double standard when it came to the Clinton and Trump campaigns.
According to these declassified documents and communications, in 2015 FBI leadership sought to give the Clinton campaign a defensive briefing before an FBI field office could pursue a FISA warrant related to a threat posed to the Clinton campaign by a foreign government. But in 2016 when there was a similar counterintelligence threat to the Trump campaign, FBI leadership failed to give a defensive briefing to the Trump campaign, opting instead to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation and relentlessly pursue FISA warrants targeting the Trump campaign. (more from Senate Judiciary)
.
On Tuesday August 18th, I had the opportunity to talk to, be interviewed by, and brief the person described as the “main guy”, the “central investigator”, “the guy who coordinates all investigative aspects” behind the John Durham investigation.
His name is William Aldenberg, and before getting to the substance of the conversation some background context is needed.
On June 7, 2018, an indictment against Senate Intelligence Committee Security Director James Wolfe was unsealed.
Approximately six weeks later, July 21, 2018, the DOJ mysteriously declassified and publicly released the Carter Page FISA application. That’s when I noticed the first two documents were related. The FISA application was the “top secret classified document” described in the Wolfe indictment.
Immediately I recognized it wasn’t just any copy of the FISA application that was released by the DOJ; but rather a very specific copy of the FISA application. What the DOJ released was the exact copy used in the leak investigation of James Wolfe. The ramifications of this specific copy being publicly released were immediately noted, although almost everyone seemed to gloss over the issue in favor of discussing the content.
Over the course of the next several months the ramifications became more clear. Despite overwhelming evidence James Wolfe was never charged with leaking the FISA application on March 17, 2017. Quite the contrary, even to this day the official position of the FBI, DOJ and U.S. government is that Wolfe *did not* leak the FISA application. There’s a very big reason for that; as both myself and special agent William Aldenberg discussed.
First, in order to fill in another corner of the interview foundation it must be remembered the goal of the DOJ under former AG Jeff Sessions, despite his recusal on all things Trump, was the removal of political influence in the DOJ. That same objective has been repeated ad infinitum by current AG Bill Barr. This approach is why everyone in/around any issue that skirts on the investigative tissue keeps saying: “a very delicate balance is being navigated”, and “very sensitive approaches” are needed.
None of the former -and some remaining embed- officials in the FBI, DOJ, or Special Counsel actors, had any aversion to the use of weaponized politics in their corrupt investigations of President Trump. However, in the current investigation of the former weaponized political investigations the primary avoidance filter is politics.
As expressed by almost everyone in and around the issue, any evidence that comes from inside the political silo is considered unusable. This sets up a rather challenging approach… hence the overused “delicate balances” etc.
This overlay, the aggressive need not to use political information, is also frustrating.
Some are beginning to question whether it is actually a shield to justify a lack of accountability or institutional preservation. Keep up the pressure, the concerns are valid. The public doesn’t draw distinctions from the origin of evidence.
Regardless of whether information comes from HPSCI ranking member Devin Nunes; and/or Senators Grassley, Johnson or Graham (political silo); or from the DOJ itself via John Bash, Jeff Jensen or John Durham; the public is absorbing all it. However, the current AG Barr instructions imply the non use of evidence emanating from the political silo in very direct terms.
After discussions with people familiar with the overall information flow I was prepared to hear about concerns of politics from the DOJ.
Exactly as anticipated lead special investigator William Aldenberg affirmed this concern multiple times. “Did anyone on The Hill assist your assembly?” …. “Did anyone related to, connected to, or in association with The Hill; or any member or person connected directly or indirectly, aid, assist, direct or by any method ‘provide‘ any of the information we are discussing?”
Various iterations of these questions were repeated several times.
Agent William Aldenberg is a polite, courteous and friendly person. He was well prepared with the materials prior to discussion and detail oriented on the specifics. He was everything one might hope from a solid investigator.
There was one month between first contact and our ultimate briefing/discussion on details. He was well prepared, open and engaging.
After introductions and formalities, Aldenberg’s first question -with a rather pronounced Boston accent- was: “how did you find me?” Again, this was not unexpected… no-one knew his role and it was completely accidental how I was able to discover him despite layers of concealment. The silo approach was/is very effective at isolating him.
