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…)

Senator Lindsey Graham (U-DC) appears on Fox News to discuss the curious Susan Rice email to herself on inauguration day. “by the book”

(more…)

In a curious article tonight Byron York presents an odd dynamic surrounding the Michael Flynn “lie narrative.”   York points out that in March 2017, James Comey told a closed session of congress that he didn’t think Michael Flynn lied to FBI investigators; yet in December 2017, Flynn accepted a plea therein.  York is puzzled – SEE HERE –

As we previously shared, the answer to the question(s) presented within the Flynn article are really not that difficult to figure out.

There was absolutely NOTHING wrong with the President-Elect’s Transition Team talking to any foreign government, or any official within any foreign government. Ever. Period.  Actually, that’s exactly what transition teams are supposed to do; they reach out and receive information from foreign government officials as the starting point to communication with a new administration.

Many people have asked the question why would Michael Flynn have lied about talking to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the first place?

It’s a great question.

The Occam’s Razor answer is the toxic political environment that existed in January 2017, where the administration was being hammered by a tsunami of media narratives and political opposition claiming that any scintilla of contact with anything Russian meant that Putin and Trump were “colluding BFF’s”,…. and Flynn didn’t want to fuel that nonsense.

(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…)

Former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova conducted a radio interview earlier today with WMAL where he outlines some of the nuance within the Schiff memo and the response from the FBI. Worth listening:

(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…)

There are many people who wonder why any Democrat, particularly Adam Schiff, would continue clinging to a narrative despite all contrary evidence that disproves it.  The answer is really quite simple; there’s nothing to lose.  Much like the bank robber killing a police officer, once that initial capital felony is committed there is no greater punishment for all subsequent actions.

The foundational lies are of such significance there is no punitive, or political, down-side to dissuade further lying built upon the originating falsehood.  Twice in this interview Major Garrett asks the ranking member of the HPSCI if he is certain the DOJ and FBI followed proper procedures, and presented proper evidence, in gaining a FISA court “Title-1” surveillance warrant over Carter Page.  WATCH:

.

Note how Adam Schiff is in California (Friday night appearing on Bill Maher), and maximizing the political benefit of his narrative construction; instead of actually working to clear up his memo construct and release it. It’s not the memo that is important to him, it’s the political narrative he’s created.

(more…)