In a very weird series of events journalist John Solomon published an article in The Hill. Despite the content directly relating to new and stunning revelations about an FBI operation in 2009; the connection to the current Russia investigation by Robert Mueller; and their use of a Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska in both investigations; the Hill Editors filed the article under “opinion”.

Secondly, after the original article was published, John Solomon gained new information about the FBI contacting Oleg Deripaska in September of 2016; before the election and before the FBI gained a FISA warrant against Carter Page and the Trump Campaign. Instead of a new article, four paragraphs were inserted as an “update” to the original content. Very weird decisions.  – READ ARTICLE HERE –

The discoveries and the story by Solomon carry huge ramifications; yet it appears there is an intentional effort by The Hill to bury the details.  Something very sketchy is afoot.

John Solomon appeared on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show to discuss the story:

Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy appears on Shannon Bream’s television show to discuss the ongoing battle between congress and the DOJ over information and evidence surrounding DOJ/FBI corruption in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

It’s a good interview to watch because McCarthy has just read a large portion of the text messages between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok for THIS ARTICLE.  As a result of reviewing the content, McCarthy is able to accurately frame his reference points and provides information that is divergent from the MSM preferred narrative. WATCH:

.

Again CTH reminds readers, despite thousands of articles written by MSM, you can count on one hand the number of journalists who have actually read through all 500+ pages (both releases) of text message communication between DOJ Lawyer Lisa Page and FBI Agent Peter Strzok.  It’s easy to spot who has not read them because the content of their articles is disputed by the underlying facts within Page/Strzok internal messages.

The article by McCarthy referenced in the interview is very good.  SEE IT HERE

As McCarthy points out, it is not likely there was a singular FBI source buried within the Trump campaign.  Instead it’s more likely that particular campaign aides were targeted and dirtied-up by unofficial intelligence operators like Stefan Halper.  Once those aides were given the appearance of being aligned with foreign enterprise, the FBI was then able to conduct surveillance and construct a narrative useful for their ‘insurance policy’.

More on that approach previously outlined HERE.

I have a sneaking suspicion the Machiavellian connections between the U.S. intelligence apparatus and multiple foreign agents/actors, including the work of Stefan Halper in the 2016 presidential election, are only a few days from fully surfacing.  There could be enough sunlight on U.K/U.S. political and intelligence officers to launch multiple investigations.

There was always something suspicious about Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chair Diane Feinstein abdicating her Gang-of-Eight position to Senator Mark Warner immediately after the 2016 election.  Feinstein stepped down from her intel committee post and took up a defensive posture as Vice-Chair on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Senator Feinstein is a political animal. She knows the deep state; she knows the deep state secrets; her position gave her operational knowledge; with that knowledge she carried leverage; and the move from Offense (Senate Intel) to Defense (Senate Judicary) just reeked of deep swamp maneuvering.   Obama campaigning last week for her, against the left-wing progressive challenge, transparently looked like a leverage expenditure.

On August 22nd, 2017, Fusion-GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson testified to the Senate Judicary Committee (Grassley Chairman, Feinstein Co-Chair) about his engagements with Christopher Steele and the formation of the Steele Dossier.  The Dossier underpinned the October 21st, 2016, FISA Title-1 surveillance warrant used on Carter Page and against the Trump campaign.

Almost five months later, January 9th, 2018, Feinstein unilaterally released the transcript of Glenn Simpson’s testimony without consulting anyone else on the committee.

At the time of the unauthorized transcript release, it looked even more suspicious {see here}.  Professional Deep State operative Feinstein doesn’t make “mistakes”.  There had to be a reason for it.  There had to be a self-interested reason for it {suspected here}.

In the last week the motive has surfaced.  Today, the motive takes on an even larger understanding.

Attention has been paid to Glenn Simpson saying in that August 2017 testimony the FBI had some additional ‘inside’ knowledge in addition to Chris Steele’s information.  Talk of campaign interlopers increased last week after the DOJ/FBI started stonewalling Devin Nunes and accusing him of trying to reveal the identity of a confidential CIA and FBI source for the 2016 origination of the FBI counterintelligence operation against Trump.

People began connecting Glenn Simpson’s prior 2017 testimony about ‘inside sources’ to the 2018 DOJ statements about exposing CIA/FBI ‘sources’. {See Here} Due to defensive leaks from within the corrupt intelligence apparatus the name Stefan Halper was identified.  {See Here} Stefan Halper is a foreign policy expert and Cambridge professor with connections to the CIA and its British counterpart, MI6.

