#Spygate – President Trump Highlights Lou Dobbs Segment Outlining December 2015 FBI CoIntel Operation….

The backstory is important here.  Two days ago internet researcher Nick Falco discovered a potentially damning text dated December 28th 2015 within a previously released set of Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages.  The original text was redacted in one section (Page #31); however, somehow further down the release (Page #159) the same text was not redacted.  It is presumed the FBI redacted the word “lures”, whereas the IG did not.

In one release (page #31) the word “lures” was redacted.  In the second release (page #159) it was NOT redacted.

The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Chairman Ron Johnson, released over 500 pages of documents and texts.  On page #159 (pdf here) the unredacted version of the following message appears:

(Link to pdf – page #159)

“You get all our oconus lures approved?”

“OCONUS” means Outside Continental U.S.  “LURES” in this context is ‘spies’; or as Chris Farrell discusses, likely double agents.  The messages were December 28th, 2015.

•Peter Strzok asking Lisa Page:  Did you get all our outside U.S. spies approved?
•Lisa Page responds: “No, it’s just implicated a much bigger policy issue. I’ll explain later. Might even be able to use it as a pretext for a call…”

The implication is this could have been the pre-planning for #Spygate. This is what Lou Dobbs and Chris Farrell are discussing; and apparently President Trump noticed:

(Link to Trump Tweet)

Here’s the full release of documents:

This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, CIA, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

411 Responses to #Spygate – President Trump Highlights Lou Dobbs Segment Outlining December 2015 FBI CoIntel Operation….

  1. jello333 says:

    What is the “cpc issue”? Lisa tells Peter:

    “Obviously you can’t know anything about the cpc issue yet.”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Blue bongo says:

      FBI Counterproliferation Center

      Liked by 2 people

    • If Strzok is putting together a task force in late Dec 2015, he’s setting up a spy ring on the entire republican primary candidate field AND most likely was spying on fellow Bernie Sander’s campaign as well. You can guarantee this especially since Bernie was sabotaged at the DNC because Clinton had the whole org locked down, but his rise in popularity wasn’t anticipated which is why many super delegates announced their support for Clinton publicly and frequently well before the primary vote was carried out in their states.

      Iowa’s primaries were completed Feb 1, 2016 so let that sink in. How long do you think it takes to put ops in place to carry out a mission? Think about that. Trump was still predicted to fade in popularity at this point in time. One thing everyone forgets is Obama spied on all our allies because 1) he could and 2) he needed to look like the smartest man in the room. By having knowledge before hand, he could walk into negotiations and talks with the upper hand.. So please grip the entire scenario and timelines. There are republicans, Gowdy & Ryan, who know in depth about the whole operation and that’s why you’re seeing a whole bunch of republican incumbents deciding not to run for re-election sighting working with Trump as the reason. Democrats involved have no shame and still believe they can mitigate the outcome of these investigations. That’s why they are still running for re-election. Trust me… Its far beyond what people believe.

      Liked by 8 people

      • mrbarger says:

        Thanks, RobosaurusRex. You are the first person to unpack the significance of Strzok starting spy ops in 2015. This has to mean that the targets were several if not all GOP candidates and probably Bernie because Trump wasn’t even the front runner yet.

        I hope treepers will dive into this rabbit hole. Obama is the most corrupt President since Harding.

        I have tweeted parts of your post so I hope more people become aware of this.


    • CopperTop says:

      jello -This is certificate of probable cause. i posted a summary of the texts on another thread and what the probable use of this term and lure would mean in context of 12/2015. It’s something you need when you are trying to ensure that the criminal defendant can’t plea no contest or use some other procedural tactic to expedite a verdict. It squeezes a defendants options for wiggling out of cooperating for bigger fish.

      PS: just because everyone here is saying that lure is a spy & it’s exciting doesn’t mean they are understanding the use of the terms or the ones in that month of texts.

