|May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)|
|Contents||Bulletin||Scripting in shell and Perl||Network troubleshooting||History||Humor|
|News||Russiagate -- a color revolution against Trump by neocons and DemoRats||Recommended Links||Understanding Hillary Clinton email scandal||Brennan elections machinations||James "We are not weasels" Comey||Andrew McCabe and his close circle of "fighters with organized crime"||Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition||Strzokgate|
|Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections||FISA Memo scandal||Brennan elections machinations||"Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections||Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit||Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool||DNC and Podesta emails leak: blaming Vladimir Putin||Clapper role in putsch||Rosenstein role|
|False flag operations in cyberspace||FBI and CIA contractor Crowdstrike and very suspicious DNC leak saga||FBI contractor Fusion GPS||Steele dossier||Was Natalia Veselnitskaya meeting with Trump Jr. a trap?||Obama administration participation in the intelligence services putsch against Trump||Samantha Power||Susan Rice unmasking campaign as an attempt to derail Trump by Obama administration||Do the US intelligence agencies influence the US Presidential elections ?|
|Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak||Anti Trump Hysteria||Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite||Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners"||Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war||MSM as fake news industry||MSM as an attack dogs of color revolution||Hillary Clinton email scandal||History of American False Flag Operations|
|Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few||Trump vs. Deep State||Michael Flynn removal||NGOs as braintrust of color revolutions||The Real War on Reality||Media as a weapon of mass deception||Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair||Two Party System as polyarchy||Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich|
|US and British media are servants of security apparatus||Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA||Media-Military-Industrial Complex||Neoconservatism||New American Militarism||Corporatist Corruption||The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies||Bernie Sanders betrayal of his supporters||American intelligence services putsch against Trump|
|Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war||The Deep State||The Iron Law of Oligarchy||National Security State||Color revolutions||Militarism and reckless jingoism of the US neoliberal elite||Skeptic Quotations||Politically Incorrect Humor||Hypocrisy and Pseudo-democracy|
Few government organizations have been engaged in violation of the US citizens’ constitutional rights for as long a time and against as many individuals as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Seldom has there been greater collusion in the perpetration of crimes against civil liberties, electoral freedom and free and lawful expression as what has taken place between the FBI and the US Justice Department.
In the past, the FBI and Justice Department secured the enthusiastic support and public acclaim from the conservative members of the US Congress, members of the judiciary at all levels and the mass media. The leading liberal voices, public figures, educators, intellectuals and progressive dissenters opposing the FBI and their witch-hunting tactics were all from the left. Today, the right and the left have changed places: The most powerful voices endorsing the FBI and the Justice Department’s fabrications, and abuse of constitutional rights are on the left, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party and famous liberal media corporations and public opinion makers.
The recently published Congressional memo, authored by Congressman Devin Nunes, provides ample proof that the FBI spied on Trump campaign workers with the intent to undermine the Republican candidate and sabotage his bid for the presidency. Private sector investigators, hired by Trump’s rival Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee, worked with pro-Clinton operatives within the FBI and Justice Department to violate the national electoral process while flouting rules governing wiretaps on US citizens. This was done with the approval of the sitting Democratic President Barack Obama.
Few knew that FBI (which formally is a part of Justice Department) serves as the main USA counterintelligence agency. And that branch of FBI has strong connections with CIA and like CIA tend to be heavily politicized in best traditions of East Germany STASI. Professor Stephen Cohen suggested that it should be called Intelgate, not Russiagate as Russi played pretty peripheral role in this intelligence againces oparations. The key players were FBI and CIA (Brennan):
The publication of the Republican House Committee memo and reports of other documents increasingly suggest not only a "Russiagate" without Russia but also something darker: The "collusion" may not have been in the White House or the Kremlin.
By Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation , check out our latest issue . Stephen Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian Studies and Politics at NYU and Princeton, and John Batchelor continue their (usually) weekly discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War. (Previous installments, now in their fourth year, are at TheNation.com .)
Cohen first raised the question of "Intelgate," perhaps coining the word, in the first half of 2017. He returns to it here.
Referring to the memo whose preparation was overseen by Republican Congressman Devin Nunes and whose release was authorized by President Trump, and to similar reports likely to come, Cohen, having for years researched Soviet-era archive materials (once highly classified), understands the difficulties involved in summarizing such secret documents, especially when they have been generated by intelligence agencies. They must be put in the larger political context of the time, which can be fully understood only by using other sources as well, including open ones; and they may be contradicted by other classified materials not yet available.
Nonetheless, the "Republican memo," as it has become known while we await its Democratic counterpart, indicates that some kind of operation against presidential candidate and then President Trump, an "investigation," has been under way among top officials of US intelligence agencies for a long time. The memo focuses on questionable methods used by Obama's FBI and Justice Department to obtain a warrant permitting them to surveil Carter Page, a peripheral and short-tenured Trump foreign-policy adviser, and the role played in this by the anti-Trump "dossier" complied by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer whose career specialization was Russia. But the memo's implications are even larger.
Steele's dossier, which alleged that Trump had been compromised by the Kremlin in various ways for several years even preceding his presidential candidacy, was the foundational document of the Russiagate narrative, at least from the time its installments began to be leaked to the American media in the summer of 2016, to the US "Intelligence Community Assessment" of January 2017 (when BuzzFeed also published the dossier), the same month that FBI Director James Comey "briefed" President-elect Trump on the dossier -- apparently in an effort to intimidate him -- and on to today's Mueller investigation. Even though both have been substantially challenged for their lack of verifiable evidence, the dossier and subsequent ICA report remain the underlying sources for proponents of the Russiagate narrative of "Trump-Putin collision."
The memo and dossier are now being subjected to close (if partisan) scrutiny, much of it focused on the Clinton campaign's having financed Steele's work through his employer, Fusion GPS. But two crucial and ramifying question are not, Cohen argues, being explored: Exactly when, and by whom, was this Intel operation against Trump started? And exactly where did Steele get the "information" that he was filing in periodic installments and that grew into the dossier?
In order to defend itself against the memo's charge that it used Steele's unverified dossier to open its investigation into Trump's associates, the FBI claims it was prompted instead by a May 2016 report of remarks made earlier by another lowly Trump adviser, George Papadopoulos, to an Australian ambassador in a London bar. Even leaving aside the ludicrous nature of this episode, the public record shows it is not true. In testimony to the House Intelligence Committee in May 2017, John Brennan, formerly Obama's head of the CIA, strongly suggested that he and his agency were the first, as The Washington Post put it at the time , "in triggering an FBI probe."
Certainly both the Post and The New York Times interpreted his remarks in this way. Equally certain, Brennan played a central role in promoting the Russiagate narrative thereafter, briefing members of Congress privately and giving President Obama himself a top-secret envelope in early August 2016 that almost certainly contained Steele's dossier. Early on, Brennan presumably would have shared his "suspicions" and initiatives with James Clapper, director of national intelligence. FBI Director Comey, distracted by his mangling of the Clinton private-server affair during the presidential campaign, may have joined them actively somewhat later.
But when he did so publicly, in his March 2017 testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, it was as J. Edgar Hoover reincarnate -- as the nation's number-one expert on Russia and its profound threat to America (though, when asked, he said he had never heard of Gazprom, the giant Russian-state energy company often said to be a major pillar of President Putin's power). The question therefore becomes: When did Brennan begin his "investigation" of Trump? His House testimony leaves this somewhat unclear, but, according to a subsequent Guardian article , by late 2015 or early 2016 he was receiving, or soliciting, reports from foreign intelligence agencies regarding "suspicious 'interactions' between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents."
In short, if these reports and Brennan's own testimony are to be believed, he, not the FBI, was the instigator and godfather of Russiagate. Certainly, his subsequent frequent and vociferous public retelling of the Russiagate allegations against Trump suggest that he played a (and probably the ) instigating role. And, it seems, a role in the Steele dossier as well. Where, then, Cohen asks, did Steele get his information? According to Steele and his many stenographers -- which include his American employers, Democratic Party Russiagaters, the mainstream media, and even progressive publications -- it came from his "deep connections in Russia," specifically from retired and current Russian intelligence officials in or near the Kremlin . From the moment the dossier began to be leaked to the American media, this seemed highly implausible (as reporters who took his bait should have known) for several reasons:
§ Steele has not returned to Russia after leaving his post there in the early 1990s. Since then, the main Russian intelligence agency, the FSB, has undergone many personnel and other changes, especially after 2000, and especially in or near Putin's Kremlin. Did Steele really have such "connections" so many years later?
§ Even if he did, would these purported Russian insiders really have collaborated with this "former" British intelligence agent under what is so widely said to be the ever-vigilant eye of the ruthless "former KGB agent" Vladimir Putin, thereby risking their positions, income, perhaps freedom, as well as the well-being of their families?
§ Originally it was said that his Russian sources were highly paid by Steele. Arguably, this might have warranted the risk. But subsequently Steele's employer and head of Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, wrote in The New York Times that "Steele's sources in Russia were not paid." If the Putin Kremlin's purpose was to put Trump in the White House, why then would these "Kremlin-connected" sources have contributed to Steele's anti-Trump project without financial or political gain -- only with considerable risk?
§ There is the also the telling matter of factual mistakes in the dossier that Kremlin "insiders" were unlikely to have made, but this is the subject for a separate analysis.
And indeed we now know that Steele had at least three other "sources" for the dossier, ones not previously mentioned by him or his employer. There was the information from foreign intelligence agencies provided by Brennan to Steele or to the FBI, which we also now know was collaborating with Steele. There was the contents of a " second Trump-Russia dossier " prepared by people personally close to Hillary Clinton and who shared their "findings" with Steele. And most intriguingly, there was the "research" provided by Nellie Ohr, wife of a top Department of Justice official, Bruce Ohr, who, according to the Republican memo, "was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife's opposition research." Most likely, it found its way into Steele's dossier. (Mrs. Ohr was a trained Russian Studies scholar with a PhD from Stanford and a onetime assistant professor at Vassar, and thus, it must have seemed, an ideal collaborator for Steele.) We are left, then, with a vital, ramifying question: How much of the "intelligence information" in Steele's dossier actually came from Russian insiders, if any? (This uncertainly alone should stop Fox News's Sean Hannity and others from declaring that the Kremlin used Steele -- and Hillary Clinton -- to pump its "propaganda and disinformation" into America. Such pro-Trump allegations, like those of Russiagate itself, only fuel the new Cold War, which risks becoming actual war any day, from Syria to Ukraine.) And so, Cohen concludes, we are left with even more ramifying questions:
§ Was Russiagate produced by the primary leaders of the US intelligence community, not just the FBI? If so, it is the most perilous political scandal in modern American history, and the most detrimental to American democracy. And if so, it does indeed, as zealous promoters of Russiagate assert, make Watergate pale in significance. (To understand more, we will need to learn more, including whether Trump associates other than Carter Page and Paul Manafort were officially surveilled by any of the agencies involved. And whether they were surveilled in order to monitor Trump himself, on the assumption they were or would be in close proximity to him, as the president once suggested in a tweet.)
