Court Filing: From Day #1 Mueller Special Counsel Was Constructing “Obstruction” Case…


On January 22nd, 2018, eleven months prior to the mid-term election, lawyers from the special counsel’s office told Judge Boasberg in a sealed-courtroom why they needed to keep James Comey’s memos from being released.

Special Counsel Attorney Michael Dreeben informed the court the special counsel was charged with investigating an obstruction case against President Trump from the beginning. President Trump was the target of their investigation from the outset.

The previously sealed court transcript was released today – SEE HERE

Despite Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein and Special Counsel Mueller assuring the President and his lawyers he was not the target of the investigation, they were lying.

As soon as the court was told Trump was the target (hearing January 22, 2018) the court agreed to seal everything relating to the journal of James Comey. [BACKGROUND]

Current DOJ and FBI Officials Hide State Dept. Email Outlining Political Motive of Chris Steele…


John Solomon has a new article at The Hill centered around this email from State Department official Kathleen Kavalec after her October 11, 2016, interaction with dossier author Christopher Steele.

The substantive point of the article is how the email proves the political motives of Steele two weeks prior to the FBI/DOJ seeking a FISA application using his work product, the dossier.  Despite knowing the bias motive, the FBI/DOJ persisted in using the dossier for a Title-1 FISA warrant against U.S. person Carter Page on October 21, 2016.

A second issue, perhaps more alarming, surrounds: (1) how the current DOJ and FBI kept the email hidden from congressional investigators; and (2) how the current DOJ and FBI have recently redacted the email, highlighting an ongoing institutional cover-up.

(The Hill) […] Interestingly, one legal justification cited for redacting the Oct. 13, 2016, email is the National Security Act of 1947, which can be used to shield communications involving the CIA or the White House National Security Council.

[…]  Everything else in the memo was blacked out. The FOIA notes contain this explanation for the redactions: “Classified by FBI on 4/25/2019 — Class: SECRET.”

In other words, the FBI under Director Christopher Wray classified the document as “secret” just a few days ago. To add injury to insult, the FBI added this hopeful note: “Declassify on 12/31/2041.” That would be 25 years after the 2016 election. (read more)

(Source)

L-R: Christopher Steele (Orbis) – Bruce Ohr (DOJ) – Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS)

 

New Filing: FBI Fights to Keep Comey Memos Secret…


This is frustrating, but not surprising.  In the updated DOJ court filing today (pdf link here) the DOJ tells the court they want to keep the Comey Journal (memos) hidden from public review {BACKSTORY HERE}:

Hat Tip Techno-Fog: The release of Mueller’s Report… “does not alter the FBI’s position with regard to the remaining redactions in the Comey Memos.”

(link to pdf)

The DOJ has authorized the release of the Jaunary 22, 2018, transcript from the ex parte hearing.  So we will get to see the original discussion which should include the FBI descriptions of the Comey Journal and their reasoning (to the judge) for keeping the collection of memos hidden.

Keep in mind DC Court Judge James E. Boasberg is also a FISA judge.

As pointed out by Techno-Fog the media will get the transcript release first.  However, we will work earnestly to deliver it as soon as possible after release:

Reminder below of what this is about:

The documents surfaced as part of the FOIA case [Backstory Here] where DC Court Judge James E. Boasberg -an Obama appointee and also a FISA judge- asked the FBI to file an opinion about the release of Comey memos to the public.  There were two original issues: (1) can the memos be released? and (2) can prior sealed FBI filings, arguing to keep the memos hidden, be released?

Below is the original declaration outlining to the court on October 13th, 2017, why the Comey memos must be sealed.  It is inside this exhibit where we discover there are many more memos than previously understood, and the content of those memos is far more exhaustive because James Comey documented the FBI investigation.

In essence Comey created these memos to cover his ass. (pg 13):

FBI Agent Archey then goes on to explain what is inside the memos: It is in this section where we discover that Comey made notes of his meetings and conversations with investigators.

Along with writing notes of the meetings and conversations, apparently Comey also made notes of the sources and methods associated with the investigation.  Why would Comey generate classified information in these notes (sources and methods) unless he was just covering his ass because he knew the investigation itself was a risk…

The content of the memos seems rather exhaustive; it appears Comey is keeping a diary for use in the event this operation went sideways. (page #14, exhibit B)

All of those investigative elements would likely be contained in official FBI files and notes by the investigative agents.  There is no need for a contemporaneous personal account of meeting content unless Comey was constructing memos for his own protection. These memos appear to be motivated by the same mindset that caused Susan Rice to generate her email to self on inauguration day.

