Comey FBI apologist, Fusion GPS co-conspirator and Lawfare Alliance media narrative engineer, Natasha Bertrand, has an outline published today on the background interview of dossier author Christopher Steele.

From within the article, beyond the sympathetic propaganda, some overarching details are interesting:
♦(1) As expected Mr. Steele would only talk to OIG investigators from Horowitz’s office; Steele would not speak to speak to U.S. Attorney John Durham.
♦(2) The interview took place at the same time President Trump traveled to the U.K (June 3rd-5th) for a state visit.  Likely coordinated so FBI officials could travel innocuously without media scrutiny (lots of security officials traveled on behalf of U.S. interests at the time); likely the preferred timing of Steele himself.
♦(3) The interview(s) took place over two days for a total of sixteen hours of conversation. The recent reports of IG delay and follow-up interviews are almost certainly related to the outcome of the investigative findings (ie. Kathleen Kavalec cooperation etc.).
(more…)

Attorney General William Barr discusses the shift in DOJ approach to support President Trump’s request to put the citizenship question on the 2020 census; also his support for Robert Mueller if the special counsel should change his mind and not testify on July 17th to the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees.

(more…)

In a new report Fox News journalist Catherine Herridge outlines a “reluctant witness” who has recently agreed to cooperate with DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz and his review of potential FISA abuse by the Obama DOJ and FBI.

Fox News – Key witnesses sought for questioning by Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz early in his investigation into alleged government surveillance abuse have come forward at the 11th hour, Fox News has learned.

Sources familiar with the matter said at least one witness outside the Justice Department and FBI started cooperating — a breakthrough that came after Attorney General William Barr ordered U.S. Attorney John Durham to lead a separate investigation into the origins of the bureau’s 2016 Russia case that laid the foundation for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe.

(more…)

A new John Solomon article today, based on an interview with Russian Billionaire Oleg Deripaska, is essentially confirming a May 2018 article where it was presumed that Oleg had hired Christopher Steele at the same time Steele was working with Nellie Ohr and Fusion GPS to write the Trump dossier.  Here’s the interview:

.
The report on the FBI contacting Oleg Deripaska in September 2016 for help to structure a narrative of Russian involvement in the Trump Campaign via Paul Manafort has some ramifications.
(more…)

An interesting discussion between Representative John Ratcliffe, former congressman Trey Gowdy and Fox News Host Jason Chaffetz surrounding: the pending Inspector General Report into FISA abuse; the upcoming Mueller testimony; and the activity of U.S. Attorney John Durham.
Within the interview Ratcliffe notes he has recently spoken to Inspector General Horowitz about the timing of his upcoming report where Ratcliffe says the “investigative work is complete”. WATCH:

.
If previous reports of Christopher Steele being willing to speak to U.S. authorities about his dossier work in 2016 are accurate; and if Horowitz has completed his investigative work; then it’s likely Horowitz has already interviewed Steele.
The IG FISA investigation began in May of 2018, approximately 14 months ago. The assembly of the investigative details into a draft report should be expected to take about four to six weeks depending on the OIG referencer team and the scale of the summary documentation assembled.
(more…)

In the synergy between the U.S. intelligence apparatus and their media agents, the CIA, DOJ and State Department have specific outlets assigned to public relations.
A long tracked history and pattern reflects the DOJ and FBI leak their needs to the New York Times.  The preferred outlet for the U.S. State Department is CNN; and the Washington Post generally comes out first in defense of the CIA agenda.   This pattern has been remarkably consistent for years.

So against a backdrop of looming revelations about the intelligence community and their activity in the 2016 election; and suddenly The Washington Post, seemingly out of nowhere, pushes an article intended to diffuse the issues around western intelligence asset Joseph Mifsud; we can reasonably assume something is happening in the background that has officials in the CIA worried about exposure and their image.
From the WaPo introduction we can see what part of “spygate” the CIA is concerned about:

(Wa Po) […] The Maltese-born academichas not surfacedpublicly since that October 2017 interview, days after Trump campaign aide GeorgePapadopoulos pleaded guilty tolying to the FBI about details of theirinteractions. Among them, Papadopoulos told investigators, was an April 2016 meeting in which Mifsud alerted him that the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.”