§ If Russiagate involved collusion among US intelligence agencies, as now seems likely, why was it undertaken? There are various possibilities. Out of loathing for Trump? Out of institutional opposition to his promise of better relations -- "cooperation" -- with Russia? Or out of personal ambition? Did Brennan, for example, aspire to remaining head of the CIA, or to a higher position, in a Hillary Clinton administration?
§ What was President Obama's role in any of this? Or to resort to the Watergate question: What did he know and when did he know it? And what did he do? The same questions would need to be asked about his White House aides and other appointees. Whatever the full answers, there is no doubt that Obama acted on the Russiagate allegations. He cited them for the sanctions he imposed on Russia in December 2016, which led directly to the case of General Michael Flynn (not for doing anything wrong with Russia but for "lying to the FBI"); to the worsening of the new US-Russian Cold War; and thus to the perilous relationship inherited by President Trump, who has in turn been thwarted by Russiagate in his attempts to improve relations through "cooperation" with Putin.
§ With all of this in mind, and assuming Trump knew most of it, did he really have any choice in firing FBI Director Comey, for which he is now unfairly being investigated by Mueller? We might also ask, given Comey's role during Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign (for which she and her team loudly condemned him), whether as president she would have had to fire him. Listening almost daily to the legion of former US intel officers condemn Russiagate skeptics ever more loudly and persistently in the media, we may wonder if they are increasingly fearful it will become known that Russiagate was mostly Intelgate. For that we will need a new bipartisan Senate Church Committee of the 1970s, which investigated and exposed misdeeds by US intelligence agencies and which led to important reforms that are no longer the preventive measures against abuses of power they were intended to be. (Ideally, everyone involved would be granted amnesty for recent misdeeds, ending all talk of "jail time," on the condition they now testify truthfully.) But such an inclusive investigation of Intelgate would require the support of Democratic members of Congress, which no longer seems possible.
Fmr. FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom argued that FBI planned to destroy Donald Trump's presidency (Dec 19, 2017). In his Fox interview he said that there was a "cabal" of FBI personnel around Comey as well as selected group of people in Justice Department working together toward this goal. He asks an interesting question: "Why Trump Justice Department does not comply with congressional subpoena?" The answer is that it is not Trump Justice Department yet. So far this is still Obama Justice Department, or more correctly "neoliberals dominated Justice Department". Deposing a couple of people who were openly involved in the attempt to rig elections in favor of Hillary like Bruce Ohr does not solve the problem. the problem are no so much people, but the underlining doctrine that the department supports -- which is neoliberalism
The role of Peter Strzok is probably the most interesting in this drama as he was instrumental is swiping the dirt about Hillary private email server under the carpet and thus derailing Sanders; later he used Steele Dossier to start color revolution against Trump (aka Russiagate) : Jordan: Appears There Was Orchestrated Plan Within DOJ, FBI to Prevent Trump From Becoming President - YouTube
From what we know as of January 2018 the operational part of Stzrok-gate consists of at least following overlapping operations (listed not exactly in chronological order)
In East Germany, Stasi leader Markus Wolfe took things a step further with the “zersetzung” tactic. The idea was to *induce* a “personal crisis” through clandestine harassment,
I realize that Clinton wing of Democratic Party (soft neoliberals) and their supporters which include a part of Wall Street, large part of Silicon valley and most MSM progressives hate Donald Trump so much that they believe that any pretext is justified in taking him down. So they joined efforts with the neoconservatives to prevent any changes that can negatively affect military industrial complex or neoliberal globalization (and by extension the US led global neoliberal empire). That's why war-mongering against Russia is now OK (and implicitly directly against China). that's why the Democratic Party now is just another War Party along (or even more jingoistic) then Republican Party -- traditional war hawks pandering to military industrial complex (that was pretty evident from Hillary campaign).
See also the following Youtube video (Jim Jordan GRILLS Rod Rosenstein: Calls For Second Special Counsel 12/13/17 ). From comments:
unit472, December 23, 2017 at 6:26 am GMT • 200 WordsWe now know the ‘fix’ was in when Comey admitted that Congress was not informed that an FBI counterintelligence investigation with the Trump campaign as the target in the summer of 2016. The basis for this investigation seems to be nothing more than that Clinton supplied Russian dossier. That the head of the FBI’s counterintelligence operations, Bill Priestap deemed the matter ‘too sensitive’ to disclose to Congressional Intelligence Committees until March of 2017 yet the Obama Administration disseminated the results of NSA surveillance throughout his Administration to the point where low level operatives like Evelyn Farkas could blurt out during an MSNBC interview that "it was important to conceal how we knew what we knew" from the president elect.spider, December 23, 2017 at 2:06 pm GMT
Mueller, if he were to really do his job, would redirect his investigation and target the Obama Administration and his close friend Jim Comey but his conflicts of interest, in particular, the Uranium One deal he approved makes that impossible. His only job now is to coverup the biggest conspiracy in the history of the US government.The assumption that Mueller is honest is questionable. He hounded Steven Hatfield for years about the anthrax letters. Then, he went after Bruce Ivins until he committed suicide–or was suicided. The chance that Ivins was guilty is about 0,001 percent.Svigor, December 23, 2017 at 3:29 pm GMT • 700 Words
If the media was hoping to persuade the American people that Trump is guilty of a crime, they have a long way to go.
Thanks for all the poll numbers, Mike. As suspect as poll numbers are, they give us at least an idea of what a lemon Big Media is selling. They pushed that narrative that hard for that long, and they haven’t even cracked 50%.
As for Mueller, it’s not hard to pick up his swamp-rat odor. He’s BFFs with Comey, for one thing. And Comey is a consummate swamp creature, absolutely tailor-made for DC (just think about all his moralizing, how his tummy hurt dealing with Trump, etc). Remember, it’s extremely likely that Mueller had to sign off on Comey’s post-firing behavior. Those two put their heads together to game-plan, and Comey’s subsequent shitshow was by mutual design. That shitshow displayed that the two were at least as interested in playing politics as they were in being FBI.
Also FBI is essentially an imperial institution and as such designed (and staffed with appropriate type of people) to serve the empire and ensure continuity of imperial policies (much like CIA, arm of which it essentially is, especially its counterintelligence part). In this sense the fact that many high level staff were pro warmonger Clinton should not surprise anybody.
Clinton was the establishment candidate hell-bent on continuation of disastrous Mid-East wars and neoliberal/neocon imperial policies toward Russia and China designed to extend the period of the USA sole supremacy it obtained after the dissolution of the USSR.
Anon says: • Disclaimer December 23, 2017 at 7:48 pm GMT • 200 WordsPlease, let Mueller stay to become a poster boy for borgistas. With each day, the incompetence of the CIA’ and FBI’ brass has been revealing with the greater and greater clarity. They have sold out the US citizenry for personal gains.Svigor December 23, 2017 at 3:59 pm GMT • 600 Words
Rod Rosenstein’ role in particular should be well investigated so that his name becomes tightly connected to the “dossier” and all its racy tales.
“… there was never sufficient reason to appoint a Special Counsel. The threshold for making such an appointment should have been probable cause, that is, deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein should have shown why he thought there was ‘reasonable basis to believe that a crime had been committed.’
That’s what’s required under the Fourth Amendment, and that’s the standard that should have been met. But Rosenstein ignored that rule because it improved the Special Counsel’s chances of netting indictments. Even so, there’s no evidence that a crime has been committed. None.”Corvanus keeps lubing his corvanus in hopes Comey and Mueller will come by for shiatsu but so far nothin’.
I don’t think Trump should fire Mueller (makes a martyr of his fishing expedition), but I also don’t know WTF Trump is doing with this thing. I haven’t read a single report about the Administration stone-walling Mueller’s investigation, which suggests that the administration isn’t stonewalling Mueller’s investigation. I think I would’ve stonewalled Mueller’s investigation many months ago. “Fuck you, fish by yourself.”
Hey, I guess he has better lawyers than I, but my strategy would’ve kept 3 of the 4 guys currently under indictment in the “not indicted” category.
If Trump wants Mueller fired, he should start firing the top brass at FBI. Give no reason, just keep firing guys until one of the replacements terminates Mueller’s investigation. Then he can stop firing people.
... ... ...
Feb 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
likbez , 15 February 2018 at 11:33 PMTTG,
Your logic is suspect in this particular case.
First of all the "Intelligence community" here means predetermined conclusions by specifically handpicked for this purpose by Brennan team, consisting of a dozen or so analysts. Which included Peter Strzok and, most probably, Andrew McCabe.
The key operation launched after election nicely fits the scheme of a color revolution (which are CIA specialty in tandem with the State Department ;-) In this context, the role ICA was to launch the media frenzy (to use controlled MSM as attack dogs to de-legitimize the elected government accusing it of some mortal sin such as corruption, collision with Russia (or other chosen scapegoat country), plunging the standard of living and economics of the country, racism and suppression of ethnic minorities, etc) is a classic recipe from Gene Sharp book https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/30/gene-sharp-dead-arab-spring-political-scientist ).
That goal was successfully achieved -- unprecedented neo-McCarthyism campaign, along with the allegations of "collision with Russia" by Trump and his team were both in full bloom by January 2017.
David Stockman provided the names of the principal conspirators of the color revolution listing Brannan as the No. 1 ( http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-18/russiagate-witch-hunt-stockman-names-names-deep-states-insurance-policy)Here are the names and rank of the principal conspirators:
John Brennan, CIA director;
Susan Rice, National Security Advisor;
Samantha Power, UN Ambassador;
James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence;
James Comey, FBI director;
Andrew McCabe, Deputy FBI director;
Sally Yates, deputy Attorney General,
Bruce Ohr, associate deputy AG;
Peter Strzok, deputy assistant director of FBI counterintelligence;
Lisa Page, FBI lawyer;
and countless other lessor and greater poobahs of Washington power, including President Obama himself.
And this MSM witch hunt was in turn a step stone toward "Appointment of the Special Prosecutor" gambit (for which Rosenstein was used possibly with help of intimidation), the most important goalpost so far achieved by plotters.
Your interpretation of the visit of Brennan to Reid is probably wrong. Information about Steele dossier was of secondary importance. His goal was to recruit an influential Congress ally who shared the agenda "Trump should go" and who can help with the forthcoming color revolution steps based on dossier and ICA. Reid subsequent steps of propagating Steele dossier were just a part of larger effort.
Barack Obama biography and his very strange relations with Brennan raises a lot of interesting questions one of which is: To what extent Obama was dependent/controlled by CIA and to what extent he was the part of the color revolution plot. He definitely took unprecedented (and dangerous for him personally) steps to de-legitimize Trump and implicate Russians before leaving the office ("unmasking" campaign by Rice and Powell, exclusion of Russian diplomats and confiscation of Russian property made of the basis of Steele falsification and the burning desire to "get" Trump )
The other question is to what extent Strzok and McCabe can be considered as Brennan allies, or maybe even Brennan agents of influence within FBI. It is not that plausible that those two guys ventured into "va bank" operation of spying on Trump by themselves. From recovered texts, it is clear that Strzok opinion about Hillary was pretty low.
