The New York Times has essentially outed the CIA and FBI informant as Stefan Halper tonight in yet another lengthy justification article citing the reasoning from the perspective of the corrupt intelligence officers who conducted the surveillance and spying operation against the Trump campaign.

Guess what?…. After 18 months of denials, their justification framework isn’t selling.  It isn’t selling even amid the barking moonbats who normally defend the left-wing crazy.  If you want to gauge the level of fail, just read the comments section of the New York Times justification article.   D’oh… the awakening is here like a DNC party during the ALS ice-bucket challenge.

According to The Times, the FBI and CIA were using Halper to protect candidate Trump from the Russians.  Yes, that’s their story and they’re sticking to it.  However, from that angle: Are they currently investigating candidate Trump for failing to collude in the Russian efforts they were attempting to protect him from?  {{{D’oh}}}  Yup, the special counsel is an ongoing effort to keep protecting President Trump… or something.

Wait,… what?.. Huh?

Oh, ya just gotta read the NYT snippets.

Two things to remember: First, they denied all of this for eighteen months.  Second, these are their leaks, their story, their version; delivered via their spin, from the people who were conducting the scheme against the Trump campaign:

(more…)

Buried in paragraph 40 of the FBI/DOJ justification article presented by the New York Times on behalf of contributing editors James Comey, Sally Yates, Mary McCord, John Brennan and James Clapper, the oft-used intelligence propaganda outlet attempted to bury the lede:

The F.B.I. obtained phone records and other documents using national security letters — a secret type of subpoena — officials said. And at least one government informant met several times with Mr. Page and Mr. Papadopoulos, current and former officials said. That has become a politically contentious point, with Mr. Trump’s allies questioning whether the F.B.I. was spying on the Trump campaign or trying to entrap campaign officials.  (read more)

In essence what the Deep State apparatchik was/is doing is admitting they conducted a large-scale surveillance operation against their political opposition by weaponizing the most intrusive intelligence gathering capabilities of the federal government.  An admission they denied for the previous 18 months….

And somehow, we are supposed to be ok with this.  Well, that’s their story, and they’re sticking to it.  Ultimately they have no choice.  If the participating members don’t justify their endeavors there’s a strong likelihood of shiny new steel bracelets.

(more…)

U.S. intelligence officials who participated in the 2016 Russian interference narrative/scheme are now attempting to justify their conspiratorial conduct with leaks to the New York Times and Washington Post.  Their leaks are a transparent effort to justify prior conduct. This cover-up endeavor has been their primary focus since congress started demanding documentary evidence from the DOJ, FBI, State Department and intelligence participants in the scheme.

Before breaking-down and explaining the recent obfuscations allow me to posit one simple but central example that highlights the gross intelligence misconduct.

On October 21st, 2016, the DOJ and FBI used the Steele Dossier as the foundation for their FISA Title-1 Surveillance application against Carter Page.  Surveillance was a key part of the FBI counterintelligence operation to investigate Russian interferance in the 2016 election.  However, almost three months later, on January 4th, 2017, when John Brennan, James Clapper, and James Comey produced their Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA), the same individuals who created the FISA application did not include the Steele Dossier in their ICA report.

Think about the contradiction in this example. It is within this contradiction, and many more, where we discover the origin of the feces. If the Dossier was valid enough to present to a FISA court as evidence of Russian involvement; then why wouldn’t that same Dossier be valid enough evidence to include in their January Intelligence Community Assessment?

When you start asking these irreconcilable common sense questions, you begin to realize -and expose- how insufferably corrupt the entire intelligence scheme really was.  The entire scheme was an assembly of individual lies; each lie a thread rolled into a bigger ball of entwined nonsense.  Look at it from a distance and it looks like a vast Russian conspiracy ball; however, pull any single strand out, look at it, and there’s no truth to it.

It’s all an illusion.

(more…)

Some major reporting today from Paul Sperry includes very interesting details about how President Obama’s intelligence community structured their Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) about Russian interference in the 2016 election – SEE HERE –

In essence by following-up with various people involved in the construct of the ICA, journalist Paul Sperry outlines how CIA Director John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, subverted their own intelligence guidelines in assembling the intelligence report.

While much of the background parallels our prior research, there are two very interesting aspects outlined by those with direct knowledge of the construct. First, that Brennan positioned FBI Agent Peter Strzok as the contact between the CIA analysis and the information flow to FBI Director James Comey:

[…]  A source close to the House investigation said Brennan himself selected the CIA and FBI analysts who worked on the ICA, and that they included former FBI counterespionage chief Peter Strzok.

