This outline is mostly a repost because it hits on the central framework of an obvious dynamic being missed by almost everyone within the larger discussion.

On December 2nd, 2017 (not accidentally ONE DAY after Mike Flynn’s guilty plea was announced), part of the intelligence community –sources inside the investigative unit– outlined specific examples of DOJ/FBI political corruption. The revelations surrounded FBI Agent Peter Strzok, FBI lawyer Lisa Page and DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr.

The month of December 2017 brought to light everything within the larger storyline of a corrupt domestic intelligence apparatus filing for a fraudulent FISA ‘Title-1’ surveillance application, and outlined the process of the DOJ and FBI spying on the Trump campaign. This entire enterprise was/is white-hats fighting back against corrupt black-hats.

In the aftermath, the FBI responded to media inquiry; and the DOJ responded to the revelations (December 3rd release) by specifically pointing attention to the Office of the Inspector General and Michael Horowitz (emphasis mine):

The January 2017 statement issued by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announcing its review of allegations regarding various actions of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in advance of the 2016 election stated that the OIG review would, among other things, consider whether certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations and that we also would include issues that might arise during the course of the review.

The OIG has been reviewing allegations involving communications between certain individuals, and will report its findings regarding those allegations promptly upon completion of the review of them.”

~ Justice Department Office of the Inspector General (link)

(more…)

Sometimes people who assemble information make wrong assertions; this is one such time. Unfortunately, Byron York’s assertion needs a quick deconstruction.

In a twitter reply today Mr. York makes a mistake in spreading false information that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is not investigating the DOJ/FBI corruption surrounding the “Trump/Russia Case”.

The fact is – the origination statement from the Office of Inspector General specifically says the review of DOJ/FBI politicization of their investigative authority is not restrained from following “other issues that may arise.”  There’s a years-worth of evidence that IG Horowitz is running an investigation on two-tracks, here’s how:

(more…)

WHITE HOUSE – Earlier today, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced indictments against 13 Russian nationals and 3 Russian entities for meddling in the 2016 Presidential election, which began in 2014 before the President declared his candidacy. President Donald J. Trump has been fully briefed on this matter and is glad to see the Special Counsel’s investigation further indicates—that there was NO COLLUSION between the Trump campaign and Russia and that the outcome of the election was not changed or affected.

President Trump says, “it is more important than ever before to come together as Americans. We cannot allow those seeking to sow confusion, discord, and rancor to be successful. It’s time we stop the outlandish partisan attacks, wild and false allegations, and far-fetched theories, which only serve to further the agendas of bad actors, like Russia, and do nothing to protect the principles of our institutions. We must unite as Americans to protect the integrity of our democracy and our elections.” (read more)

(more…)

There is a particular transparency in timing as Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announces indictments from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s ‘Russian Interference in U.S. Election‘ investigation on the same day as the FBI is forced to admit they made massive mistakes from reports against the Parkland Florida school shooter.

The thirteen indictments are based on very weak structure. Here’s the DOJ Announcement; and here is Rod Rosenstein’s press conference. Specific wording is used tactically to generate maximum value; however, when you peel back the onion skin and look at the actual indictment itself (full pdf below) there’s not much ‘there’ there:

.

The indictment itself is full of fluff and clearly presents itself as political posturing.  The Mueller investigation had to find something, anything; and what they came up with reflects how little substance exists.  This is one of those examples where it pays to read the actual indictment; and contrast the facts laid out against the method of salesmanship and parseltongue. It is not a difficult read – even Boris and Natasha could do it.

Example: “unwitting Trump campaign official” is really  – A single New York volunteer campaign worker agreed to give some signs to a pro-Trump rally.

(more…)

Moments ago FISA Court Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer responded to the requests from the House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte. (full pdf’s below – #1 and #2)

There are nuances in each response specific to the statutory roles of each Chairman and the specific requests made by each committee.  Reflected in Judge Collyer’s responses is a need for careful consideration of each unique request.

♦House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes holds primary oversight authority over the aggregate Intelligence Community (IC).  Chairman Nunes has requested the transcripts from the FISA Court during the DOJ/FBI Title-1 surveillance application over their target, U.S. person Carter Page.

♦House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte holds primary oversight authority over the Department of Justice -including the FISA court- and has requested the actual FISA Title-1 application as submitted by the DOJ/FBI for surveillance of Carter Page.

Judge Collyer responds to both legislative branch chairmen from the position of “never previously receiving such requests.” There are separation of power challenges, but also an understanding inherent in the response to Chairman Goodlatte of the unique statutory oversight his committee holds.

(more…)

Andrew McCarthy has an excellent must-read review of how the Susan Rice email paints a clear picture of James Comey’s instructions -from President Obama- to obfuscate the intent of the FBI counterintelligence operation during the early days of the Trump administration.

Andrew McCarthy – On her way out the White House door and out of her job as national-security adviser, Susan Rice writes an email-to-self. Except it’s not really an email-to-self. It is quite consciously an email for the record.