Now we know that Brennan single-handedly opened Russiagate investigation and even boasted about that. That means that he is the real godfather of Russiagate. According to the Washington Times:"It was then-CIA Director John O. Brennan, a close confidant of Mr. Obama's, who provided the information -- what he termed the "basis" -- for the FBI to start the counterintelligence investigation last summer .Mr. Brennan told the House Intelligence Committee on May 23 that the intelligence community was picking up tidbits on Trump associates making contacts with Russians."
Links from Crowdstrike "analysis" (which most probably was a false flag operation to implicate Russians and cover the leak of emails to a USB drive) also might lead to Brennan.
The same is true about Fusion GPS. And even Steele himself, who, as we now know, got some information collected by the duo of Shearer-Blumenthal via State Department. So it is plausible that none, or very little of the dirt on Trump published in the dossier belongs to Steele. He might simply be used for the legitimization purpose of already collected by somebody else dirt; I read somewhere that he produced the "initial" dossier memo used for FISA court in record short period; something like three days). The story with prostitutes urinating on the bed in a Moscow hotel really smells with Blumenthal. It's his methods of dealing with Hillary political opponents. BTW he is the author of "birth certificate hypothesis" and "birther movement" (of which Trump became a part much later, after Obama victory) and due to this was rejected by Ralph Emmanuel when Hillary tried to get him into Obama WH ( http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/does-clinton-have-a-blumenthal-birther-problem/article/2602090 )
Mike Whitney asked several important in this content questions ( http://www.unz.com/mwhitney/is-john-brennan-the-mastermind-behind-russiagate/ ):But now the plan has backfired and the investigations are gaining pace. Trump's allies in the House smell the blood in the water and they want answers. Did the CIA surveil members of the Trump campaign on the basis of information they gathered in the dossier? Who saw the information? Was the information passed along to members of the press and other government agencies? Was the White House involved? What role did Obama play? What about the Intelligence Community Assessment? Was it based on the contents of the Steele report? Will the "hand-picked" analysts who worked on the report vouch for its conclusions in or were they coached about what to write? How did Brennan persuade the reluctant Comey into opening a counterintelligence investigation on members in the Trump campaign when he knew it would be perceived as a partisan attempt to sabotage the elections by giving Hillary an edge?
I'm wondering why it's that much of a stretch to believe that the CIA might have engineered the whole thing.
Feb 16, 2018 | www.thenation.com
In a recent interview, James Clapper, who served as President Obama's director of national intelligence, said explicitly that the Intelligence Community Assessment itself had nothing whatsoever to do with the dossier. "We briefed, John [Brennan, then CIA director] and I, briefed the president-elect [Trump] at the time, on January 6. He viewed what we presented to him, which had very high confidence levels in what we presented him, which by the way, a point I'll make, had nothing to do with the dossier. We did not draw on the dossier. The dossier, the infamous dossier, was not a part of our Intelligence Community Assessment," said Clapper. "His first reaction to it was that this caused a question about the legitimacy of his election."
Jeffrey Harrison says: February 16, 2018 at 6:08 pm
It's interesting that the Russians set this all up to boost Trump and disparage Three Names before Trump even announced he was running. The basic set up for this was going on in 2014 whereas Trump announced in 2015.
Carla Skidmore says: February 16, 2018 at 7:29 pm
No, not really. Trump was making gestures of interest in the presidency in 2012
Jeffrey Harrison says: February 16, 2018 at 8:30 pm
Pfui. He also made noises about running in the 2012 election. People don't set up organizations to do stuff just on the off chance that some politician or wannabe is going to run. These guys ain't got nothin'.
It's been a year since Mueller went to work and what's he got? A couple of Republican political operatives being political operatives. Their crime was not reporting to the USG that they were working for Ukraine.
Now we're down to social media posts. You're probably one of those people who say, I saw it on the internet so it must be true. If the government is going to be upset about crap they see on social media from foreign parties, they need to start by telling said social media that they can't solicit advertising from foreign entities with political overtones as facebook did of RT.
Francis Louis Szot says: February 16, 2018 at 6:05 pmClark M Shanahan says: February 16, 2018 at 3:44 pm
Apparently, it comes down to trolls who planted various "fake news" stories.
Stipulate to all of that; the worst of it.
How does THAT begin to stack–up against the murderous coup that the USA OPENLY fomented in the Ukraine a couple of years earlier by bankrolling dozens of Non-governmental organizations whose sole purpose was "regime change"?
Maybe come back to me about all of this when the FBI can convincingly prove that the Russian government armed and funded a Neo–nazi para–military group that assaulted and burned–down the North Carolina State House.
I'm hoping the hush-money passed on to two of Trump's romantic caprices, during the election, gets traction.
Tell me, as soon as you can, when having skepticism on the Russia/Election Meddling story is finally permitted. I heard tell, we've lately dropped the "Treason" narration. Now the spin du jour is that Trump & Co were all duped by them clever Ruskies.
Whatever floats your boat.
Feb 15, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
His dossier was more than opposition research, it was part of a full-spectrum information operation.Leaving aside the validity of what has become known as the "Steele dossier," it's important to look at how Christopher Steele was able to guarantee that the information in it would play a significant and ongoing role in American politics.
Steele, who is British, did far more than simply provide opposition research to the Democratic National Committee. He was able to make sure it reached the most influential people possible in politics, media and government to shape and influence the growing narrative of the 2016 presidential election. In other words, as a skilled professional intelligence officer, Steele ran a full-spectrum information operation against the United States. One could even call it information warfare.
This is what separates his work creating the dossier (which a decent journalist with friends in Russia could have done) from his work insinuating the dossier into the highest reaches of American government and political society. For that, you need a real pro, an intelligence officer with decades of experience running just that kind of operation. Looking for foreign interference in the 2016 election? Let's take a closer look at Christopher Steele.
Steele's skill is revealed by the now familiar Nunes and Grassley memos, which show he used the same set of information in the dossier to create a collaboration loop, every intelligence officer's dream, which is his own planted information used to surreptitiously confirm itself, right up to the point where the target country's own intelligence service re-purposed it as evidence in the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court.
Steele admits he briefed journalists off-the-record starting in summer and autumn 2016. His most significant hit came when in September 2016, journalist Michael Isikoff broke the story of Trump associate Carter Page's alleged connections to Russia. Isikoff did not cite the dossier or Steele as sources, and in fact denied they were when questioned.
Isikoff's story didn't just push negative information about Trump into the public consciousness. It claimed U.S. intel officials were probing ties between a Trump adviser and the Kremlin, adding credibility, suggesting the feds themselves felt the info was worthwhile. Better yet for Steele, Isikoff claimed the information came from a "well-placed Western intelligence source," suggesting it originated from a third-party and was picked up by Western spies instead of being written by one. Steele, either as a source himself or via colleagues passing around his information, saw to it the dossier information reached journalists at Mother Jones , the BBC, Guardian and others. An article by Harold Blum in Vanity Fair laid it out in April of last year:
It wasn't long before, as The New York Times would write, the memos by the former spy "became one of Washington's worst-kept secrets, as reporters . . . scrambled to confirm or disprove them."
At the same time, Steele's info reached influential people like Sen. John McCain, who could then pick up a newspaper and believe he was seeing the "secret" info from Steele confirmed independently by an experienced journalist. And how did McCain first learn about Steele's work? At a conference in Canada, via Andrew Wood , former British Ambassador in Moscow. Where was Wood working at the time? Orbis , Christopher Steele's research firm.
A copy of the dossier even found its way to the State Department , an organization which normally should have been far removed from U.S. election politics. A contact within State passed information from Clinton associates Sidney Blumenthal and Cody Shearer (both men also played active roles behind in the scenes feeding Clinton dubious information on Libya) to and from Steele. The Grassley memo suggests there is was a second Steele document, in addition to the dossier, already shared with State and the FBI, but not made public.
While seeding his dossier in the media and around Washington, Steele was also meeting in secret with the FBI (he claims he did not inform Fusion GPS, his employer), via an FBI counterintelligence handler in Rome. Steele began feeding the FBI in July 2016 with updates into the fall, apparently in the odd guise of simply a deeply concerned, loyal British subject. "This is something of huge significance, way above party politics," Steele commented as to his motives.
The FBI, in the process of working Steele, would have likely characterized him as a " source ," technically an " extra-territorial confidential human source ." That meant the dossier's claims appeared to come from the ex-MI6 officer with the good reputation, not second-hand from who-knows-who in Russia (the FBI emphasized Steele's reputation when presenting the dossier to the FISA court). Think of it as a kind of money laundering which, like that process, helped muddy the real source of the goods.
The FBI used the Steele dossier to apply for a FISA court surveillance warrant against Carter Page. The FBI also submitted Isikoff's story as collaborating evidence, without explaining the article and the dossier were effectively one in the same. In intelligence work, this is known as cross-contamination , an amateur error. The FBI however, according to the Nunes memo, did not tell the FISA court the Steele dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee as commissioned opposition research, nor did they tell the court the Isikoff article presented as collaborating evidence was in fact based on the same dossier.
Steele reached an agreement with the FBI a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him $50,000 to continue his "research," though the deal is believed to have fallen through after the dossier became public (an intelligence community source tells The American Conservative Steele did in fact operate as a fully paid FBI asset.) Along the way, the FBI also informed Steele of their separate investigation into Trump staffer George Papadopoulos, a violation of security and a possible tainting of Steele's research going forward.
The Nunes memo also showed then-associate deputy attorney general Bruce Ohr back-channeled additional material from Steele into the DOJ while working with Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and her replacement, Rod Rosenstein. Ohr's wife Nellie Ohr worked for Fusion GPS, the firm that commissioned the dossier, on Steele's project. Ohr's wife would be especially valuable in that she would be able to clandestinely supply info to collaborate what Steele told the FBI and, via her husband, know to tailor what she passed to the questions DOJ had. The FBI did not disclose the role of Ohr's wife, who speaks Russian and has previously done contract work for the CIA, to the FISA court.
Ohr's wife only began work for Fusion GPS in September/October 2016 , as the FBI sought the warrant against Page based on the Steele dossier. Ohr's wife taking a new job with Fusion GPS at that critical juncture screams of the efforts of an experienced intelligence officer looking to create yet another inside pipeline inside, essentially his own asset.
For the operation's audacity, it was impressive: Steele took a dossier paid for by one party, and drove it deep into the Washington political machinery. His work formed in part the justification for a FISA warrant to spy on a Trump associate, the end game of which has not yet been written.
In that time, he maneuvered himself from paid opposition researcher to clandestine source for the FBI. Steele then may have planted the spouse of a senior DOJ employee as a second clandestine source to move more information into DOJ. In the intelligence world, that is as good as it gets; via two seemingly independent channels you are controlling the opponent's information cycle.
Steele further manipulated the American media to have his information amplified and given credibility. By working simultaneously as both an anonymous and a cited source, he got his same info out as if it was coming from multiple places.
The Washington Post characterized Steele as "struggling to navigate dual obligations -- to his private clients, who were paying him to help Clinton win, and to a sense of public duty born of his previous life." But The Washington Post has no idea how intelligence officers work. Their job is to befriend and engage the target to carry out the goals of their employer. When they do it right, the public summation is a line like the Post offered: you never even knew you were being used.