With the documents in hand to walk through and review, here is the essential story as evidenced within many seemingly disconnected public records. This is what we discussed:
FBI Washington Field Office Special Agent Brian Dugan was given a task in early 2017 to see if he could track down and identify people who were leaking information related to national security. Dugan used a Top-Secret Classified Information request by SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner to begin a very specific leak investigation.
On March 17, 2017, Brian Dugan picked-up a copy of the Carter Page FISA application from the FISA Court. He personally delivered that “read and return” copy to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Security Director James Wolfe. Shortly after 4:02 pm that same day, Vice-Chairman Mark Warner reviewed the FISA in the senate “scif”.
It is not known if any other SSCI committee member viewed that FISA (there is a great deal of circumstantial evidence to indicate only Wolfe and Warner saw it); however, what is factually certain – is that on the same day as Wolfe and Warner reviewed the FISA, Security Director James Wolfe leaked it to journalist Ali Watkins.
Both the New York Times and Washington Post began reporting on the FISA application.
As soon as Ms. Watkins wrote an article for Buzzfeed, April 3, 2017, outlining Carter Page as “person one” in the application, Dugan knew the FISA had been leaked.
Dugan tells us in the Wolfe indictment how the leak took place. The original FISA application is 83 pages with two mostly blank pages. Wolfe sent Ali Watkins 82 text messages (pictures), and later that evening had a lengthy phone call about it. Dugan put Wolfe under physical surveillance for several months as he gathered more information.
Dugan obtained enough evidence surrounding Watkins participation to gain a search warrant for her email, electronic communication and phone records. At the same time it appears Dugan obtained the text messages between Chris Steele’s lawyer, Adam Waldman, and Vice-Chairman Mark Warner. The dates of both captures are very similar.
After more investigative paths were followed; and after more surveillance was conducted; eventually Wolfe was confronted. He lied three times over two dates until eventually Dugan put the direct evidence in front of him, and on December 15, 2017, Wolfe admitted to the leak. He was fired from the SSCI.
Sometime around mid-January 2018 Dugan wrapped up his investigation. However, because the special counsel held investigative authority over everything Trump-Russia, which included the FISA application, Dugan’s entire investigative file had to transfer over to the special counsel for review before going to the DC U.S. Attorney for a grand jury. That moment is when things get really troublesome.
Dugan’s delivery of the investigative file to Main Justice (mid January ’18) was the first time the special counsel knew of the totality of the investigation, and the issues with a trail of evidence going back to a serious SSCI compromise. The special counsel group took the Dugan file apart and began providing cover for their political allies. That’s why the Mark Warner text messages were released on February 9, 2018.
The Wolfe leak was toxic to the purpose of the special counsel. There were also serious issues with an intelligence compromise, a national security compromise, an SSCI compromise, a gang-of-eight compromise, and a compromise between the legislative and executive branches of government. The special counsel was in damage control mode.
Despite recommendations and normal procedures, “Top FBI leadership”, including FBI Director Chris Wray, made decisions not to do a national security damage assessment based on the identified intelligence compromises. The ramifications are rather stark. Everyone was in cover-up mode.
The transfer of the investigative file into Main Justice is how the special counsel gained custody of the exact March 17, 2017, version of the FISA application which they released on July 21, 2018. Additionally, only nine days earlier, July 12, 2018, the special counsel was telling the FISA court the Carter Page FISA application was adequately predicated.
When the Brian Dugan investigative file was returned, the evidence of the Wolfe leak was scrubbed. Wolfe was only charged with lying three times to investigators. Absent the indictment for the leak Wolfe’s lawyers knew they had leverage; they threatened to subpoena the SSCI senators (remember, it’s likely only Warner was a participant in the March 17th FISA review – so the real target of that threat was Senator Mark Warner).
After the threat DC U.S. Attorney’ Office, Jessie Liu, agreed to a plea deal. They dropped the three counts of lying to federal investigators down to one count while simultaneously the media ran from the story.
On December 14, 2018, WFO Special Agent Brian Dugan filed an attachment, Government Exhibit 13, to the final sentencing recommendation – and in that two page sworn statement, under penalty of perjury, SSA Brian Dugan attested to Wolfe leaking the FISA application for the final time.
Everyone ignored it.