      Basically a lure is an operation…a person may ‘lure’ and that may make them a human intelligence asset…but a lure is not a spy…a lure is an operation….and it’s guided by US code because of state craft concerns…sovereign nations don’t like people being learned to and from their country because they have friendly extradition treaty etc.. Done all the time of course but there is a record approval process.

      If this lure is a bombshell…there’s paperwork.

      Liked by 5 people

      • CopperTop says:

        * sorry should have said expedite an appeal not ‘verdict’. It squeezes a defendant wishing to plea no contest form just filing an appeal to avoid the ramifications of their plea deal

        Liked by 1 person

      • Thank you – I also was wondering about that “cpc” so I did a search. Good grief, there are 199 different definitions!


      • Bill Dunn says:

        Isn’t lure just another word for entrapment?
        Trying to “lure” someone into something they might otherwise not do?


        • Rachel Guess says:

          A lure would not necessarily mean entrapment. Entrapment occurs when you create an action from another individual that would not have occurred otherwise.

          For instance, if I said hey dude I scored an awesome stash the other day and you said hey let me buy some from you, no entrapment has occurred because you are making the overture, not me. However if I instead asked you if you wanted to buy some of my stash, that would be entrapment.

          In this case, a lure would be an asset saying I heard there are issues surrounding clinton’s emails and then letting the other person take the lead in the conversation, then there isn’t any entrapment. Entrapment would occur if I said I can arrange for you to meet a guy that has clinton’s missing emails for sale.


  2. Charlotte says:

    Halper was a crack cocaine addict.
    Barry Soetoro was a cocaine addict.
    Was that a pre-requisite for the job?

    OMG! Anti-Trump Deep State Spy Stefan Halper Was Busted on Crack Cocaine Charges!


    Liked by 4 people

    • farrier105 says:

      Maybe they are ALL crackheads–Comey, Brennan, Clapper, the whole damn bunch. That would explain EVERYTHING.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Karmaisabitch says:

        For sure most of the football players are. How else can one justify, their psychotic narcissistic behavior than cocaine psychosis. The amorality of putting themselves above God and country.


    • wolfmoon1776 says:

      Shiny object, IMO – but VERY HELPFUL when interpreted correctly. Remember – Halper is TIED TO THE CLINTONS. The crack is probably an enticement for an informant – very typical in DC. Could be for an IMPORTANT PERSON. Remember Marion Berry, the CRACK MAYOR? (Middle name SHEPILOV. LOL. Hilarious.)


      Barry’s downfall was under BUSH, but his REHABILITATION and RETURN TO MAYOR was under the CLINTONS.

      HALPER IS A SPY. He’s carrying crack for a REASON. And this is why the prosecution DROPPED IT. But this shows that HALPER was working his spy game in DC already in 1994 – PRESUMABLY FOR BEELZEBUBBA.

      I think this “Helper” guy is Russia’s RAT from the beginning, when he was kicking around with Beelzebubba in London. Now, they need his badness to be ANYTHING BUT RUSSIA.


      Halper really helps explain Uranium One. Here is a guy who was dialed in with Beelzebubba from the beginning. Imagine ALL THAT INFORMATION about the Clintons heading East.

      This guy is PURE CLINTON, and is tied in with everybody who REALLY wanted HILLARY TO WIN.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ray Arlen says:

        Barry’s…REHABILITATION…was under the CLINTONS.”

        Perhaps his rehabilitation amounted to being resupplied and thus recontrolled. That seems more Clintonesque, but I am just supposing.

        Liked by 2 people

    • cali says:

      Yeah he was arrested in VA in 1992 and in possession of cocaine. However somebody came along and ordered his file/case deleted.
      Despite that the court docs are still posted even though only partially. What’s missing is the actual case description in detail.

      I would not be surprised if the deep state had a hand in that Halper cocaine case to be erased ergo his compliance with the deep state owing one for the team. 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Dr.Jay says:

    CPC in FBI context would most likely be the FBI CounterProliferation Center.