Meanwhile, there is informed speculation Steele was more than a source for the FBI, and actually may have been tasked and paid to search for specific information, essentially working as a double agent for the FBI and the DNC. Others have raised questions about Steele's status as "retired" from British intelligence, as the lines among working for MI6, working at MI6, and working with MI6 are often times largely a matter of semantics (for the record, Steele's old boss at MI6 calls the dossier credible; an intelligence community source tells The American Conservative Steele shared all of his information with MI6.)
As for the performance of the DOJ/FBI, we do not have enough information to judge whether they were incompetent, or simply willing partners to what Steele was up to, using him as a handy pretext to open legal surveillance on someone inside the Trump circle.
So, putting talk of Russian meddling aside for a moment, is it not fair to ask if what Christopher Steele was doing could be construed as foreign influence in an American election?
Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well : How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People and Hooper's War : A Novel of WWII Japan. He Tweets @WeMeantWell
KevinS February 15, 2018 at 12:19 am"The FBI used the Steele dossier to apply for a FISA court surveillance warrant against Carter Page. The FBI also submitted Isikoff's story as collaborating evidence, without explaining the article and the dossier were effectively one in the same."Lenny , says: February 15, 2018 at 12:26 am
Have you (or anyone else here) seen the application? I am not aware that is has been declassified.Carter Page Touted Kremlin Contacts in 2013 Letterjohn , says: February 15, 2018 at 12:49 am
The letter, dated Aug. 25, 2013, was sent by Page to an academic press during a dispute over edits to an unpublished manuscript he had submitted for publication, according to an editor who worked with Page.
"Over the past half year, I have had the privilege to serve as an informal advisor to the staff of the Kremlin in preparation for their Presidency of the G-20 Summit next month, where energy issues will be a prominent point on the agenda," the letter reads.Doesn't the FISA court grant 99.5% of requests? A rubber stamp might have a higher failure rate. I doubt the info in the brief had much to do with anything. Still they re-upped the warrant 3x right? So that was based on what? I think something they saw/heardPeter Van Buren , says: February 15, 2018 at 10:21 amCommenters seem to have missed the point; Steele did everything he was paid for and then some. The fact that the universe of factors still elected Trump is immaterial to this relative success. In addition, the final chapter has not yet been written. There are people actively using Steele's work trying to bring Trump down. Stay tuned.Allen , says: February 15, 2018 at 10:29 amThis article is a waste of time, not because it is inaccurate -- the federal government was weaponized and wielded by President Obama and Hillary Clinton a long time ago. No, it is a waste of time because those who hate Trump will continue to hate him and will believe any bad thing anyone says about him, regardless of facts. It's not about facts for them, it's about their feelings.Lenny , says: February 15, 2018 at 11:05 am
As I've said here before, if Trump cured cancer tomorrow, the headline at NYT and WaPo would read TRUMP PUTS DOCTORS OUT OF WORK!The Steel dossier which was not released during the campaign was an information operation but the coordinated leaks by Assange was not?Will Harrington , says: February 15, 2018 at 11:07 am
Comey ranting and raving about Clinton's emails before the elections but staying mum about the investigation into the Trump campaign was an effort by the deep state to get Hillary elected?
The Trump campaign had more contacts with Russians than the diplomatic staff at the US embassy in Moscow, but Hillary Clinton is the on who colluded with the Russians?
How much money is Putin paying you ?
Have you no shame or decency left in your bones? You and others who carry water for this abomination that is defiling the WH and degrading our democratic norms?ARK 712Scott Ritter , says: February 15, 2018 at 11:24 am
You make quite a claim, considering that ALL of the history of the United States is modern history and we are only barely into the second year of the Trump administration. So, does this make you a sycophant for the people who claim to be resisting fascism while not having a clue what fascism is? Come on, use real arguments. Steele is the issue in this article so citing a couple of guilty pleas that don't really touch on the issue is not dealing with the article, it is a red herring. Personally, considering the blatant ways we interfere in other countries, I can't help but hear this as hypocritical whining. If Putin did order interference in our elections (and I would, if I were him) then the real problem seems to be that the Russian government is much better at playing this game than the sad bunch of incompetents that pass themselves off as our elite governing class.Information operations is the bread and butter of MI-6. My experience with "Mass Appeal" in 1997-1998 underscores the degree to which planting stories in the media for the purpose of manipulating public opinion toward a specific objective served as a major component of MI-6 operational planning from top to bottom.Johann , says: February 15, 2018 at 1:16 pm
Steele was part of a Russia team in the mid-2000's which was knee deep in conducting information operations against Putin's Russia; the entire Litvenenko episode was part and parcel of that effort. Steele was the MI-6 Case Officer who helped shape public opinion after Litvenenko's death. Keep in mind that Litvenenko was arrested in March 1999 his information was dated, and any new sources were from the Russian expat community, driven by anti-Putin oligarchs and guided by MI-6. Steele and Orbis assumes control of these sources in 2009; Steele's entire business model is built on the framework of an MI-6 anti-Russian information operation. Peter is spot on when he describes the Steele dossier as an information operation in the MI-6 model, whether MI-6 was directly involved or not.At some point, the Democrats are going to have to admit they were duped by the Russian sources. The dossier fit exactly what they believed of Trump like a tee, and so it had to be true, except it wasn't. They were ecstatic and ran with it, even before they tried to verify it. When someone wants something very badly, they are easy to scam. The Russian agents who fed them that load of BS are now watching US TV, drinking vodka, and laughing their a__es off. They were wildly successful in creating political discord in our country, which was their objective. As usual, the democrats were their useful idiots, just like during Soviet times.Johann , says: February 15, 2018 at 1:19 pmThe democrats may think it was patriotic for the Obama admin to use the intelligence agencies against their political opponents, but they are beyond stupid. Do they really think Trump or some future president won't do the same against them? Time to reel in our surveillance state. As usual, our greatest danger is our own government.SteveK9 , says: February 15, 2018 at 2:06 pm'Leaving aside the validity of what has become known as the "Steele dossier".'Ken Zaretzke , says: February 15, 2018 at 3:35 pm
Why do we have to start here? I don't think there is any point to 'leaving it aside'. The document is obvious rubbish to anyone with two gray cells to rub together.
I think we should 'start' by accepting that this is a ludicrous pile of fabrications. You don't have to be an 'expert' at anything to smell this out. Being intelligent and not born yesterday are all the qualifications needed."Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos have pleaded guilty and are working with a team of prosecutors to ensure that what is publicly known to meet the legal threshold for criminal activity to be ensured."Peter Van Buren , says: February 15, 2018 at 3:54 pm
You need to read this article. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456379/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-questions-raised-about-fbi-robert-mueller-investigation
And then there's the shadowy and still unexplored role of Britain's intelligence agencies–see the chapter titled "What Were the Brits Up To?" in Rogue Spooks: The Intelligence War on Donald Trump."Leaving aside the validity of what has become known as the "Steele dossier "OzPerch , says: February 15, 2018 at 9:00 pm
Space precludes going through the dossier line-by-line, and there is little to nothing in it that can be fully confirmed or disproven anyway based on publicly available information. Indeed, it was written just that way.
But the truth of the contents didn't matter; what mattered is what Steele could make people believe, whether those were journalists or the FBI.This is excellent work. Normally American conservatives suffer from a habitual Anglophilia, and they lionize vicious creatures like Winston Churchill. Perhaps this attempted coup against Trump is causing them to take a second look at the "special relationship", which has involved the US in one illegal war after another and given the neocons, who got their start in the Democratic Party, a foothold in the GOP.
Feb 15, 2018 | www.youtube.com
It is funny to watch how they are divided (republicans and democrats) on domestic issues but they are as one on aggressive and militaristic foreign policies. Bomb, invade, bomb... rinse and repeat. No objection from either side.
Jack Novak , 1 day ago (edited)Lois Dye , 1 day ago Dark Circles , 1 day ago BongoMunkey , 1 day ago Darrin Rychlak , 1 day ago SusanBailey AmazingEstate , 21 hours ago Knight Oyin , 22 hours ago pigboykool , 1 day ago Chris Shiherlis , 1 day ago avalanche344 , 1 day ago Lightwish Light , 1 day ago Purpurowy Diaboł , 10 hours ago Purpurowy Diaboł , 10 hours ago Shara Kirkby , 14 hours ago jo phoenix , 17 hours ago ameighable , 18 hours ago Jerry Cunningham , 18 hours ago dAn , 1 day ago
Feb 15, 2018 | nationalinterest.org
...Donald Trump went to war against the entire political class: all factions of both parties, the bureaucracy, the national media, the lobbyists, Hollywood and Wall Street. He said the whole system was rotten and had failed the nation: hopeless wars that accomplished nothing except the wastage of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars, the extension of Iranian influence and an immense humanitarian crisis, a flatlined economy, a shrinking workforce, increasing poverty and crime, oceans of debt, large trade deficits from trade agreements that exported unemployment to the United States and the unmonitored influx of millions of illiterate peasants from Latin America.
... ... ...
For the first nine months of the new administration, there was the constant confected threat of impeachment. The phantasmagorical imbecility that Trump had somehow colluded and connived with the Russian government to rig the election was the excuse of the hapless Clinton and her Trump-hating echo chamber in the national media for the election result.The deep state was almost the whole state, and it pitched in to sabotage the administration. For nearly that long, the Republican leaders sat on their hands waiting to see if he would be impeached or not. His nominees were a long time in being confirmed. There were leaks of White House conversations, including with foreign leaders -- outright acts of insubordination causing Trump, a decisive executive, to fire some fairly high officials, including the malign director of the FBI, who then informed Congress that he had leaked a self-addressed memo (probably illegally, as it was technically government property), in order to have a special prosecutor named to torment the president over the fatuous Russian allegations, although Comey testified that Trump himself was not a target or suspect and the Russians had not influenced the outcome of the election. (This was a sober position compared to the wholesale fabrications of the Democratic vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mark Warner, that a thousand Russian agents had swarmed the key battleground states and had delivered Wisconsin to Trump.)
The president has strengthened the White House staff. The FBI and Justice Department have been ripped apart in their partisanship and misuse of the dossier on which the collusion argument and the surveillance of the Trump campaign were based. And the dossier, a pastiche of falsehoods from gossips in the Kremlin, has been exposed as a smear job paid for by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee, and the whole impeachment movement has collapsed. The hunters are the prey and Trump will prosecute, sack, or intimidate the deep state. But it is there, can arise quickly and can be very dangerous. Forewarned is forearmed.
Conrad Black is a writer and former newspaper publisher whose most recent book is Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full (PublicAffairs, 2007).
Feb 15, 2018 | theduran.com
What kind of a moron would believe the Steele dossier on Trump and Russia? Lots of Democrat and hollywood elite morons and lots of morons at MSNBC and CNN.
It's so transparently partisan, outrageous and full of fictitious claims, the dossier reads like a parody of a badly written spy novel.
Amazingly, the dossier is what the FBI used to justify spying on American citizens.
