The New York Times is now reporting  former FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker has resigned from the FBI.  This follows a similar announcement for Lisa Page.

James Baker and Lisa Page were part of the “fab five” (Baker, Page, Strzok, Ohr, Priestap) previously suspected as cooperating with IG and FBI INSD investigators in exchange for some form of process leniency.  James Baker was removed from his position as FBI Chief Legal Counsel on December 21st, 2017.  He has been holding down some previously unknown position inside the FBI until today.

WASHINGTON — Two top F.B.I. aides who worked alongside the former director James B. Comey as he navigated one of the most politically tumultuous periods in the bureau’s history resigned on Friday.

One of them, James A. Baker, served as the F.B.I.’s top lawyer until December when he was reassigned as the new director, Christopher A. Wray, began installing his own advisers. Mr. Baker had been investigated by the Justice Department on suspicion of sharing classified information with reporters. He has not been charged.

(more…)

The Daily Caller is reporting Lisa Page has resigned from the FBI.  If accurate this would indicate her internal investigative usefulness has run its course.  This would align with those who expect the IG report to come out soon [likely May 18].

DAILY CALLER:  The FBI attorney who exchanged anti-Trump text messages with another bureau official resigned on Friday, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

The FBI confirmed that the lawyer, Lisa Page, tendered her resignation.

Page has faced months of scrutiny over the text messages, which she exchanged with Peter Strzok, the former deputy chief of the FBI’s counterintelligence division. (more)

Lisa Page was assigned to be Special Counsel to FBI Deputy Andrew McCabe in 2015.  It was Lisa Page’s testimony to FBI Inspection Division (INSD) investigators and the DOJ Inspector General that ended up delivering her text messages on July 20th, 2017.

Page was instrumental in the initial phases of the internal investigation.  During mid-summer questioning about leaks to media former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said he did not authorize Lisa Page to talk to media.  This contradicted Mrs. page.  To prove her side of the story Lisa Page provided the text messages. Thus the first investigative thread was pulled, eventually revealing massive internal corruption at the top levels of the DOJ and FBI.

(more…)

In broad measure the DOJ-OIG investigation into the politicization and weaponization of the DOJ and FBI has three basic frames of reference:

♦The internal investigation of intelligence leaks to media by FBI and DOJ officials.
♦The internal investigation into the politicization of the Clinton email investigation, and the results therein. This is the central investigation.
♦The internal investigation of politically motivated abuse/fraud upon the FISA court.

•The first outcome ended with an OIG report and criminal referral of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe for his leaks to media. •The next outcome will be the long-awaited IG report on the Clinton investigation. •The last IG release in this series will encompass the DOJ-OIG internal review of applications to the FISA court.

Today, there is some new information: the congressional testimony of Inspector General Horowitz has been postponed due to new discoveries in relationship to the Clinton investigation. It is our suspicion the ‘new investigative review‘ specifically pertains to the how DOJ and FBI officials handled the issues stemming from the Huma Abedin/Anthony Weiner laptop; and how Andrew McCabe took specific action to hide the content therein between September 28th, 2016 and the eventual re-opening of the investigation on October 28th, 2016.  In essence the background of the “non-investigation”.

Those new IG discoveries would most certainly encompass FBI and U.S. Attorney contacts from New York to Main Justice and FBI HQ in Washington DC; and include what actions each of the participants took therein.

(more…)

Well, well, well…. they say timing is everything.

Today U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III appears to have caught on to an explosive issue CTH noted yesterday.  In building the case against Paul Manafort, special counsel Robert Mueller’s team used the pre-existing FISA Title-1 warrant that was originally applied to U.S. person Carter Page and the Trump campaign.

Under normal criminal investigation any search warrant or surveillance warrant would normally proceed through U.S. courts, under Title-3, where the Mueller team would need to show probable cause for a warrant.  However, by using the Title-1 warrant from the FBI counterintelligence operation, as extended by AAG Rod Rosenstein, Robert Mueller was able to use far more intrusive and unchecked searches and seizures for his criminal probe.

The media, and broad media-consumption public, are currently unaware the Mueller probe was simply a continuance of the 2016 FBI counterintelligence operation. Most people think the special counsel investigation is a separate issue. It’s not.

However, in addition to a scathing rebuke of the underlying prosecutorial premise, ie.  Mueller trying to keep the originating structure hidden, Judge Ellis demanded today that Mueller unredact the August 2, 2017, instructions from AAG Rosenstein.  That removal will expose the use of the FISA Title-1 warrant use that drove the investigative origin.

(more…)

One of the most frequent questions about Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein circles around his decision to reauthorize the FISA Title-1 surveillance warrant used against Carter Page and by extension the Trump campaign.   In this outline we take the timeline and overlay new information that helps to understand what was going on:

• Why did Rosenstein renew that sketchy FISA warrant July 18th, 2017?
• Why did Mueller request clarity two weeks later on August 2nd, 2017?