Her term having ended 15 minutes before, Rice was technically back in private life, where private people have private email accounts — even notepads if they want to scratch out a reminder the old-fashioned way. Yet, for at least a few more minutes, Rice still had access to her government email account. She could still generate an official record. That’s what she wanted her brief email to be: the dispositive memorialization of a meeting she was worried about — a meeting that had happened over two weeks earlier, at which, of course, President Obama insisted that everything be done “by the book.”  (continue reading)

(more…)

For those following the increasingly curious case against General Mike Flynn, events took another unusual turn yesterday as Special Counsel Robert Mueller -with agreement from all parties- filed a motion for a protective order to seal documents. These are documents compelled on behalf of the defense, by Judge Emmet Sullivan, prior to sentencing.

On November 30th, 2017, Mike Flynn signed a guilty plea; ostensibly admitting lying to investigators.  The plea was accepted by Judge Rudolph Contreras; who is also a FISA court judge.  Six days later, December 7th, 2017, Judge Contreras “was recused” from the case without explanation.  The case was reassigned to DC District Judge Emmet Sullivan.

The Contreras recusal always seemed sketchy. If the conflict existed on December 7th, wouldn’t that same conflict have existed on November 30th, 2017?

On December 12th, 2017, Judge Sullivan gave out a rather unusual set of instructions to Robert Mueller.  The instructions included Sullivan telling Mueller to turn over to the Flynn defense anything that could be considered exculpatory:

[…]  if the government has identified any information which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes is not material, the government shall submit the material to the Court for in camera review. (link)

On January 31st, 2018, Robert Mueller requested a delay of sentencing pushing the sentencing phase into May of this year.  And then yesterday, February 14th, 2018, Mueller asks for the information he is turning over to be sealed.

(more…)

On a Monday night (February 12th, 2018) episode of Tucker Carlson a Democrat member of the House Intelligence committee said something interesting that almost everyone missed.  Appearing on the show to joust with Tucker, HPSCI member Eric Swalwell stated: “the House Intel Committee has not interviewed a single witness in over a month”.  [Video Here, quote @03:47]  This statement is rather enlightening.

A month earlier, January 4th, 2018, an agreement was finally made between House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and DOJ Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for complete disclosure of all unredacted documents AND a list of witnesses who Nunes wanted the HPSCI to question.

Included in those names was:  FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who exchanged anti-Trump text messages during an affair and previously worked on the special counsel’s Russia probe; FBI general counsel James Baker, who was reassigned; FBI head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap, whom ex-FBI boss James Comey testified made the decision not to brief Congress about the Russia case during last year’s election; and Bruce Ohr, a DOJ official reassigned after concealing meetings with figures involved in the dossier.

The January 4th agreement between Devin Nunes and Rod Rosenstein was made after a great deal of back-and-forth.  Chairman Nunes then documented the agreement in a letter.

On January 8th, Bruce Ohr was demoted for the second time.  [AND DOJ officials scheduled Bruce Ohr to be available to Devin Nunes on January 17th]

On January 9th, the DOJ provided the unredacted DOJ/FBI documents requested to Chairman Nunes; the documents the DOJ produced surrounded the Clinton-Steele Dossier and the FISA Title-1 application.   The documents were assigned to a SCIF in the basement of the House.  Those documents become the basis for Chairman Nunes to outline his memo; essentially a declassification request to the White House written by Trey Gowdy.

(more…)

Earlier today Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley sent a letter to President Obama’s former National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, about a curious email she sent to herself documenting a White House conversation between President Obama and former FBI head James Comey (pdf below).

On the day of the inauguration, January 20th, 2017; at the very last minutes of the outgoing administration; Mrs. Rice documented a conversation which took place on January 5th, 2017 between President Obama, Asst. AG Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey.  Vice-President Joe Biden and Susan Rice were in attendance.

On its face the Rice note would appear to be a CYA memo documenting a conversation in the larger effort of the White House in case the DOJ/FBI were discovered to be conspiring to create a series of false accusations, the “insurance policy” per se’, against the incoming president.  Rice appears to be leaving a document trail in the event she needed to extricate herself from risks associated with the intention of the ‘small group’.

The substance of the meeting surrounded the “Clinton-Steele Dossier”, and how the DOJ and FBI officials were pursuing the use therein.  The date of the meeting, January 5th, 2017,was amid a series of leaks from inside the FBI and DOJ toward allied media who were working diligently to frame a narrative of Russian collusion.

(more…)

It’s always an interesting exercise to take new and confirmed information and go back to see the claims from the key stakeholders when the initial trail of the information was discovered.  This is one such example from July 2017.

Now that Chairman Devin Nunes, Chuck Grassley and the key players themselves, have discovered and admitted the U.S. State Department was heavily involved in passing along Clinton opposition research to Chris Steele to create the “Clinton-Steele Dossier”, it’s interesting to look at how the former State Department spokesperson -in place during all the events- responded last year when the Clinton-Steele Dossier was thought to be part of the underlying evidence for the DOJ/FBI FISA application.

Former State Department spokesperson Marie Harf, a person in direct and continuous contact with all the principle agents during the 2016 information flow, was confronted in July 2017 and adamantly denied the dossier was part of the FISA application. WATCH:

Looking beyond the transparent lying and subsequent collapse of credibility, the key takeaway here is how State Department officials knew what was going on in 2016, recognized the risk presented by that action in 2017, and were willing to walk the plank because they were certain none of it would ever come to light.

(more…)