Tucker Carlson easily debunks the many claims that Democrats in Congress repeatedly cited as reason to stop the normal functioning of government, so that millions of tax payer dollars can be spent trying to figure out if Trump has been a Russian spy for the last 10 years.
Melotte 22 , February 14, 2018 5:48 PMJoseph Sobecki , February 14, 2018 1:29 PM
It is funny to watch how they are divided (republicans and democrats) on domestic issues but they are as one on aggressive and militaristic foreign policies. Bomb, invade, bomb... rinse and repeat. No objection from either side.john vieira , February 15, 2018 1:06 AM
Watch Jerome Corsi and James Kalstrom great video's about all the felony crimes Barry's DNC/DOJ/FBI were involved in including the dossier.Vierotchka , February 14, 2018 1:28 PM
No need to convince me Tucker...have been calling them morons with regards to "Putin did it" since the ex "moron in chief"...who by the way is now a certified fifth columnist with the blessing of the treasonous mainstream media...insinuated as much after the "loser" lost....to deflect the Seth Rich /WikiLeaks affair...and the Keystone Kops have been tripping all over as well as tripping up themselves ever since trying to "make it happen"...and if it was not for almost the "entire" mainstream media 'covering' for them many more people would actually realize that they are the biggest 'comedy' in town...
I can only concur.
Feb 14, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
BuzzFeed is suing the cash-strapped Democratic National Committee (DNC) to force them to hand over information related to the "Steele Dossier" that might help the news outlet defend itself against a lawsuit lodged by a Russian businessman who was named in the document. Three separate lawsuits have been launched against BuzzFeed in connection to the January 11, 2017 publication of the dossier, which states that Russian tech executive Aleksej Gubarev used his web hosting companies to hack into the DNC's computer systems.
The dossier, without substantiation, said Gubarev's U.S.-based global web-hosting companies, XBT and Webzilla, planted digital bugs, transmitted viruses and conducted altering operations against the Democratic Party leadership.
While one key name in the dossier was blackened out by BuzzFeed, Gubarev's was not. He alleges that he was never contacted for comment, suffering reputational harm in the process. - Foreign Policy
As part of their defense, BuzzFeed issued a subpoena to the DNC for information which might help them defend against Gubarev's lawsuit by verifying claims in the dossier - including "digital remnants left by the Russian state operatives," as well as a full version of the hacking report prepared by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike.
Since the DNC wouldn't let the FBI look at the server and instead relied on the report prepared by CrowdStrike (founded by Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch - who sits on the very Anti-Russian Atlantic Council along with Evelyn " oops! " Farkas. The AC is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk, who apparently owns the Ukrainian gas company Joe Biden's son is on the board of).
"As part of the discovery process, BuzzFeed is attempting to verify claims in the dossier that relate to the hacking of the DNC," said BuzzFeed spokesman Matt Mittenhal in a statement. "We're asking a federal court to force the DNC to follow the law and allow BuzzFeed to fully defend its First Amendment rights."
Last month, the DNC claimed that providing the requested information would expose the DNC's internal operations and harm the party politically (it's always someone else's fault, no?).
"If these documents were disclosed, the DNC's internal operations, as well as its ability to effectively achieve its political goals, would be harmed ," said DNC lawyers.
If the DNC is compelled to turn over the full CrowdStrike report and "digital remnants," perhaps Gubarev would then present a counter-analysis by researcher Forensicator which CrowdStrike apparently "missed" - revealing that the DNC files were copied at 22.6 MB/s - all but confirming that the files had to have been copied locally by an inside source. Many have speculated that DNC IT staffer Seth Rich, whose murder is still unsolved, was the source of the emails provided to WikiLeaks.
Word of BuzzFeed's suit against the DNC comes on the heels of a Monday revelation that the news outlet hired a former top FBI and White House cybersecurity official to fly around the globe on a secret mission to corroborate various claims in the dossier.
The probe is being conducted by Anthony Ferrante - formerly the FBI's top official in charge of "cyber incident response" at the U.S. National Security Council under the Obama administration. Ferrante is leading the investigation from his new employer, D.C.-based business advisory firm, Forensic Technologies International (FTI) consulting reports Foreign Policy .
At FTI, Ferrante launched what's now been a months-long stealth effort chasing down documents and conducting interviews on the ground in various countries around the world. His team directed BuzzFeed lawyers to subpoena specific data and testimony from dozens of agencies or companies across the country and assembled a cyber ops war room to analyze that dat a, according to sources familiar with the work.
Considering that much of the Steele dossier came from a collaboration with high level Kremlin officials (a collusion if you will), one has to wonder exactly what channels Ferrante and FTI have tapped in order to access such information.
Wouldn't it be funny if BuzzFeed proves the DNC wasn't hacked?
Feb 21, 2017 | www.lewrockwell.com
Q. Who is behind the coup attempt ?
A. Mainly, unnamed intelligence officials and operatives who are in the CIA or recently retired from such. A number of media outfits are exceptionally active in propagating negative headlines and stories about Trump and his administration. Elements of other intelligence agencies and departments of government are possibly involved. We do not know the names of those operating against Trump, and this is a weakness of the coup hypothesis.
Q. When did the coup attempt begin?
A. Its foundation was laid in 2016 by accusations of Russian interference in the election. The coup began in earnest as soon as the election in November 2016 made Trump the winner.
Q. What evidence points to the CIA's role in the coup attempt?
A. A news report from September 5, 2016, reports that "U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies are investigating what they see as a broad covert Russian operation in the United States to sow public distrust in the upcoming presidential election and in U.S. political institutions, intelligence, and congressional officials said."
On Jan. 14, 2017, a news report states that the CIA set up a task force in 2016 to investigate possible Russian funding of Trump's campaign. The task force included the FBI, the Treasury, and Justice Departments, the CIA, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the National Security Agency (NSA).
Q. Why did the CIA set up a task force to investigate Trump's campaign?
A. Why did the CIA not set up a task force to investigate Hillary Clinton's activities during and after being Secretary of State in response to receipt of mammoth amounts of foreign money that were laundered through the Clinton Foundation? The reason is that she was the candidate favored by the CIA leadership and Trump was not.
Early in 2016, Trump was raising very strong doubts in the intelligence community that he'd govern as they saw fit.
On February 24, 2016, ex-CIA chief Hayden said he'd be "frightened" of a Trump presidency. He said, "I would be incredibly concerned if President Trump governed in a way that was consistent with the language that candidate Trump expressed during the campaign." A news report told us "Former CIA director Michael Hayden believes there is a legitimate possibility that the U.S. military would refuse to follow orders given by Donald Trump if the Republican front-runner becomes president and decides to make good on certain campaign pledges."
A month later, Hayden opined that Trump was a larger threat to national stability on security matters than Hillary Clinton.
On April 11, 2016, we learn that CIA Director "Brennan said on NBC News Sunday that he would not allow enhanced interrogation tactics, including waterboarding, even if a future president ordered it." Trump wasted no time responding: "Donald Trump is taking on CIA Director John Brennan on torture, saying Brennan's pledge not to allow waterboarding is 'ridiculous.'"
On July 13, 2016, Brennan testified that he'd consider quitting rather than obey a president's order to reinstate waterboarding, something that Trump had suggested. Another article says that even before that date, "[Brennan] has already expressed his distaste for Trump."
There is ample evidence in the form of sharp public bickering between Trump and these two CIA chiefs, present and the past, that the CIA set up a task force to investigate Trump's campaign as a weapon against Trump and his possible election. The motive behind the investigation was not to ensure a clean campaign free of Russian influence but to work against Trump's election chances. The CIA was dismayed by what appeared to them to be a possible president who was aiming to work with Putin and not against him.
Q. But wasn't the CIA doing the right thing to investigate possible Russian funding of the Trump campaign?
A. The idea of Russian funding of Trump's campaign was absurd. This investigation had no reason to be started other than a goal of smearing Trump and preventing a Trump presidency. It was absurd because foreign money given to American political campaigns is illegal and everyone knows it. Trump would not jeopardize his campaign for some trivial amount of money nor would his campaign officials; and a large amount would easily be spotted through the banking system. It was also absurd because the Kremlin would not operate and does not operate in this way. It would not risk being found out blatantly violating American law in this way, as that would greatly diminish its credibility. "Doing the right thing" for the American system was strictly a plausible and disingenuous device.
Q. If the investigation was absurd, what leads or allegations did the CIA have to set it up?
A. The excuse was an allegation that three of Trump's associates had received campaign money from the Kremlin. This allegation came from a Baltic state and it was processed by the CIA and made into something worthy of following up. We read that the task force " was set up after the director of the CIA, John Brennan, received a recording of a conversation about money from the Kremlin going into Trump's campaign coffers, the BBC's Paul Wood reported. The recording was apparently passed to the CIA by the intelligence agency of one of the Baltic States."
According to this, John Brennan is the key player in the anti-Trump movement. He wants to see Trump's presidency brought to a quick end or otherwise neutered and made compliant to rule by the CIA. By their control over information and its interpretation, the leaders of the CIA have gained considerable power within the government. They've enhanced this by developing operational forces in the field.
As occurred during the propaganda campaign that preceded Bush 2's attack on Iraq and as in the Ukraine case noted above, we again observe murky foreign sources that are given credence and validity by the CIA. The public and media have no viable way of checking on the story of Kremlin money except perhaps through off the record sources. Such stories can't be traced through public hearings without subpoena power and a will to wash a lot of dirty linen in public. They are perfect for propaganda and cover-ups.
John Brennan has the CIA initiate an investigation on a flimsy basis and gets away with it. We know from his public statements at that time and later that he's thoroughly anti-Trump and anti-Russia. This is why such an investigation went forward. Brennan had nothing to lose. If he found some dirt on Trump or his associates, he'd discredit Trump and lose him votes. If he didn't find anything, the investigation itself would still raise suspicions about Trump and provide Hillary Clinton and her aides with anti-Trump ammunition. In fact, her campaign did use the alleged Russian connection against Trump.
Q. What else do we know of Brennan's differences with Trump?
A. On Sept. 11, 2016, Brennan disagreed with Trump publicly: "CIA Director John Brennan pushed back against Donald Trump's claim that he could read disapproval of President Barack Obama's policies in the body language of the intelligence officers who gave him a confidential national security briefing."
On November 30, 2016, we read that Brennan expressed another difference with Trump: "The director of the CIA has issued a stark warning to President-elect Donald J. Trump. Tearing up the Iran nuclear deal would be 'the height of folly' and 'disastrous.'"
On January 3, 2016, Charles Schumer said that Trump was "being really dumb" for arguing against the assessments of the intelligence community on Russian hacking. He adds ominously: "Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you."
On January 15, 2017, we read "CIA Director John Brennan on Sunday had a stern parting message for Republican Donald Trump days before he assumes the U.S. presidency, cautioning him against loosening sanctions on Russia and warning him to watch what he says. Brennan rebuked the president-elect for comparing U.S. intelligence practices to Nazi Germany in comments that laid bare the friction between Trump and the intelligence community he has criticized and is on the verge of commanding."