Halper connects to the same circle of intelligence operatives Christopher Steele used for his sketchy Dossier construct.

A close circle of politically connected U.S., British, Australian and Russian intelligence insiders begins to back-stop the larger conspiracy.

The information provided by the international crew was apparently shaped and funneled by former CIA Director John Brennan to the FBI for domestic political exploitation.

Back to Feinstein.

In his podcast today Dan Bongino outlines the hindsight appearance of Dianne Feinstein publishing the Glenn Simpson testimony in an effort to: A) remind Simpson what he said; and, B) warn all other operational participants of the potential risk.  {Listen Here}  This is what we suspected back in January when Feinstein initially released the transcript.

Senator Feinstein’s 2016 senior staffer (with Gang-of-Eight security clearance) was Dan Jones.  It was recently revealed that Dan Jones contracted with Christopher Steele to continue work on the Russia Conspiracy angle after the 2016 election, and raised over $50 million toward the ideological goals of removing President Trump. {See Here}

Staffer Dan Jones surfaces in the text messages from Feinstein’s replacement on the Gang-of-Eight, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman, Mark Warner {See Here}

Senator Warner was texting with Adam Waldman about setting up a meeting with Chris Steele.  Walman is a lobbyist with a $40,000 monthly retainer to lobby the U.S. government on behalf of controversial Russian billionaire Oleg V. Deripaska.

Senator Mark Warner was trying to set up a covert meeting.  In the text messages Adam Waldman is telling Senator Warner that Chris Steele will not meet with him without a written letter (request) from the Senate Intelligence Committee.  Senator Warner didn’t want the Republican members to know about a meeting.  Chris Steele knew this was a partisan political set-up and was refusing to meet unilaterally with Senator Warner.   Lobbyist Adam Waldman was playing the go-between:

That “Dan Jones”, mentioned above, talking with Chris Steele and told to go to see Senator Warner, is the former senate staffer Dan Jones, who was previously attached to Dianne Feinstein.

Simultaneously, while trying to connect Senator Warner to Christopher Steele, text messenger (go-between) Adam Waldman is representing Oleg Deripaska:

(Source Link) 

Oleg Deripaska was a source of intelligence information within the John Brennan intelligence community efforts throughout 2016. This is the same intersection of  characters that circle around Stefan Halper.

….And today, journalist John Solomon just connected Deripaska to Robert Mueller and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. {See Here} You just can’t make this stuff up.

THE HILL – In 2009, when Mueller ran the FBI, the bureau asked Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska to spend millions of his own dollars funding an FBI-supervised operation to rescue a retired FBI agent, Robert Levinson, captured in Iran while working for the CIA in 2007.

Yes, that’s the same Deripaska who has surfaced in Mueller’s current investigation and who was recently sanctioned by the Trump administration. (read more)

Oh, and that 2009 FBI operation carried out by Robert Mueller and Andrew McCabe, well, apparently it was unlawful.  But wait, it gets better….

Senator Warner’s 2017 intermediary Adam Waldman, also spoke to John Solomon just yesterday about how the FBI attempted to use Oleg Deripaska in September 2016 to frame the Russian narrative before the FISA Warrant:

John Solomon – […] Deripaska also appears to be one of the first Russians the FBI asked for help when it began investigating the now-infamous Fusion GPS “Steele Dossier.” Waldman, his American lawyer until the sanctions hit, gave me a detailed account, some of which U.S. officials confirmseparately.

Two months before Trump was elected president, Deripaska was in New York as part of Russia’s United Nations delegation when three FBI agents awakened him in his home; at least one agent had worked with Deripaska on the aborted effort to rescue Levinson. During an hour-long visit, the agents posited a theory that Trump’s campaign was secretly colluding with Russia to hijack the U.S. election.

“Deripaska laughed but realized, despite the joviality, that they were serious,” the lawyer said. “So he told them in his informed opinion the idea they were proposing was false. ‘You are trying to create something out of nothing,’ he told them.” The agents left though the FBI sought more information in 2017 from the Russian, sources tell me. Waldman declined to say if Deripaska has been in contact with the FBI since Sept, 2016.  (read more)

Oh, and those reports last week about the White House supporting the DOJ in keeping the origination material from Devin Nunes?….. Yeah, well, those IC leaks to the WaPo and New York Times were false too.