(more…)

Alan Dershowitz appears with two panel members of the ‘Tick-Tock-Boom club’ to discuss the potential of Robert Mueller’s testimony.

.
On the issue of the May 16th, 2017, Mueller trip to the White House raised by ‘tick-tock’ chairman Greg Jarrett, his emphasis is on the wrong syllable.
If Mueller does appear before congress the substance of Mueller’s White House visit should be ignored, and his status within the visit should be the focus.  Not to beat a dead horse, but the purpose of Rosenstein taking Mueller to the White House had nothing to do with Mueller as a candidate for FBI Director.
Congress needs to skip the BS, and get right to the heart of the issue.  Here is five Minutes of rapid fire questions for Mueller on this subject:
(more…)

In March 2017 CTH first highlighted statements by Evelyn Farkas that described a coordinated effort from within the Obama administration to push political opposition research, gathered by the intelligence community, into the media.

Jay Sekulow now discovers documents that highlight the Obama administration’s efforts in their last days in office.  This effort backstops Farkas’s earlier statements.  First, from Sekulow:

(Via Fox Op-ed) – Stunning new information just released by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) shows that the Obama administration stepped up efforts – just days before President Trump took office – to undermine Trump and his administration.

The ACLJ, where I serve as chief counsel, has obtained records that show the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, under Director James Clapper, eagerly pushed to get new procedures as part of an anti-Trump effort. The procedures increased access to raw signals intelligence before the conclusion of the Obama administration, just days before President Trump was inaugurated.

(more…)

One of the reasons why the Flynn legal situation is so interesting is not really because of Flynn himself; but rather because the Flynn situation is a likely example of President Obama’s surveillance network in operation.

Tenuous legal theories (Logan Act) and obscure laws (technical FARA violations) appear to have been exploited by DOJ administration officials, in close ideological alignment with the Lawfare Group.  In association with overall Obama administration officials, the fellow travelers used the legal system to create a DC surveillance network.
At the 30,000 ft. level Obama’s surveillance network looks like this:

• White House identifies a target; •passes request to the DOJ National Security Division (middlemen); •who then use the auspices of possible FARA violations to pass the instructions to the FBI contractors; •who data-mine the NSA database.

•The FBI results are then passed back to the DOJ-NSD; •who weaponize the information for FISA applications (becomes legal cover); and •pass the authorized surveillance (spying) results back to the White House etc.

It’s a circle of surveillance activity that could encompass almost every politician in Washington DC as they network with foreign lobbyists and special interests.
(more…)

The official media account of how the intelligence community gained the transcript of incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn talking to Ambassador Sergey Kisliyak on December 29th, 2016, surrounds “incidental collection” as a result of contact with an agent of a foreign power. Meaning the Flynn call was picked up as the U.S. intelligence apparatus was conducting surveillance on Russian Ambassador Kisliyak.
If this version of events were accurate (it’s not), it would fall under FISA-702 collection: the lawful monitoring of a foreign agent (Kislyak) who has contact with a U.S. person (Flynn).
In order to review the identity of the U.S. person, a process called ‘unmasking’, a 702 submission must be made. That submission, the unmasking, leaves a paper/electronic trail.  In a 2017 congressional hearing, Senator Lindsey Graham asks Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and former DNI James Clapper about this process. [Watch first 3 minutes]

.
However, in the two years following this testimony, there was nothing that would deliver the answer as to: who unmasked General Michael Flynn?
The reason is simple, Flynn wasn’t unmasked – because he was under FISC authorized active surveillance.  Here’s how we know.
(more…)