In the next section FBI Agent David Archey explains the scale of the memos.  There are obviously far more than previously discussed or disclosed publicly.  Additionally, look carefully at the way the second part is worded.

Archey is saying Comey’s written recollections should be withheld because it might affect the testimony of people familiar with the “memorialized conversations”. (page #15, Exhibit B)

 

This is an October 2017 filing, Comey was fired May 9th.  FBI Agent Archey is outlining Trump as the target who might adjust his testimony.  Again, more evidence of the special counsel focus being motivated by the obstruction case they were hoping to build. [Reminder, Comey was still FBI director at the time these memos were written]

The next section gets to the heart of why the FBI wants to keep the Comey memos hidden and not released.

In this section Archey outlines how FBI Director James Comey wrote down who the sources were; what code-names were assigned; how those confidential sources engaged with FISA coverage initiated by the FBI; what foreign governments were assisting with their effort; and what the plans were for the investigation.

Again, why memorialize all of this classified information unless the memos were intended as CYA protection for himself?

There’s also really good news in here.  Think about it.  Now we know the entire anti-Trump operation is memorialized in writing.  There is documentary evidence of the entire operation, from the perspective of James Comey, within these memos.  We did not know that before this moment.

Therefore, it looks like President Trump can add the Comey Memos to the pre-existing declassification list.  At any time, President Trump now has an additional set of documents he knows to exist that his office can ask to be released.

If the FBI was running an honest and genuine investigation; what do they have to fear from the release of the Comey Memos now that the investigation is over.

China Confirms Ideological Disposition: “no matter what Americans do, the negative impact on us would be manageable and foreseeable.”…


We have discussed the Chinese outlook toward trade and negotiations at great length.  One of the overriding issues has always been the zero-sum disposition of China as it relates to any engagement. To wit: if it does not benefit China, it simply is not done.

Peace or war. Win or lose. Yin and Yang. Culturally there is no middle position in dealings with China; they are not constitutionally capable of understanding or valuing the western philosophy of mutual benefit where concession of terms gains a larger outcome.  If it does not benefit China, it is not done. The outlook is simply, a polarity of peace or war.  In politics or economics the same perspective is true.  It is a zero-sum outlook. (link)

Against the collapse of trade negotiations, the ideology of Chairman Xi Jinping is showcased today in the first official responses from the Chinese government toward the U.S. initiating tariffs due to Beijing’s duplicitous reversal on prior commitments.

(SCMP) Beijing will not make concessions in trade talks in response to Donald Trump’s latest tariff threats, Chinese state media said in a commentary published a day after the US president announced increases in duties on Chinese goods.

“Things we think are advantageous for us, we will do it even without anyone asking,” People’s Daily reported on its WeChat account on Tuesday.

“Things that are unfavourable to us, no matter how you ask, we will not take any step back. Do not even think about it.”

[…] The piece was the first official Chinese opinion piece since Trump went on Twitter and announced plans to more than double the tariffs on US$200 billion worth of Chinese goods because trade talks were going on “too slowly” for his liking.

[…] “According to the [relative economic strengthens] of China and the US and the trend of development, as long as we can focus on developing our country, no matter what Americans do, the negative impact on us would be manageable and foreseeable.”  (more)

Well, that’s that then…  Time to unleash the Wilburine!

 

Senator Shaheen Questions FBI Director Wray About Term: “Spying”…


It didn’t work out too well the last time New Hampshire Senator Jeanne Shaheen asked Attorney General Bill Barr about the term ‘spying’.  This time the intentionally obtuse senator questions the term “spying” on the Trump campaign by conflating a Title III criminal investigation (which never happened), with Title I counterintelligence investigation (which did happen).

Senator Shaheen uses a criminal example, operations against the mob, to ask FBI Director Wray about ‘spying’.  As expected, Director Wray delivers the reply she was seeking.

.

At this point in the ongoing slow boil of FBI corruption it has become obvious why DAG Rod Rosenstein recommended Chris Wray for the position in 2017.  Wray picked up, right were James Comey left-off.  What the heck kind of answer is this?