Q. What became of the allegations against the three associates of Trump?
A. The three accused men each strongly denied allegations of being paid by the Kremlin. On October 15, the FISA court granted a warrant to intercept communications from two Russian banks. The investigators were looking for evidence that money passed from Russia to the three Trump associates. No such evidence was found.
On January 19, 2017, the continuing investigation by "American law enforcement and intelligence agencies" was confirmed, and Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager, was mentioned:
"The counterintelligence investigation centers at least in part on the business dealings that some of the president-elect's past and present advisers have had with Russia . Mr. Manafort has done business in Ukraine and Russia. Some of his contacts there were under surveillance by the National Security Agency for suspected links to Russia's Federal Security Service, one of the officials said."
Mr. Manafort has done nothing illegal, we learn. He has merely done some business in Ukraine and Russia. He merely came into contact with people with suspected links to a Russian intelligence outfit. They weren't even known spies. Mr. Manafort has fallen victim to suspicion by association two or three times removed even from guilt by association.
The other two being investigated are Carter Page and Roger Stone, and we learn that they too are innocent of wrongdoing.
"The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department's financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said."
So, we know that a concerted effort has been made to investigate three of Trump's close aides. We know that the CIA was the instigator and that it used its typical murky and unverifiable tips to gain credibility. Finally, we know that this inquiry has produced no evidence of any illegal activities of Trump or his aides.
Q. What other evidence is there of an attempted coup against Trump?
A. On Oct. 7, 2016, there was released the "Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security". This brief statement on behalf of U.S. intelligence agencies linked the Russian government to hacking: "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations." It stated its belief "that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."
On Nov. 30, 2016, an outfit named PropOrNot with links to the U.S. intelligence community published a report that named 200 websites as propagators of Russian propaganda: "Russia Is Manipulating US Public Opinion through Online Propaganda".
On Dec. 9, 2016, it was reported that "The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency "
Dec. 29, 2016, arrived the FBI-DHS report: "Grizzly Steppe – Russian Malicious Cyber Activity". This was widely denounced as lacking even persuasive circumstantial evidence, never mind direct evidence of Russian involvement.
On Jan. 10, 2017, the Golden Showers report was leaked, accusing Trump of having been compromised by Russian agents and therefore subject to blackmail. This report had been circulating for weeks in intelligence and media circles. It had supposedly been written between July and December by former British MI-6 agent, Christopher Steele.
Once again we observe that a spurious anti-Trump report is purported or arranged to have a foreign origination; but that it is carried to the public by means of the CIA and leaks within the U.S.
On February 13, 2017, the coup perps drew fresh blood when Michael Flynn resigned, despite no evidence of wrongdoing. Their success is attributable to their use of wiretapped phone calls and to leaking these to the media. Since intelligence agents have access to these calls that the NSA collects, we once again observe that intelligence circles are active in seeking to undermine Trump. This is consistent with the conclusion that a coup attempt is ongoing.
Q. Could you summarize, please?
A. In 2016 Trump and the CIA became foes of one another because of vast policy differences. Past and present CIA directors went public against Trump. They instigated a series of reports and leaks to discredit Trump and to link his campaign to Russian meddling in the election. They went after several of his aides, causing Paul Manafort to resign. After the election, they produced new anti-Trump material and managed to get his National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, to resign. This adds up to an attempted coup that has had some success.
Q. What happens next?
A. The future is guesswork. We will be surprised at what happens, but here are some guesses. The coup attempt will not cease. There is nothing presently opposing it unless Trump is counterattacking behind the scenes, of which there is no evidence. Trump will eventually sense the coup's efficacy and devise ways to stop it. The anti-Trump media will keep the pot boiling. They will need new stories to exploit. Anti-Trump elements in the CIA can be expected to come up with new, dubious and devious revelations aimed at discrediting Trump's handling of foreign affairs. We can expect former intelligence officials to speak out against Trump at critical times and to recruit allies who will add what appears to be an even more independent criticism of Trump. The coup may transform into an effort to control Trump's policies from outside his administration.
Michael S. Rozeff [ send him mail ] is a retired Professor of Finance living in East Amherst, New York. He is the author of the free e-book Essays on American Empire: Liberty vs. Domination and the free e-book The U.S. Constitution and Money: Corruption and Decline .
Feb 13, 2018 | www.unz.com
The report ("The Dossier") that claims that Donald Trump colluded with Russia, was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign. The company that claims that Russia hacked DNC computer servers, was paid by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign. The FBI's counterintelligence probe into Trump's alleged connections to Russia was launched on the basis of information gathered from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.
The surveillance of a Trump campaign member (Carter Page) was approved by a FISA court on the basis of information from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.
The Intelligence Community Analysis or ICA was (largely or partially) based on information from a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign. (more on this below)
The information that was leaked to the media alleging Russia hacking or collusion can be traced back to claims that were made in a report that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.
The entire Russia-gate investigation rests on the "unverified and salacious" information from a dossier that was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton Campaign. Here's how Stephen Cohen sums it up in a recent article at The Nation:
"Steele's dossier was the foundational document of the Russiagate narrative from the time its installments began to be leaked to the American media in the summer of 2016, to the US "Intelligence Community Assessment" of January 2017 .the dossier and subsequent ICA report remain the underlying sources for proponents of the Russiagate narrative of "Trump-Putin collision." ("Russia gate or Intel-gate?", The Nation)
There's just one problem with Cohen's statement, we don't really know the extent to which the dossier was used in the creation of the Intelligence Community Assessment. (The ICA was the IC's flagship analysis that was supposed to provide ironclad proof of Russian meddling in the 2016 elections.) According to some reports, the contribution was significant. Check out this excerpt from an article at Business Insider:
"Intelligence officials purposefully omitted the dossier from the public intelligence report they released in January about Russia's election interference because they didn't want to reveal which details they had corroborated, according to CNN." ("Mueller reportedly interviewed the author of the Trump-Russia dossier -- here's what it alleges, and how it aligned with reality", Business Insider)
Bottom line: Despite the denials of former-CIA Director John Brennan, the dossier may have been used in the ICA.
In the last two weeks, documents have been released that have exposed the weak underpinnings of the Russia investigation while at the same time revealing serious abuses by senior-level officials at the DOJ and FBI. The so called Nunes memo was the first to point out these abuses, but it was the 8-page "criminal referral" authored by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Senator Lindsey Graham that gave credence to the claims. Here's a blurb from the document:
"It appears the FBI relied on admittedly uncorroborated information, funded by and obtained for Secretary Clinton's presidential campaign, in order to conduct surveillance of an associate of the opposing presidential candidate. It did so based on Mr. Steele's personal credibility and presumably having faith in his process of obtaining the information. But there is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility."
There it is. The FBI made a "concerted effort to conceal information from the court" in order to get a warrant to spy on a member of a rival political campaign. So –at the very least– there was an effort, on the part of the FBI and high-ranking officials at the Department of Justice, to improperly spy on members of the Trump team. And there's more. The FBI failed to mention that the dossier was paid for by the Hillary campaign and the DNC, or that the dossier's author Christopher Steele had seeded articles in the media that were being used to support the dossier's credibility (before the FISA court), or that, according to the FBI's own analysts, the dossier was "only minimally corroborated", or that Steele was a ferocious partisan who harbored a strong animus towards Trump. All of these were omitted in the FISA application which is why the FBI was able to deceive the judge. It's worth noting that intentionally deceiving a federal judge is a felony.
Most disturbing is the fact that Steele reportedly received information from friends of Hillary Clinton. (supposedly, Sidney Blumenthal and others) Here's one suggestive tidbit that appeared in the Graham-Grassley" referral:
" Mr. Steele's memorandum states that his company "received this report from REDACTED US State Department," that the report was the second in a series, and that the report was information that came from a foreign sub-source who "is in touch with REDACTED, a contact of REDACTED, a friend of the Clintons, who passed it to REDACTED."
It is troubling enough that the Clinton campaign funded Mr. Steele's work, but that these Clinton associates were contemporaneously feeding Mr. Steele allegations raises additional concerns about his credibility." (Lifted from The Federalist)
What are we to make of this? Was Steele shaping the dossier's narrative to the specifications of his employers? Was he being coached by members of the Hillary team? How did that impact the contents of the dossier and the subsequent Russia investigation?
These are just a few of the questions Steele will undoubtedly be asked if he ever faces prosecution for lying to the FBI. But, so far, we know very little about man except that he was a former M16 agent who was paid $160,000 for composing the dubious set of reports that make up the dossier. We don't even know if Steele's alleged contacts or intermediaries in Russia actually exist or not.
Some analysts think the whole thing is a fabrication based on the fact that he hasn't worked the Russia-scene since the FSB (The Russian state-security organization that replaced the KGB) was completely overhauled. Besides, it would be extremely dangerous for a Russian to provide an M16 agent with sensitive intelligence. And what would the contact get in return? According to most accounts, Steele's sources weren't even paid, so there was little incentive for them to put themselves at risk? All of this casts more doubt on the contents of the dossier.
What is known about Steele is that he has a very active imagination and knows how to command a six-figure payoff for his unique services. We also know that the FBI continued to use him long after they knew he couldn't be trusted which suggests that he served some other purpose, like providing the agency with plausible deniability, a 'get out of jail free' card if they ever got caught surveilling US citizens without probable cause.
But that brings us to the strange case of Carter Page, a bit-player whose role in the Trump campaign was trivial at best. Page was what most people would call a "small fish", an insignificant foreign policy advisor who had minimal impact on the campaign. Congressional investigators, like Nunes, must be wondering why the FBI and DOJ devoted so much attention to someone like Page instead of going after the "big fish" like Bannon, Flynn, Kushner, Ivanka and Trump Jr., all of whom might have been able to provide damaging information on the real target, Donald Trump. Wasn't that the idea? So why waste time on Page? It doesn't make any sense, unless, of course, the others were already being surveilled by other agencies? Is that it, did the NSA and the CIA have a hand in the surveillance too?
It's a moot point, isn't it? Because now that there's evidence that senior-level officials at the DOJ and the FBI were involved in improperly obtaining warrants to spy on members of the opposite party, the investigation is going to go wherever it goes. Whatever restrictions existed before, will now be lifted. For example, this popped up in Saturday's The Hill:
"House Intelligence Committee lawmakers are in the dark about an investigation into wrongdoing at the State Department announced by Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) on Friday. Nunes told Fox News on Friday that, "we are in the middle of what I call phase two of our investigation. That investigation is ongoing and we continue work toward finding answers and asking the right questions to try to get to the bottom of what exactly the State Department was up to in terms of this Russia investigation."
Since then, GOP lawmakers have been quietly buzzing about allegations that an Obama-era State Department official passed along information from allies of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that may have been used by the FBI to launch an investigation into whether the Trump campaign had improper contacts with Russia.
"I'm pretty troubled by what I read in the documents with respect to the role the State Department played in the fall of 2016, including information that was used in a court proceeding. I am troubled by it," Gowdy told Fox News on Tuesday." ("Lawmakers in dark about 'phase two' of Nunes investigation", The Hill)
So the State Department is next in line followed by the NSA and, finally, the Russia-gate point of origin, John Brennan's CIA. Here's more background on that from Stephen Cohen's illuminating article at The Nation:
" .when, and by whom, was this Intel operation against Trump started?