Finally, guess who was supposed to be conducting oversight in 2016 when all of these politically motivated intelligence operations were going on?… Yeah, well, that would be the Gang-of-Eight…

…the same congressional oversight group Senator Dianne Feinstein bailed out of…. Go Figure:

Now does this make more sense:

Listen carefully to the opening statement from former CIA Director John Brennan May 23rd, 2017, during his testimony to congress.

Pay very close attention to the segment at 13:35 of this video of Brennan’s testimony:

Brennan: [13:35] “Third, through the so-called Gang-of-Eight process we kept congress apprised of these issues as we identified them.”

“Again, in consultation with the White House, I PERSONALLY briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership; specifically: Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr; and to representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members.”

“Given the highly sensitive nature of what was an active counter-intelligence case [that means the FBI], involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”…

.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/371101285/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-pMEa6x5I0qt6SU7fudq7

.

Sketchy porn lawyer Michael Avanetti took to twitter today to threaten anyone who might look into his shady financial background:

Apparently this is in response to some research by Robert Barnes who discovered Avanetti filed for bankruptcy in December 2017, claiming total assets of $412K – and then ::poof:: mysteriously three months later, at the same time he takes to the airwaves with Stormy Daniels, he comes into a windfall of $8 million.  SEE STORY HERE.

Seemingly connected, a picture graphic is causing Avanetti great angst:

(Source)

Congressman Darrell Issa appears on Sunday Morning with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the ongoing issues with FBI and DOJ officials stonewalling congressional oversight.

One of the interesting aspects noted by Issa is the people underneath the top-tier of justice management, the careerists, who are the ones actually running the operation, defending the administrative state, and protecting the previous conduct of their organizational embeds.

Mr. Dan Bongino appears on Fox News Morning to discuss revelations about how the FBI conducted a politically motivated counterintelligence operation against Donald Trump.

.

Bongino also discussed more details on his podcast – SEE HERE

Knowing what we know now – how Stefan Harper (a foreign policy expert and Cambridge professor with connections to the CIA and its British counterpart, MI6), randomly reached out to contact Trump low-level campaign aide George Papadopoulos; and how that contact was likely part of a coordinated effort by political operatives within the U.S intelligence apparatus to start the counterintelligence operation against Trump;  this prior interview with Chairman Devin Nunes is well worth re-watching.

About a month ago, April 22nd, 2018, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes appeared on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the origin of the counterintelligence operation (July 2016) against the Trump campaign.

This interview follows a mid-April FBI release of “some information” about the original “electronic communication” (EC) documents that underpinned the origin of the FBI operation. The first half of the interview contains stunning information about how the raw intelligence product within the EC did not come through official intelligence channels.

The origin of the 2016 counterintelligence operation, which was specifically started by CIA Director John Brennan sharing his ‘raw intelligence product’ with the FBI, was not an official product of the U.S. intelligence community. Brennan was NOT using official partnerships with intelligence agencies of our Five-Eyes partner nations; and he did not provide raw intelligence -as an outcome of those relationships- to the FBI.

.

When we first watched this interview the initial questions were: if the EC is not based on official intelligence from U.S. intelligence apparatus or any of the ‘five-eyes’ partners, then what is the origin, source and purpose therein, of the unofficial raw intelligence? Who created it? And why?

We now know the originating structure involved Stefan Halper the foreign policy expert and Cambridge professor deeply connected to the CIA and its British counterpart, MI6.

We must also remember CIA Director John Brennan gave congressional testimony last year where he explained how he delivered the raw intelligence product itself. We spotted several issues, and Brennan’s obfuscation, a year ago, when Brennan first gave his testimony.

On May 23rd, 2017, Former CIA Director John Brennan gave very specific testimony to congress where he noted he provided the raw intelligence to FBI Director Comey – FULLSTOP.  We now know Stefan Halper was part of the group assembling that raw intelligence.  All of it was, as Nunes outlined, “through unofficial channels”.

Listen carefully to the opening statement from former CIA Director John Brennan May 23rd, 2017, during his testimony to congress. Pay very close attention to the segment at 13:35 of this video of Brennan’s testimony:

Brennan: [13:35] “Third, through the so-called Gang-of-Eight process we kept congress apprised of these issues as we identified them.”