    “The Counterproliferation Center (CPC) combines the operational activities of the Counterintelligence Division, the subject matter expertise of the WMDD, and the analytical capabilities of both components to identify and disrupt proliferation activities. Since its inception in July 2011, the CPC has overseen the arrest of approximately 65 individuals, including several considered by the U.S. Intelligence Community to be major proliferators. “

    Liked by 1 person

    • Food for thought. Could this have any connection to Uranium 1? I know ALL of this is connected in some way…but I mean a more direct connection.

      Liked by 2 people

    • singular says:

      Haven’t been able to read the link yet. Proliferation of What?


    • Blue bongo says:

      Under a T-1 “wiretap” for a counterintelligence operation the entire spectrum of the government is put into play. The “wire” runs 24/7 using every asset needed as required, every Intel agency, government agencies, and military. We are only seeing the smallest fraction of % of entire story that the government is approving for release.

      Liked by 1 person

      • cali says:

        @Blue bongo: I agree!

        Having read all the text and the email chain attached to the release its also obvious that Priestap himself was involved in cleaning up the language Comey proposed in regards to the findings in Hillary’s email/server case as well as having highly top secret SAP info on her server.

        Comey for example stated that Hillary accessed this server while in Russia where she also had email correspondence with Hussein et al. In Russia! An unencrypted server with SAP and other top secret and other classified info.
        So how did Hillary get SAP’s – SCIF top secret info on her server? Who gave it to her and why?
        The fact is that Comey – despite coming to the wrong conclusion not to prosecute her – listed her cross negligence/reckless handling of classified and top secret SAP, emailing back and forth with Hussein that was changed to ‘government official’ and worse – all changed as recommended by none other than Bill Priestap!
        If he indeed was a true white hat why watering down the actual crimes by Hillary et al?

        Hussein lied and so did everyone else interviewed by the FBI because as Comey wanted to report – everyone knew she was using her personal server to conduct government business throughout her term. That also means all those interviewed by the FBI – Mills, Samuelson, Abedin, Hussein and more all lied!

        Lastly – we also now know that Huma Abedin operated under a forged security clearance that was not approved by the regular chain of command. Like the Pakistani Awan spies – Huma Abedin just like them all had security clearances based on democratic ops vouching for knowing them. That’s how we have people like Abedin and Awan with security clearances without ever having done a background check! Think about that for one moment!

        The actual spying began in 2014 beginning with Mike Flynn after he gave a speech in Moscow and was seen sitting at the same table where Jill Stein and Vladimir Putin sat. Hussein and his deep state were gunning for Flynn ever since.

        Liked by 4 people

  4. SW Richmond says:

    Hang them. No, seriously, hang them.

    Liked by 9 people

  5. Frank Adelman says:

    The CTH has been providing YUGE valuable service to us consistently for months – deeply appreciate the hard work that goes into your reporting to us. I repeatedly credit you guys all across social media to let folks know to look you up.

    QUESTION: Given your past take on Sessions’ role, can we expect him to, at some point soon, drop the “aw shucks” persona and come out with guns blazing? Me and my entire fam have been turning blue out here holding our breath waiting for the big shoes to drop on all this mess for quite some time now. I have to tell you, att this point we will not be satisfied until we see footage of folks holding their designer jackets up in front of the cameras as they’re being led away in cuffs – know what I mean? I hope and pray that our President understands the true breadth and depth of the feeling out here in the Heartland (we’re in Ohio – TRUMP COUNTRY) about how we expect to see the whole lot of those bastards get what’s coming to them. And how we are going to feel if that doesn’t happen. If he is the slightest bit unsure, he should take a few moments and ask the folks at the next rally he holds….