In testimony to the House Intelligence Committee in May 2017, John Brennan, formerly Obama's head of the CIA, strongly suggested that he and his agency were the first, as The Washington Post put it at the time, "in triggering an FBI probe." Certainly both the Post and The New York Times interpreted his remarks in this way. Equally certain, Brennan played a central role in promoting the Russiagate narrative thereafter, briefing members of Congress privately and giving President Obama himself a top-secret envelope in early August 2016 that almost certainly contained Steele's dossier. Early on, Brennan presumably would have shared his "suspicions" and initiatives with James Clapper, director of national intelligence. FBI Director Comey may have joined them actively somewhat later .
When did Brennan begin his "investigation" of Trump? His House testimony leaves this somewhat unclear, but, according to a subsequent Guardian article, by late 2015 or early 2016 he was receiving, or soliciting, reports from foreign intelligence agencies regarding "suspicious 'interactions' between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents."
In short, if these reports and Brennan's own testimony are to be believed, he, not the FBI, was the instigator and godfather of Russiagate." ("Russiagate or Intelgate?", Stephen Cohen, The Nation)
Regular readers of this column know that we have always believed that the Russiagate psyops originated with Brennan. Just as the CIA launched its disinformation campaigns against Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gadhafi, so too, Russia has emerged as Washington's foremost rival requiring a massive propaganda campaign to persuade the public that America faces a serious external threat. In any event, the demonizing of Russia had already begun by the time Hillary and Co. decided to hop on the bandwagon by blaming Moscow for hacking John Podesta's emails. The allegations were never persuasive, but they did provide Brennan with some cover for the massive Information Operation (IO) that began with him.
According to the Washington Times:
"It was then-CIA Director John O. Brennan, a close confidant of Mr. Obama's, who provided the information -- what he termed the "basis" -- for the FBI to start the counterintelligence investigation last summer .Mr. Brennan told the House Intelligence Committee on May 23 that the intelligence community was picking up tidbits on Trump associates making contacts with Russians."
It all started with Brennan. After Putin blocked Brennan's operations in both Ukraine and Syria, Brennan had every reason to retaliate and to use the tools at his disposal to demonize Putin and try to isolate Russia. The "election meddling" charges (promoted by the Hillary people) fit perfectly with Brennan's overall strategy to manipulate perceptions and prepare the country for an eventual confrontation. It provided him the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone, to deliver a withering blow to Putin and Trump at the very same time. The temptation must have been irresistible.
But now the plan has backfired and the investigations are gaining pace. Trump's allies in the House smell the blood in the water and they want answers. Did the CIA surveil members of the Trump campaign on the basis of information they gathered in the dossier? Who saw the information? Was the information passed along to members of the press and other government agencies? Was the White House involved? What role did Obama play? What about the Intelligence Community Assessment? Was it based on the contents of the Steele report? Will the "hand-picked" analysts who worked on the report vouch for its conclusions in or were they coached about what to write? How did Brennan persuade the reluctant Comey into opening a counterintelligence investigation on members in the Trump campaign when he knew it would be perceived as a partisan attempt to sabotage the elections by giving Hillary an edge?
Soon the investigative crosshairs will settle on Brennan. He'd better have the right answers.
El Dato , February 13, 2018 at 9:31 pm GMTDeepstate ain't gonna go quietly.Anon Disclaimer , February 13, 2018 at 10:02 pm GMT
Watch out for distractions in the national or international sphere.
(Btw, Russia warns via RT of an upcoming false flag attack using chlorine in Syria. Can't get an even break.)That the whole media can be in service of a such a fraud and beam their relentless lies across millions of TV screens even in a democracy like America goes to tell you that the Power ultimately decides what is 'fiction' and 'non-fiction'.The Alarmist , February 14, 2018 at 12:32 am GMT
Why else would most of Big Media be spreading all these lies about Russia Hacking or 'Russiagate' when the only real 'gate' is Deepstategate and Jewishhategate. The anti-Trump hysteria is nothing but an act of arson set by Jewish globalists who hate him.Brennan, Clapper, Clinton, Blumenthal, Abedin, Mills, Podesta, Strzok, McCabe whoever might have been mastermind or mere footsoldier in the drama, one cannot escape the fact that the Capo di tutti capi is Barak Hussein Obama, even if only on the "Buck stops here" principle.nsa , February 14, 2018 at 5:12 am GMTPlanting stories in the kept lugenpresse then citing the resulting articles as evidence is a common technique of the national security state. Anyone remember DickiePoo Cheney (the man with no heart) planting bogus weapons-of-mass-destruction stories with "reporter" Judith (the jooie) Miller whose stuff was dutifully published in the rapidly anti arab Jew York Times. DickiePoo then cited the stories as evidence that Iraq needed to be invaded and destroyed. This kind of propaganda is quite effective and very long lasting to this day something like 60% of the american public still believe Saddam had a hand in the 911 false flag operation and probably future history books will agree.JNDillard , February 14, 2018 at 5:32 am GMTInvestigative reporting at its best. Thank you, Mike Whitney. Every member of Congress should read this.Dan Hayes , February 14, 2018 at 5:39 am GMTLast September Brennan began a two-year stint as a distinguished fellow for global security at Fordham Law School. Brennan is a 1977 college graduate of this Jesuit institution which undoubtedly laid the groundwork for a career of duplicity and malfeasance .Toby Keith , February 14, 2018 at 6:07 am GMT
His appointment is in the grand tradition of Jesuitical sucking up to the powers-that-be.
An especially egregious example of this would be the current Jesuit "Bishop of Rome" (his preferred parlance) playing footsie with communist China. And in the process throwing faithful Chinese under the proverbial bus – just being chalked up as collateral damage!
The beat goes on.@The Alarmist
Every President after Kennedy has been a kosher puppet. Obama masterminded nothing, and it's a very Hasbara thing to suggest he did.
Nov 13, 2017 | www.youtube.com
In today's podcast, we hear how Vault 8 has succeeded Vault 7 among WikiLeaks dumps (but it's still all CIA all the time from Mr. Assange and company). GCHQ expresses concerns about Kaspersky anti-virus products.
Media reports suggest that NSA is in the middle of a big mole hunt. Equifax begins to tally up the costs of its breach.
The US Intelligence Community reiterates its conclusion that dog bites man, or rather, that Russia wants to work mischief with the United States...
Feb 08, 2018 | wearechange.org
Article via Strategic-Culture
New revelations from Wikileaks' 'Vault 7' leak shed a disturbing light on the safeguarding of privacy. Something already known and largely suspected has now become documented by Wikileaks. It seems evident that the CIA is now a state within a state, an entity out of control that has even arrived at the point of creating its own hacking network in order to avoid the scrutiny of the NSA and other agencies.
Reading the revelations contained in the documents released by WikiLeaks and adding them to those already presented in recent years by Snowden, it now seems evident that the technological aspect regarding espionage is a specialty in which the CIA, as far as we know, excels. Hardware and software vendors that are complicit -- most of which are American, British or Israeli -- give the CIA the opportunity to achieve informational full-spectrum dominance, relegating privacy to extinction. Such a convergence of power, money and technology entails major conflicts of interest, as can be seen in the case of Amazon AWS (Amazon's Cloud Service), cloud provider for the CIA , whose owner, Jeff Bezos, is also the owner of The Washington Post . It is a clear overlap of private interests that conflicts with the theoretical need to declare uncomfortable truths without the need to consider orders numbering in the millions of dollars from clients like the CIA.
While it is just one example, there are thousands more out there. The perverse interplay between media, spy agencies and politicians has compromised the very meaning of the much vaunted democracy of the land of the Stars and Stripes. The constant scandals that are beamed onto our screens now serve the sole purpose of advancing the deep interest of the Washington establishment. In geopolitical terms, it is now more than obvious that the deep state has committed all available means toward sabotaging any dialogue and détente between the United States and Russia. In terms of news, the Wikileaks revelations shed light on the methods used by US intelligence agencies like the CIA to place blame on the Kremlin, or networks associated with it, for the hacking that occurred during the American elections.
Perhaps this is too generous a depiction of matters, given that the general public has yet to see any evidence of the hacking of the DNC servers. In addition to this, we know that the origin of Podesta's email revelations stem from the loss of a smartphone and the low data-security measures employed by the chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. In general, when the 16 US spy agencies blamed Russia for the hacking of the elections, they were never specific in terms of forensic evidence. Simply put, the media, spies and politicians created false accusations based on the fact that Moscow, together with RT and other media (not directly linked to the Kremlin), finally enjoy a major presence in the mainstream media. The biggest problem for the Washington establishment lies in the revelation of news that is counterproductive to the interests of the deep state. RT, Sputnik, this site and many others have diligently covered and reported to the general public every development concerning the Podesta revelations or the hacking of the DNC.
Now what is revealed through Wikileaks' publications in Vault 7 is the ability of a subsection of the CIA, known as Umbrage , to use malware, viruses, trojans and other cyber tools for their own geopolitical purposes. The CIA's Umbrage collects, analyzes and then employs software created variously from foreign security agencies, cyber mafia, private companies, and hackers in general. These revelations become particularly relevant when we consider the consequences of these actions. The main example can be seen in the hacking of the DNC. For now, what we know is that the hacking – if it ever occurred – is of Russian origin. This does not mean at all that the Kremlin directed it. It could actually be very much the opposite, its responsibility falling into the category of a cyber false-flag. One thing is for sure: all 16 US intelligence agencies are of the view that "the Russians did it". That said, the methods used to hack vulnerabilities cannot be revealed, so as to limit the spread of easily reusable exploits on systems, such as the one that hosted the DNC server. It is a great excuse for avoiding the revelation of any evidence at all.
So, with little information available, independent citizens are left with very little information on which to reliably form an opinion on what happened. There is no evidence, and no evidence will be provided to the media. For politicians and so-called mainstream journalists, this is an acceptable state of affairs. What we are left with instead is blind faith in the 16 spy agencies. The problem for them is that what WikiLeaks revealed with Vault 7 exposes a scenario that looks more likely than not: a cyber false-flag carried out by the Central Intelligence Agency using engineered malware and viruses made in Russia and hypothetically linking them back to hacking networks in Russia. In all likelihood, it looks like the Democrats' server was hacked by the CIA with the clear objective of leaving Russian fingerprints and obvious traces to be picked up by other US agencies.
In this way, it becomes easier to explain the unique views of all 16 spy agencies. Thus, it is far more likely that the CIA intentionally left fake Russian fingerprints all over the DNC server, thereby misleading other intelligence agencies in promoting the narrative that Russia hacked the DNC server. Of course the objective was to create a false narrative that could immediately be picked up by the media, creating even more hysteria surrounding any rapprochement with Russia.
Diversification of computer systems.
The revelations contained in the Wikileaks vault 7 ( less than 1 % of the total data in Wikileaks' possession has been released to date) have caused a stir, especially by exposing the astonishing complicity between hardware and software manufacturers, often intentionally creating backdoors in their products to allow access by the CIA and NSA. In today's digital environment, all essential services rely on computer technology and connectivity. These revelations are yet more reason why countries targeted by Washington, like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, should get rid of European and American products and invest in reducing technological dependence on American products in particular.