“Again, in consultation with the White House, I PERSONALLY briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership; specifically: Senators Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and Richard Burr; and to representatives Paul Ryan, Nancy Pelosi, Devin Nunes and Adam Schiff between 11th August and 6th September [2016], I provided the same briefing to each of the gang of eight members.”

“Given the highly sensitive nature of what was an active counter-intelligence case [that means the FBI], involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”…

In the last paragraph of the testimony above Brennan is describing raw intelligence gathered prior to the Carter Page FISA Application/Warrant (October 21st, 2016).

In hindsight, and against the known facts from research, we can clearly identify two central motives surrounding why the intelligence apparatus needed the FISA warrant. First, the FBI and larger team of co-conspirators needed to have a retroactive legal basis for political surveillance that was happening long before the warrant was issued.   Second, this was all part of an insurance policy to create the illusion of a Russian Conspiracy – that would later be used -if needed- in an effort to eliminate President Trump.

The unlawful foundational FBI surveillance, which happened prior to October 2016, included the use of unauthorized FISA-702 queries of the NSA and FBI database for political opposition research by contractors. Again, much like the unofficial origin of the Stefan Halper raw intelligence that began the July 2016 counterintelligence op, the FISA(702) abuse was simply more ‘unofficial’ use of the intelligence apparatus.

Once the FBI Counterintelligence operation began, it was the FBI (Comey) and ODNI (Clapper) generating intel reports, likely included in the Presidents’ Daily Briefing (PDB), as evidenced by Page and Strzok messages saying: “POTUS wants to know what we’re doing”.

The CIA provided the false raw intel, via Stefan Halper, to start the operation, and the FBI and DOJ-NSD (National Security Division) generated the raw monitoring intelligence from the characters identified by the CIA, FBI, DOJ-NSD and approved by FBI FISA-Title 1 warrant submissions.

The FBI were running the counter-intelligence operation and generating the actual reports that were eventually shared with the White House, Susan Rice and the Dept of Justice.  That’s why all the unmasking requests. Those reports, or interpretations of the report content, were leaked to the media by political operatives in the IC (and specifically FBI) throughout the deployment of the “insurance policy”, by Lisa Page, Mike Kortan, James Baker and Peter Strzok – with the guiding hand of Andy McCabe.

During the time James Comey’s FBI was generating the intelligence reports, Comey admitted he intentionally never informed congressional oversight: “because of the sensitivity of the matter“.

In his congressional testimony John Brennan was smartly (and intentionally) positioning himself out of the picture from the perspective of the illegal acts within the entire process. ODNI James Clapper while rubbing his face and scratching his head had taken the same route earlier. That approach would leave James Comey, Andrew McCabe and the small group within the DOJ-NSD and FBI.

The CIA and DNI wanted all traceable fingerprints to be from DOJ and FBI.  And that’s exactly what happened…. so far.

In his May 2017 testimony, Director Brennan goes on to say the main substance of those Gang of Eight briefings (2016) was the same as the main judgements of the January 2017 classified and unclassified Russian intelligence assessments published by the CIA, FBI, DNI and NSA (intelligence community).

The January reference was the infamous 17 agencies report, from CIA (Brennan), DNI (Clapper), FBI (Comey) and NSA (Rogers), all who had confidence -except Rogers- according to the report, that Russia was attempting to interfere in the 2016 election. The intelligence report was finished January 4, 2017, the day before the White House meeting with Comey, Brennan, Clapper, etc. and documented by Susan Rice.

A skeptic might think John Brennan is informing congress on one thing (Russian investigation), and James Comey due to his March 20th admissions (Trump counterintelligence investigation), is NOT INFORMING congress on another.

However, that angle of obfuscation is rebuked by Brennan’s own testimony that his specific intelligence product (CIA) was given to the FBI who were exclusively in charge of the “counter-intelligence investigation“.

What Brennan was doing in May 2017 was actually creating his defense, and positioning James Comey as the primary person who is to blame for any outcome therein.

However, the central risk of sunlight from revelations about Stefan Halper, cannot be assigned to James Comey – hence the current severity of angst from John Brennan.

In May 2017, while this testimony was happening, deploying the “insurance policy” was still plausible – but it was becoming less likely to succeed.