To understand the dynamic we must remind ourselves what was known at key dates in the investigative decision-making.  None of this is intended to exhibit an opinion toward the motives of those making decisions; however, in hindsight we can clearly outline what was known and what was not known at the time these decisions were made.

Recently we have gained clarity toward the scope of investigative evidence held by Robert Mueller.  Thanks to some debriefing interviews by ‘witness’ Michael Caputo we more thoroughly understand what evidence is held by Robert Mueller; and, more importantly the scale of that evidence leads to a reasonable conclusion about how it was obtained.

It appears Special Counsel Robert Mueller began his investigation of Russian interference and the possibility of Trump campaign collusion, right where the FBI counterintelligence operation left-off.  This is additionally supported by reviewing the original investigative instructions as outlined by Rod Rosenstein the day Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel:

(more…)

Former FBI Deputy Director James Kallstrom appeared on Tucker Carlson to discuss the context of the ongoing Special Counsel investigation by Robert Mueller and his assigned team of investigators. Within the discussion Mr. Kallstrom provides some historic context for current events.

.

CTH is going to expand an outline of the Mueller probe origin, and current disposition, utilizing the latest information and contrast against the timeline of Deputy Director Rod Rosenstein. More on that soon.

(more…)

NOW IT ALL COMES TOGETHER…

Michael Caputo appears on Fox News for a general discussion of his third experience being grilled by Hillary Clinton’s Legal Team within the Clinton-Mueller Special Counsel.

However, one of the interesting bits of information is where Mr. Caputo notes the Clinton-Mueller team have the personal emails, phone call logs, communications and even text messages of every targeted member of the investigation. This little factoid is jaw-dropping important because it highlights the underlying reason why Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein needed to grant a July 2017 extension of the Title-1 FISA surveillance warrant (initiated against Carter Page); that was actually being utilized by the FBI to conduct political surveillance of these same Trump officials.

Without the July 2017 FISA extension, Robert Mueller would not have predicate investigative authority to reach into the accounts of his targets and extract their personal communication.  Mueller would have needed to go to court for a search warrant; he is conducting a criminal investigation; he would have needed probable cause.  However, by applying the 2016 extended FISA Title-1 warrant, the Clinton-Mueller special counsel used the previous legal authority to extract all the information they wanted to review.

Things are making much more sense now.

(more…)

It was not unexpected to see NBC shift their earlier reporting on the surveillance of Trump lawyer Michael Cohen and attempt to walk-back the most troubling of issues. In a correction to earlier reporting NBC changes the story from federal authorities (ie. Robert Mueller and the corrupt FBI group) “wiretapping” the phones and communication devices of Cohen, to federal authorities “monitoring” the phones and devices of Cohen.

NBC – CORRECTION: Earlier today, NBC News reported that there was a wiretap on the phones of Michael Cohen, President Trump’s longtime personal attorney, citing two separate sources with knowledge of the legal proceedings involving Cohen.

But three senior U.S. officials now dispute that, saying that the monitoring of Cohen’s phones was limited to a log of calls, known as a pen register, not a wiretap where investigators can actually listen to calls.  NBC News has changed the headline and revised parts of the original article. (link)

The reason for the imprecise shift is obvious. If everyone understood how Robert Mueller’s investigation was merely an extension, an “insurance policy” per se, of the prior originating FBI Counterintelligence operation against Trump, then people would begin to ask uncomfortable questions.

Whether the FBI was actively listening in-on Michael Cohen’s calls; or whether the FBI was merely monitoring who, what, where and how, those calls were taking place, doesn’t diminish the reality that Robert Mueller was –and is– conducting wide-scale surveillance on President Trump and any entity associated with his administration.

That reality, accidentally released by the initial NBC reporting, is considered an uncomfortable risk to the Mueller investigation. The last thing Team Mueller team want people to understand is how they are simply continuing a political investigation that began two years ago under false and unlawful pretense.

(more…)

A report by NBC that Michael Cohen’s phones and email accounts are being “wiretapped” and under surveillance by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation unit has gained attention today.  However, there should be no real surprise in the reporting.

When the special counsel was initiated and authorized by Rod Rosenstein, there was a transfer of investigative authority from the FBI to Robert Mueller.  This is the underpinning of the “Insurance Policy”, as originally begun via the original FISA surveillance warrant granted in October of 2016.  The only thing that changed was who was conducting the investigation.

The appointment of the Special Counsel merely transferred the ongoing investigation from inside the FBI counterintelligence unit (Page, Strzok, Ohr, Priestap, etc.) to Robert Mueller (Aaron Zelby, Andrew Weissman, etc.).  The ongoing SC (Mueller) investigation is identical in every way, sans the name changed for the participants.  The current Mueller investigation is the same one initiated by the FBI in 2016; that is what is hidden in the redactions of instructions by Rod Rosenstein. (See pdf below):

(more…)

Earlier this morning Rudy Giuliani appeared on Fox Business “Mornings With Maria” to discuss the ongoing issues surrounding the Robert Mueller investigation and President Trump.

.

Additionally, Mr. Giuliani appeared on Fox News for an expanded discussion of similar issues. Below:

(more…)