    Liked by 8 people

    • tav144 says:

      I’m with ya. I and almost everyone I know in my orbit are saying the same thing. If they don’t perp walk these guys — and I mean those at the top of the food chain more than anyone & getting no deals – then I and everyone else I know who voted Trump in my locale have said that the rule of law will be DEAD. There is no trusting this government for fair and impartial justice if these criminals who tried to overthrow a duly elected president and nullify MY vote, get off with a slap. These people need to made an example of. Gowdy needs to get his priorities in order! Stop protecting an institution that will ONLY (!!!) be rehabilitated when those who abused the institution and abused the public’s trust, are held accountable!! If they are not held accountable and this becomes another whitewash sham the way the previous administration’s scandals were “pretend” investigated and then buried with no one held accountable, then there could very well be a severe backlash against these crooks and “their” crooked institutions by those in the heartland who have had enough of this garbage! I say “their” institutions, because when they stop representing the people’s interest and the people’s right to know via constitutionally mandated oversight of said constitutionally created institution, and the people’s right to have said constitutionally created institution obey the law just like everyone else — well, they cease to be OUR government institutions. They’ve become a law unto themselves, believing themselves above the law. They become an enemy of the State. A “domestic” enemy.
      As Alexander Hamilton noted in 1775, the government exercises powers to protect the absolute rights of the people, and the people could reclaim them if the government breaches this constitutional contract.
      For better or worse, the chickens have come home to roost, and they better make sure they handle this right or they’ll find their own neck in the wringer!

      Liked by 4 people

      • Great posts from both of you. I still hold out hope that AG Sessions will do exactly as you stated, Frank, and I believe wholeheartedly in our VSG. And you are both dead-on – if appropriate punishment is NOT issued out of all this crap, sadly, it will be time to take Mr. Hamilston’s statement to task and throw off the despots. For all who believe in prayer, pray HARD that we don’t have to face that day!


      • Grassleygirl/Breitbartista says:

        Progressives do not believe we are a Constitutional Rebublic.
        Has anyone ever heard a dem refer to the US as anything other then a democracy?
        Sadly many repubs are also progressives.All progressives are big government statists.
        Unless there are real consequences, and convictions these people will not be deterred .
        They will not stop undermining the electoral college either. Rule of law is for us not them.


    • Wit's End says:

      Breathe. Enjoy the pageant as it unfolds. You might be missing some of the fun.


  6. alms4more says:

    A s far as the ig report. Have we ever that justice delayed is justice denied?


  7. This article is a really fun read if you replace “Russia” with “FBI”

    Mother Jones
    Did Russia Spy on Donald Trump When He Visited Moscow?
    Intelligence experts say he would have been an obvious target.
    DAVID CORN DEC. 14, 2016 11:00 AM

    “With the Washington Post‘s bombshell report that the CIA has assessed that the Russian hacking of Democratic targets was done as part of a Kremlin operation to help Donald Trump win the election, here’s an intriguing question: Has Russian intelligence spied on the president-elect and, if so, what private information has it collected on him? A counterintelligence veteran of a Western spy service in October told Mother Jones that he had uncovered information—and had sent it to the FBI—indicating Russian intelligence had mounted a yearslong operation to cultivate or co-opt Trump and that this project included surveillance that gathered compromising material on the celebrity mogul. Yet there have been no indications from the FBI whether it has investigated this lead. Still, several intelligence professionals say Trump would have indeed been a top priority for Russian intelligence surveillance—especially when he was in Moscow in November 2013 for the Miss Universe pageant, which he owned at the time.”


  8. Jeff P. says:

    PDJT is going to help another Industry in the USA prosper! The ROPE industry should get a big spike in sales with all of the TRAITORS we need to Freaking HANG in the USA!!!!!

    Liked by 3 people

  9. Bluto says:

    I am curious about the actual Congressional authority or sanction of the founding of the FBI. I can find laws where the FBI’s budget is appropriated, they are given authority to arrest and carry firearms, and expand their investigations in various ways but any initial sanction of the agency seems elusive.