“Strzok was the intermediary between Brennan and [former FBI Director James] Comey, and he was one of the authors of the ICA,” according to the source. (link)

This structure is interesting because it highlights an increasingly obvious intention of the participating group to control the content of intelligence, and the information flow therein.  There are several instances which highlight the level of a strategic effort  undertaken to keep James Comey out of the loop on details within the 2016 operation(s).

(more…)

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:

(more…)

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.

(more…)

The Department of Justice Inspector General will soon release a report on the government’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information. It’s taken a long time; and with good reason. The scale of the misconduct and criminal activity is staggering.

The video below is the final installment of six segments. This report covers the Clinton and Abedin email that were discovered after the investigation was closed in July 2016. {Go Deep} The emails along with the fact that they were on Anthony Weiner’s laptop was kept secret and not investigated for four weeks (Sept 28th, through Oct 27th) by top officials at the FBI. Who stalled the investigation and why? And what was in those emails. That’s the focus of this segment.

.

When the IG report reviewing how the Clinton email investigation was handled comes out, there will likely be a review of Peter Kadzik, the former Main Justice Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs. In congressional testimony Sept. 12th, 2016, Kadzik told Congress he was in charge of the Clinton e-mail probe for the Justice Department.

(more…)

Knowing what we know now – how Stefan Halper (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.

(more…)

•On July 31st, 2016 the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign. They did not inform congress until March 2017. •At the beginning of August (1st-3rd) 2016 FBI Agent Peter Strzok traveled to London, England for interviews with UK intelligence officials. •On August 15th, 2016 Peter Strzok sends a text message to DOJ Lawyer Lisa Page describing the “insurance policy“, needed in case Hillary Clinton were to lose the election.

Recently there has been a great deal of interest in the origination OF the 2016 FBI counterintelligence operation, and how the FISA court was later used to gain Title-1 surveillance warrant against U.S. person Carter Page; part of that operation.

The current line of inquiry surrounds the originating “EC” or “electronic communication” that was generated by CIA Director John Brennan and passed on to FBI Director James Comey. The EC initiated the FBI Counterintelligence Operation.

Specifically, House Intelligence Committee Devin Nunes has asked about a redacted name within the “EC”, which has led to the DOJ and FBI claiming to release the name would compromise the individual.

All of these inquires, and refusals, center around the origination authority for the FBI Counterintelligence operation. The origination led to the FISA warrant. Remember that.

Chairman Nunes sent Main Justice a classified letter asking questions. DOJ responded saying they would not comply with providing information (letter)  The Washington Post claimed Nunes was looking for information on an FBI/DOJ ‘source’: “a U.S. citizen who has provided intelligence to the CIA and FBI.” Additionally, this “source” was later also described by WaPo as a witness for Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation.

(more…)

Michael Avenatti is the sketchy lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels.  Following a similar approach deployed by Fusion-GPS, in a rush to spread rumors and accusations Avenatti has pushed stolen documents from Treasury Department filings to his allies in the media.

The documents appear to come from frequently submitted bank filings and treasury notifications known as Currency Transaction Reports (CTR’s), and Suspicious Activity Reports (SAR’s).  SAR’s and CTR’s are compliance forms filed by organizations who engage in financial services.

Every organization from mortgage providers, to international financial institutions, to local U.S. main street banks, all the way to Western Union and convenience stores who generate money orders, are required to file CTR’s and SAR’s as part of the Treasury Department Banking Secretaries Act; a law requiring anyone engaged in financial services to assist government agencies in detecting and preventing money laundering.

At some point every person reading here has likely had a report filled out by a financial provider, submitting their details within a financial transaction, filed with the Treasury department. You never know about it, because it’s part of compliance reporting.

Somehow the sketchy lawyer for Stormy Daniels obtained a list of treasury filings attached to the name Michael Cohen; the same name as President Trump’s lawyer. It is likely someone within the Treasury Department, or the DOJ with search access to the Treasury Department, leaked this list to Michael Avenatti in an effort to assist his dubious motives.

Unfortunately, at least two of the people Avenatti is now accusing of scurrilous financial transactions are not the same Michael Cohen the dubious lawyer is seeking to attack.  One is a Canadian Michael Cohen, the other is an Israeli Michael Cohen; both have financial transactions in the United States.  The latter just sending his brother money.

This is what happens when you put names in search engines within government records.  There are always multiple people with the same name.  You might remember the wrong Michael Cohen was identified in the Steele Dossier as traveling to Prague, part of a similarly intended and motivated accusation.

(more…)