…”I don’t think I personally have any evidence of that sort”.

Trump’s China Tweet


$2 Trillion of ‘Goodwill’: Did Pelosi and Schumer Just Play Trump?


Published on May 2, 2019

SUBSCRIBED 126K

President Trump meets privately with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, who emerge announcing “goodwill” and a common commitment to spend $2 trillion on infrastructure spending. Did Trump get played? Will Democrat insistence on environmental regulations drag out projects and jack up their price? If you enjoy reason, thought, civil dialogue and just plain fun, you’ll find your people at our new, Member-exclusive, website. You’ll join the team that produces and enjoys some 44 new shows each month, a rich video archive, and a dynamic Member-written blog. Find your people today at https://BillWhittle.com/register/

“Democracy Dollars” to Make Everyone a Campaign Donor, Cut Power of Wealthy


Published on May 2, 2019

SUBSCRIBED 126K
New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand wants to reduce the influence of wealthy white men, and make every voter a campaign donor by giving us all vouchers — drawn on the federal treasury — so we can contribute to candidates of our choosing. Candidates would agree to refuse contributions above $200 in order to receive these “Democracy dollars.” What’s the harm in that? Bill Whittle explains. Lively discussion grounded in conservative principles comes not just in our 44 video new videos each month, and our deep archive, but in our exclusive Member-written blog, threaded discussions, and private message power. Come home to your people now at https://BillWhittle.com/register/

FBI Scheduled to Make Court Filing on Release of Comey Journal Tomorrow…


It is worth remembering a recent court filing by the FBI where we discover James Comey documented each “Crossfire Hurricane” intelligence decision. Within the CYA memos  Comey included the ID of code-named spies in a journal of sorts, that remains hidden for now.  I have a hunch the full Comey journal will soon be released.

A court filing originally scheduled for April 15th, to determine the outcome of the multiple memos, and FBI closed-court discussion therein, was delayed until May 7th, tomorrow:

The number of Comey memos is why I now describe them collectively as the Comey “journal”.  {Go Deep} The reason I suspect the “journal” will soon be released is connected to the recent New York Times release admitting to the use of FBI intelligence assets(Stefan Halper and Azra Turk)) in the Trump operation.

Last week’s NYT “spy” admission followed a report a month earlier (everyone forgot) that DOJ Inspector General was investigating the FBI use of Stefan Halper.

CTH notes a conspicuous similarity where all FBI leaks are positioned to present justifications ahead of document/investigative releases adverse to the group’s interests.  These leaks appear to be planned releases from corrupt officials still employed within the FBI, and political allies outside government (Lawfare and MSM).

All of the leaks are justifications.  The Comey’s memos, as described by Weissmann and Mueller’s lead FBI Agent, David Archey, are also based around “justification”.

FBI Director James Comey transparently wrote those justification memos in his journal in 2016 and 2017 exactly for a moment when/if questions were raised about what the FBI investigators were doing.

Considering there were already FBI investigators taking notes and documenting the operation, there is no other intellectually honest motive for James Comey writing an independent journal other than justifying the specific activity. 

It would make sense for the currently employed corrupt FBI officials to head-off any inquiry, and lead their defense, with documents/leaks that justify their activity.

Additionally, Weissmann and Mueller positioned the corrupt FBI operation to remain completely in-the-loop on any damaging investigative material when they had a dedicated staff of FBI agents writing reports back to FBI Headquarters:

(Page 13 Weissmann-Mueller report)

When you read that underlined passage you realize how smart Weissmann, Mueller and the small group were.  The corrupt investigative unit set up a process where they could leak to the media at will, and yet if anyone ever made inquiry there are so many people piped-in to the investigation it would be impossible to find the leaker.

Simultaneously, for the ongoing cover-up needs of FBI Director Christopher Wray, Deputy Director David Bowditch and FBI General Counsel Dana Boente they had a daily briefing to use in burying issues adverse to their institutional interests.

If you wondered why the FBI was busy sending lawyers in with each person questioned by congress, well, page #13 of the Weissmann/Mueller report explains exactly what purposes those lawyers likely maintained.   The entire leadership structure of the FBI appears clearly compromised.  Hence the David Archey declarations align therein.

What better ongoing way for Director Wray to protect his institutional interests than to coordinate with General Counsel Dana Boente a series of document releases that will justify the corrupt endeavors of the preceding team of officials.  I digress….