    The actual founding of the agency seems, from what I can discern, was sort of a work around Congress by T. Roosevelt and his Attorney General Charles Bonaparte because Congress, in fear of being investigated themselves by their political enemies, has restricted the Justice Department’s use of Secret Service and Treasury agents in violation of Federal law. Previous to borrowing Treasury agents, the Justice Dept. had hired civilian private detectives.

    Even on the FBI website, the actual Congressional authorities for the agency are only listings of laws that were passed later to expand their authority but no listing of when the original authority for the FBI was approved. https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/where-is-the-fbis-authority-written-down

    The reason I ask this is because I would like to see the President order the Attorney General to disband and reform the FBI under a new structure with more oversight concerning the people at the top. (I would also like to see a complete revamp of the Justice Dept. which started under Grant because at that time the Attorney General was a part-time job and he felt an entire department was needed to help control interstate commerce after the Civil War). The Justice Department was sanctioned under Congressional authority.

    I can find no such authority or sanction for the FBI. It seems it was and still is a creation of the Justice Department (and was actually founded under shaky conditions.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. CopperTop says:

    Wheatioo – Thank you for the reminder about Treasury protection of Ben Carson. I believe Carson let it slip not only about death threats but other ‘concerns’ at the time it was revealed tax dollars would be spent to protect him. I remember being hum drum over the protection until I saw a mention of other ‘concerns’

    I am 99% certain the Lure referred to is indeed an operation that netted and indictment of discovered a foreign asset poking around the very naive campaign of this outsider – Carson. It probably came out of legwork by the DNC to demonstrate that they were being attacked politically by this entitity/nation/persons and who probably asked DOJ to investigate. It probably proved what we all know today that an entitity was messing around with both sides. Because that happens every election. I choose entity because Rogers would not affirm that the ‘Russians’ were behind it.

    I think this lead to Papa and he was either found to be dirty or became useful and then the rest is SD history.

    I have been a part of many granular need to know discussions and the redacting of lure…really looks like it’s trying to protect the methods used to investigate foreign infiltration.

    If that upsets treepers…sorry…it’s perfectly normal to investigate that. It’s NOT perfectly normal to put in motion everything that appears to have occurred from the point of 12/15 forward and as SD says


    Liked by 4 people

  11. CopperTop says:

    Adendum: The Dems will have a field day if there is a no -contest plea by Papa between 12/15 and 3/15 and if the CPC (certificate of probable cause) discussed on the texts (Page) is referring to his plea related to something discovered about him on the Carson campaign. They will continue the Clapper gas lighting saying it was all a good thing. Remain steadfast since the False Cohen, in the FISA, ‘by the book memo”, the exits of folks from GCHQ etc etc is what brings that logic to a screeching halt.

    Liked by 1 person

    • bookman says:

      Copper, you make some good points. What I think that you are missing is the fact that Priestep testified yesterday for hours. My surmise is that he dropped some heavy bricks on Comey, McCabe, Strzok and many others. CAT… OUT … OF … BAG!!!

      Liked by 1 person

      • CopperTop says:

        Yes but swampers want to/have been making statements to legitimize the ‘looking’ into election tampering aspect of all this. It’s puzzling as to why unless there is a predicate on another campaign to REMOTELY justify what they did to trump. I don’t understand it but the propensity for Confirmation Bias is real. The thing about this human condition is it does require new data in order for one to reveal their bias. The new data has to be something new. This 12/15 discussions seems as good as any.

        Ben Carson didn’t want SS protection. He was alerted he needed in October and besides the usual threats he seems to think it’s laughable. Perhaps he thought it’s laughable that there was tampering.

        “I don’t feel the need for it, quite frankly. But the Secret Service thinks that I need it,” Carson said during an October campaign stop in Austin, Texas, according to CNN. “So, you know, it is what it is.”