The cover-up was complete.
All of the direct evidence of this series of events, and a lot more not in this written summary, is included in a series of public documents released over a period of about twelve months. Because the documents were released out of sequence and seemingly disconnected no-one caught on to the backstory.
This evidence was directly provided to special investigator William Aldenberg who was very apt at asking questions as each document was reviewed. By the end of our discussion there were no questions remaining; and none of it was based on supposition, innuendo, speculation or inference.
Mr. Aldenberg could not affirm or attest to the implications of the information as provided; however, he did accept the briefing was clear and articulately grounded on the evidence within the documents provided.
After answering a series of questions about how this was found; direct inquiry into the provenance; and several questions surrounding how I was able to retrieve this information into a singular timeline of sequential events that seemed disconnected over two years; I reminded Mr. Aldenberg that SSA Brian Dugan was still employed at the FBI Washington Field Office and it should be a very simple conversation to confirm.
Mr Aldenberg and I exchanged direct contact information, and concluded our conversation.
It was always the primary objective to carry this information directly to those badges who are positioned to do something about it. That mission is accomplished.
DOJ investigators are now aware of the issues and evidence that has remained hidden for years. More importantly they now know that we know.
Perhaps even more importantly, none of this evidence comes from within a political silo; all of it was attained from outside the DC system; none of the more illegal activity is based on political lies; and all of issues point to a direct national security threat, including the overarching possibility of blackmail against those who are currently charged with intelligence oversight. Lastly, all of the events to cover-up the Wolfe leak involve direct criminal conduct.
Now you know why I focused on James Wolfe. It’s not political, it’s criminal.
Be of good cheer.
Sundance
The sequence is critical:
1. Adam Waldman text messages. (release date Feb 9, 2018)
2. Justice Dept. Letter to journalist Ali Watkins (release date Feb 13, 2018)
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4498451-Justice-Department-Records-Seizure.html
3. James Wolfe indictment (release date June 8, 2018)
4. FISC / Senate Judiciary Letter (public release April, 2020 – event date July 12, 2018) The letter from DOJ-NSD (Mueller Special Proseuctors) to the FISC is important.
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/2018-doj-letter-to-fisc&download=1
5. Carter Page FISA application (release date July 21, 2018) Only need the first application section. 83 pages of original application.
https://www.scribd.com/document/384380664/2016-FISA-Application-on-Carter-Page#
6. Government Sentencing Wolfe Case memo and recommendation for upward departure and/or variance. Filed December 11, 2018
https://www.scribd.com/document/395499292/James-Wolfe-DOJ-Sentencing-Memo-December-11
7. Govt. Reply to Defendant (Wolfe) sentencing memo (date Dec 14, 2018) Govt. Exhibit #13 (two page attestation is critical).
https://www.scribd.com/document/395775597/Wolfe-Case-DOJ-Response-to-Defense-Sentencing-Memo
Misc:
July 27, 2018, – Wall Street Journal – Wolfe lawyers threaten SSCI subpoenas.
Dec 11, 2018 – Politico – Senators seek Leniency –
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/11/senate-intelligence-committee-leaking-james-wolfe-1059162
.
ps. Laundry is done, chores are complete, lawn is mowed, bills are paid…. and I’m going back on the road to provide more detailed in-person briefings.
Stella has done an excellent job of myth busting about the postal service mess. Easy to understand and clear explanations of the bipartisan support of the Accountability and Enhancement Act.
If you follow social media, you will probably have seen the claims that the postal service is in trouble because of unfair mandates placed upon them by Republicans in 2006 when the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act was passed. The reasoning is, according to many accounts, that:
The postal accountability act requires the USPS to pre-fund employee retirement medical benefits 75 years into the future. USPS is not allowed to use that money for anything else. Billions of dollars just sitting there. Clearly designed to kill the post office.
FACT #1: The Act was sponsored by two Republicans and co-sponsored by 2 DEMOCRATS – Henry Waxman of CA and Danny Davis of IL. The myth-makers use the term “Republican-led Congress” to insinuate that it was only Republicans who supported the Act.
FACT #2:201 Democrats in the House voted for the bill, along with the 208 Republicans. Clearly not a…
View original post 804 more word
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!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
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
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending
Centinel2012 