In May 2017 CIA Director John Brennan was making James Comey own the “Counter-Intelligence ‘Muh Russia’” claims about the Trump campaign. As a consequence, Brennan was trying to make Comey the fall-guy for a Robert Mueller investigative outcome in case everything fell apart and their deployment of the “insurance policy” failed.

Brennan knows there’s no ‘there’ there.  However, the problem with Brennan’s approach is within Stefan Halper.  Director James Comey used the raw intelligence provided to him by Brennan to start the investigation, but he did not originate it; Brennan did. That’s the risk to Brennan if Devin Nunes is successful in getting the information about  Stefan Halper into the investigative psyche.

The entire construct of the “Russian Investigation” was the political use of manufactured intelligence, used to create an investigation in order to eliminate, President-Elect Trump or President Trump. This was their “insurance policy”.

However, there simply was no ‘there’ there because there’s no substantive evidence to support a “Trump Campaign Collusion Narrative”. Eventually, all avenues to prove the existence of something, that doesn’t exist, hit a dead end.

Comey made a March 20th, 2017, admission to congress that the FBI intentionally kept congress in the dark during the construct of the counter-intel narrative.

Congress was kept in the dark during this phase because the narrative can only thrive with innuendo, rumor, gossip etc. The appearance of the investigation itself was the political need; the substance was non-existent and immaterial to the creation of the narrative.

If Comey notified congress, via the Gang of Eight oversight, the counter-intel narrative would have been harder to manufacture as details would have to be consistent; and people like Devin Nunes would know what was going on.  That was the benefit to keeping any oversight away while creating the politically useful narrative.

In May 2017, CIA Director John Brennan, facing the underlying Russian ‘collusion evidence’ being non-existent, was trying to give the appearance that he briefed congress on larger Russian election interference issues. However, the trouble for Brennan is his own admissions.  He is saying it was his raw intelligence that underlay the principle for the FBI counter-intelligence investigation.

Brennan specifically says he gave his raw intelligence product to the FBI.  That raw intelligence product is now under scrutiny (along with what the FBI did with it).

There is something profoundly sanctimonious about Benjamin Witte and fired FBI Director James Comey sitting under a the banner of “Lawfare” and pontificating about the need to save beloved “institutions of government”.  Even the terminology “Lawfare” describes the intentional use of the legal process to wage ideological war against your enemies; in this example, political enemies.

In this soundbite captures from a Brookings Institution symposium break-out session sponsored by Benjamin Witte and the Lawfare Blog, Witte interviews James Comey about the threats posed by the sunlight of House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes.

.

The Lawfare group is mentioned several times in text messages between corrupt FBI Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ Special Counsel Lisa Page.  The group of like-minded, politically motivate, lawyers was used frequently by Lisa Page to frame arguments within their investigative endeavors during the Clinton exoneration and Trump investigation.

Accordingly, recently resigned FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker announced after his departure he was going to work for Wittes at Lawfare.  Birds of a feather.. etc.

The position espoused by James Comey in the video snippet is almost identical to the espoused motives of his friend Robert Mueller.  Both officials reconcile allowing the politicization and weaponization of the FBI and DOJ around the premise of ‘defending the institutions’.  It’s an absurdly circular framework of ideology.

There is no doubt Comey allowed, and at times promoted, the political use of the FBI in an effort to achieve goals based on his own corrupt standards and values.  One only needs to look at the conduct of the upper-tier of officials within the agencies to see the breeding ground for agenda-based institutions.

FBI Director James Comey, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Chief Legal Counsel James Baker, Chief of Staff Jim Rybicki, Director of Public Affairs Michael Kortan and embattled FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok are all clearly outlined as participating in some of the most corrupt internal schemes in the history of the agency.

This “tight group” as Comey describes, have all been fired -or demoted then resigned- with clear evidence of misconduct outlined by the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility.

The sole remaining person (on the FBI side) central to the “small group” endeavors is demoted FBI agent Peter Strzok; likely due to cooperation at some level with the ongoing internal investigations.   We have yet to fully understand the scale of the corruption therein; but the parts we do know are astounding.

The mindset in this Wittes/Comey interview is bizarre to say the least.  Corrupt the  institution for political motives – then decry transparency demanded of the corruption therein in an effort to preserve the institution.  To quote Emerson: “The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons.”