  12. jessetmims says:

    These texts about “OCONUS” and “lures” were exchanged between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page on Dec. 28, 2015. Donald Trump announced he was running for president on June 16, 2015.
    This means at least three people, Strzok, Page, and whoever they needed to get approval from, had already decided to spy on the Trump campaign when it was barely six months old.

    Versions of “Trump will never be president” had already begun to be heard; but, apparently, the DNC’s internal polling was already putting the lie to that popular mantra.

    This exchange also occurred seven months before July 19, 2016, the date Trump officially became the Republican Party’s presidential nominee.

    These new Strzok/Page texts also beg the question, “Did the Democrats spy on the campaigns of any other Republican candidates?” If not, that is telling in and of itself; i.e., if Trump & Co. were the only ones being spied on, that is a strong indication he was the only one of the seventeen Rs considered to be a threat to them. Indeed, to have initiated an international spying operation against Trump that early in the game is a strong indication that they were literally shaking in their boots at the thought of him becoming their nominee’s opponent.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. brh82 says:

    jessetmims, I remember Rubio and Paul both were rabid, during and after the campaign, about the fact that something made them question whether they were objects of surveillance. They ragged the notion to death, for a very long time, and then they simply dropped it.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. dawg says:

    KEY: It was NOT a counter-intel INVESTIGATION, it was an intel OPERATION. This all started before any talk or fabricated evidence of Russia even came up.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. SSI01 says:

    I don’t know what entrapment standards are in play here when you employ “lures,” as the FBI terms them, apparently – but when running my own investigations that utilized CWs, as we called them, you could NOT under any circumstances have your Cooperating Witness put the idea into your target’s head about committing the offense you were investigating him for. That thought had to have already been expressed by the target in some fashion. Your CW could make a generalized statement about that offense, to which the target could respond with a statement about a specific intent – but he/she could not specifically state something like, “Wouldn’t it be great if someone around here could bring in that info about Hillary’s emails? These guys would be very interested in that, wouldn’t they?” A generalized statement like, “Some folks just can’t keep their traps shut about classified info, in person or otherwise, can they?” would have been acceptable. Hopefully the dupe would have put two and two together and offered their services after that. From what I’ve seen the “lure” was far more specific than that. In a CI investigation, is that sort of tactic permissible?

    Liked by 1 person

    • jessetmims says:

      @ SSI01… Great post. The difference between those old CWs and the Strzok lures is that the former served an honorable purpose; whereas, the lures did not.

      Strzok used the term “lure” as a noun. The word’s meaning in that capacity is, “Something that tempts or is used to tempt a person or animal to do something.” In other words, the Strzok lures were persons who were to be used to entrap people associated with Trump’s campaign into divulging information about any activity, etc., that could be used to destroy Trump.

      That failed; so, they decided to fabricate events and/or a series of events they hoped would do the same thing. Thus, the insurance policy (the Steele dossier) was born.

      As for permissibility… In my opinion, once the threshold of using American and foreign Intelligence Agencies to interfere with a legal candidate’s presidential campaign was crossed, there was no legal basis for anything the Deep State did. The time to have done anything of that nature would have been immediately after Barack Obama announced his candidacy.


      • SSI01 says:

        Makes sense. And you’re correct – any FBI/CIA staffer/agent/analyst with any scruples would have brought what they were plainly being told to do to the attention of their manager, along with their objections and a plainly stated – hopefully in writing – explanation of why this was wrong. The objection should have been memorialized in some way. At that point the agent or analyst involved should have requested -strongly – relief from their position and reassignment to some other “legal” activity. Or they could have done what I did and blow the whistle. But there was no question what was occurring was illegal, no matter who was requesting, or demanding, it be done.

        If you’ve never been taught there is an ultimate arbiter of what is Right and Wrong, you’d go right ahead and do what you were told. If you had an old-fashioned upbringing you would have done something else. Situational ethics has its way, I guess.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s