Lastly, don’t be surprised to see the arc of this story bends slightly, and with increased scrutiny will will discover the White House National Security Counsel (NSC) was a participant in the political weaponization of intelligence through a memorandum of understanding with the FBI.

It would make sense if the Obama NSC had access to the FBI surveillance database, and simultaneously extracted raw intelligence search results….. keep watching.

TheLastRefuge@TheLastRefuge2

Something to consider given the current state of adversarial hostilities toward AG Barr in DC.

🤔What if tomorrow the DOJ/FBI suddenly doesn’t object to releasing *ALL* of Comey’s memos (the full spygate journal)?

Backstory: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/05/04/james-comey-justifies-fbi-spy-operations-more-reason-to-release-his-volumes-of-spygate-memos/ 

225 people are talking about this

USTR Lighthizer: “We have seen an erosion of commitments by China” … “in our view unacceptable”…


To say there are conflicting reports of the U.S-China trade discussion, and possible breakdown therein, would be an understatement.  However, mining through the various U.S. and China news agencies, a more clear picture emerges.

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighizer is quoted today: “We felt we were on track to get somewhere. Over the course of last week we have seen an erosion of commitments by China. That in our view is unacceptable.”  This statement appears to be in line with reports from Beijing about Chinese negotiators: “with sources suggesting that President Xi Jinping vetoed additional concessions proposed by his negotiators.”

(Bloomberg) […] Lighthizer and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told reporters on Monday that the Chinese backsliding became apparent during their visit to Beijing last week, but that they had been reassured by their Chinese interlocutors that everything would turn out.

That changed over the weekend when China sent through a new draft of an agreement that included them pulling back on language in the text on a number of issues, which had the “potential to change the deal very dramatically,” Mnuchin said.

At that stage about 90 percent of the pact had been finalized, he said, and the Chinese wanted to reopen areas that had already been negotiated.  “We are not willing to go back on documents that have been negotiated in the past,” he said.  (read more)

The South China Morning Post concurs with Mnuchin and Lighthizer’s explanations when they share:

“Xi told them ‘I’ll be responsible for all possible consequences’,” the second source said. Chinese negotiators subsequently presented a tougher proposal to Washington, although it is not clear if they pitched an amended proposal to Xi after the latest round of talks in Beijing last week. (link)

So we see the framework of the duplicitous and conniving Chinese being duplicitous and conniving. Go figure.

Again, this status-conflict is in complete alignment with the historic Chinese world-view.  It is not so much an issue with differences of opinions; the U.S. -vs- China trade conflict is actually a fundamental issue of cultural clashes.

March 2018 – […] China has no cultural or political space between peace and war; they are a historic nation based on two points of polarity.  They see peace and war as coexisting with each other.

China accepts and believes opposite or contrary forces may actually be complementary, interconnected, and interdependent in the natural world, and they may give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another.  Flowing between these polar states is a natural dynamic to be used -with serious contemplation- in advancing objectives as needed.

Peace or war. Win or lose. Yin and Yang. Culturally there is no middle position in dealings with China; they are not constitutionally capable of understanding or valuing the western philosophy of mutual benefit where concession of terms gains a larger outcome.  If it does not benefit China, it is not done. The outlook is simply, a polarity of peace or war.  In politics or economics the same perspective is true.  It is a zero-sum outlook.

Historic Chinese geopolitical policy, vis-a-vis their totalitarian control over political sentiment (action) and diplomacy through silence, is evident in the strategic use of the space between carefully chosen words, not just the words themselves.

Each time China takes aggressive action (red dragon) China projects a panda face through silence and non-response to opinion of that action;…. and the action continues. The red dragon has a tendency to say one necessary thing publicly, while manipulating another necessary thing privately.  The Art of War.

President Trump is the first U.S. President to understand how the red dragon hides behind the panda mask.

It is specifically because he understands that Panda is a mask that President Trump messages warmth toward the Chinese people, and pours vociferous praise upon Xi Jinping, while simultaneously confronting the geopolitical doctrine of the Xi regime.

In essence Trump is mirroring the behavior of China while confronting their economic duplicity. (more)

The Chinese delegation is still coming to DC on Wednesday/Thursday but it is doubtful anything will stop the increased tariffs from taking place Friday morning.