The People's Republic has already started down this track, with the replacement of many network devices with local vendors like Huawei in order to avoid the type of interference revealed by Snowden. Russia has been doing the same in terms of software, even laying the groundwork to launch of its own operating system, abandoning American and European systems. In North Korea, this idea was already put into practice years ago and is an excellent tool for deterrence for external interference. In more than one computer security conference, US experts have praised the capabilities of the DPRK to isolate its Internet network from the rest of the world, allowing them to have strong safety mechanisms. Often, the only access route to the DPRK systems are through the People's Republic of China, not the easiest way for the CIA or NSA to infiltrate a protected computer network.
An important aspect of the world in which we live today involves information security, something all nations have to deal with. At the moment, we still live in a world in which the realization of the danger and effect of hacking attacks are not apparent to many. On the other hand, militarily speaking, the diversification and rationalization of critical equipment in terms of networks and operability (smartphones, laptops, etc) has already produced strong growth in non-American and European manufacturers, with the aim of making their systems more secure.
This strengthening of technology also produces deleterious consequences, such as the need for intelligence agencies to be able to prevent the spread of data encryption so as to always enjoy access to any desired information. The birth of the Tor protocol, the deployment of Bitcoin, and apps that are more and more encrypted (although the WikiLeaks documents have shown that the collection of information takes place on the device b efore the information is encrypted ) are all responses to an exponential increase in the invasion of privacy by federal or American government entities.
We live in a world that has an enormous dependence on the Internet and computer technology. The CIA over the years has focused on the ability to make sure vulnerable systems are exploited as well as seeking out major security flaws in consumer products without disclosing this to vendors, thereby taking advantage of these security gaps and leaving all consumers with a potential lack of security. Slowly, thanks to the work and courage of people like Snowden and Assange, the world is beginning to understand how important it is to keep personal data under control and prevent access to it by third parties, especially if they are state actors. In the case of national security, the issue is expanded exponentially by the need to protect key and vital infrastructure, considering how many critical services operate via the Internet and rely on computing devices.
The wars of the future will have a strong technological basis, and it is no coincidence that many armed forces, primarily the Russian and Chinese, have opted in recent years to training troops, and conducting operations, not completely relying on connectivity. No one can deny that in the event of a large-scale conflict, connectivity is far from guaranteed. One of the major goals of competing nations is to penetrate the military security systems of rival nations and be able to disarm the internal networks that operates major systems of defense and attack.
The Wikileaks revelations are yet another confirmation of how important it is to break the technological unipolar moment, if it may be dubbed this way, especially for nations targeted by the United States. Currently Washington dictates the technological capacities of the private and government sectors of Europe and America, steering their development, timing and methods to suit its own interests. It represents a clear disadvantage that the PRC and its allies will inevitably have to redress in the near future in order to achieve full security for its vital infrastructure.
This article first appeared on Strategic-Culture.org and was authored by Federico Pieraccini.
Feb 12, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
According to Simpson, "foreign intelligence services hacking American political operations is not that unusual, actually, and there's a lot of foreign intelligence services that play in American elections." He mentioned the Chinese and the Indians, not the Israelis. The Mossad, Simpson did tell the Committee, was his source for his belief that Russian intelligence has been operating through the Jewish Orthodox Chabad movement, and the Russian Orthodox Church. "The Orthodox church is also an arm of the Russian State now the Mossad guys used to tell me about how the Russians were laundering money through the Orthodox church in Israel, and that it was intelligence operations."
There are just two references in the Committee transcript to the CIA. One was a passing remark to imply the Russians cannot "break[ing] into the CIA, [so instead] you are breaking into, you know, places where, you know, an open society leaves open."
The second was a bombshell. It dropped during questioning by Congressman Thomas Rooney (right), a 3-term Republican representative from Florida with a career as an army lawyer. Rooney asked Simpson: "Do you or anyone else independently verify or corroborate any information in the dossier?"
Simpson replied by saying, "Yes. Well, numerous things in the dossier have been verified. You know, I don't have access to the intelligence or law enforcement information that I see made reference to, but, you know, things like, you know, the Russian Government has been investigating Hillary Clinton and has a lot of information about her."
Then Simpson contradicted himself, disclosing what he had just denied. "When the original memos came in saying that the Kremlin was mounting a specific operation to get Donald Trump elected President , that was not what the Intelligence Community was saying. The Intelligence Community was saying they are just seeking to disrupt our election and our political process, and that this is sort of kind of just a generally nihilistic, you know, trouble-making operation. And, you know, Chris turned out to be right, it was specifically designed to elect Donald Trump President."
How did Simpson know with such confidence what the "Intelligence Community" was "saying", and who were Simpson's and Steele's sources in the "Intelligence Community"? Rooney failed to inquire. Instead, he and Simpson exchanged question and answer regarding the approach Simpson and Steele made to the FBI when they delivered their dossier. In the details of that, Simpson repeated what he had already told the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Rooney then asked what contact had been made with the CIA or "any other intelligence officials". Simpson claimed he didn't understand the question at first, then he stumbled.
Source: http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/20180118/106796/HMTG-115-IG00-20180118-SD002.pdf -- page 61 .
What Simpson was concealing in the two pauses, reported in the transcript as hyphens, Rooney did not realize. Simpson was implying that noone from Fusion GPS, his consulting company, had been in contact with the CIA, nor him personally. But Simpson left open that Steele had been in contact with the CIA. Rooney followed with a question about "anyone", but that was so imprecise, Simpson recovered his confidence to say "No". That was a cover-up -- and the House Intelligence Committee let it drop noiselessly.
Intelligence community sources and colleagues who know Simpson and Steele say Simpson was notorious at the Wall Street Journal for coming up with conspiracy theories for which the evidence was missing or unreliable. He told the Committee that disbelief on the part of his editors and management had been one of his reasons for leaving the newspaper. "One of the reasons why I left the Wall Street Journal was because I wanted to write more stories about Russian influence in Washington, D.C., on both the Democrats and the Republicans eventually the Journal lost interest in that subject. And I was frustrated that was where I left my journalism career."When Simpson was asked "do you -- did you find anything to -- that you verified as false in the dossier, since or during?" Simpson replied: "I have not seen anything -- ". Note the hypthen, the stenographer's signal that Simpson was pausing.
"[Question]. So everything in that dossier, as far as you're concerned, is true or could be true?"
"MR. SIMPSON: I didn't say that. What I said was it was credible at the time it came in. We were able to corroborate various things that supported its credibility."
Sources in London are divided on the question of where Steele's sources came from -- CIA, MI6, or elsewhere. What has been clear for the year in which the dossier's contents have been in public circulation is that the sources the dossier referred to as "Russian" were not. For details of the sourcing . The subsequent identification of the Maltese source Joseph Mifsud, and the Greek-American George Papadopoulos, corroborates their lack of direct Russian sources. Instead, the sources identified in the dossier were either Americans, Americans of Russian ethnic origin, or Russians with no direct knowledge repeating hearsay three or four times removed from source.
So were the allegations of the dossier manufactured by a CIA disinformation unit, and fed back to the US through the British agent, Steele? Or were they a Simpson conspiracy theory of the type that failed to pass veracity testing when Simpson was at the Wall Street Journal? The House Intelligence Committee failed to inquire.
One independent clue is what financial and other links Simpson and Steele and their consulting firms, Fusion GPS and Orbis Business Intelligence, have had with US Government agencies other than the FBI, and what US Government contracts they were paid for, before the Republican and Democratic Party organizations commissioned the anti-Trump job?
The House Committee has subpoenaed business records from Fusion, but Simpson's lawyers say they will refuse to hand them over. The financial records of Steele's firm are openly accessible through the UK government company registry, Companies House. Click to read here .
Because the Trump dossier work ran from the second half of 2015 to November 2016, the financial reports of Orbis for the financial years ending March 31, 2016, and March 31, 2017, are the primary sources. For FY 2016 and FY 2017, open this link to read.
The papers reveal that Orbis was a small firm with no more than 7 employees. Steele's business partner and co-shareholder, Christopher Burrows, is another former MI6 spy. They had been hoping for MI6 support of their private business, but it failed to materialize, says an London intelligence source. "Chris Burrows is another from the same background. They all hope to be Hakluyt [a leading commercial intelligence operation in London] but didn't get the nod on departure."They do not report the Orbis income. Instead, for 2016 the company filings indicate £155,171 in cash at the bank, and income of £245,017 owed by clients and contractors. Offsetting that figure, Orbis owed £317,848 -- to whom and for what purposes is not reported. The unaudited accounts show Orbis's profit jumped from £121,046 in 2015 to £199,223 in 2016, and £441,089 in 2017.
The financial data are complicated by the operation by Steele and Burrows of a second company, Orbis Business Intelligence International, a subsidiary they created in 2010, a year after the parent company was formed. Follow its affairs here .
According to British press reports , Orbis and Steele were paid £200,000 for the dossier. Simpson told the House Intelligence Committee the sum was much less -- $160,000 (about £114,000). Simpson's firm, he also testified, was being paid at a rate of about $50,000 per month for a total of about $320,000. If the British sources are more accurate than Simpson's testimony, Steele's takings from the dossier represented roughly half the profit on the Orbis balance-sheet.
British sources also report that a US Government agency paid for Orbis to work on evidence and allegations of corruption at the world soccer federation, Fédération Internationale de Football (FIFA). Indictments in this case were issued by the US Department of Justice in May 2015 , and the following December . What role the two-partner British consultancy played in the complex investigations by teams from the Justice Department, the FBI and also the Internal Revenue Service is unclear. That Steele, Burrows and Orbis depended on US government sources for their financial well-being appears to be certain.
Another reported version of the FIFA contract is that Steele, Burrows and Orbis were hired by the British Football Association to collect materials on FIFA corruption, and provide them to the FBI and other US investigators, and then to the press. The scheme's objective was reportedly to advance the British bidding for the World Cup in 2018 or 2022 by discrediting the rival bids from Russia and Qatar. Click to read . Were MI6 and CIA sources mobilized by Orbis to feed the FBI with evidence the US investigators were unable to turn up, or was Orbis the conduit through which disinformation targeting Russia was fed to make it appear more credible to the FBI, and to the media?
US Congressional investigators have so far failed to notice the similarities between the FIFA and the Trump dossier operations. Early this month two Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee announced that they have called for a Justice Department and FBI investigation of Steele for providing false information to the FBI. The provision of the US code making lying a federal crime requires the falsehoods occur "within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States." Simpson has testified that when Steele briefed the FBI on the dossier, he did so at meetings in Rome, Italy.
Now then, Part I and this sequel of the Simpson-Steele story having been read and thoroughly mulled over, what can the meaning be?
In the short run, this case was a black job assigned by Republican Party candidates for president, then the Democratic National Committee, for the purpose of discrediting Trump in favour of Hillary Clinton. It failed on Election Day in 2016; the Democrats are still trying.
In the long run, the case is a measurement of the life, or the half-life, of truth. Giuseppe di Lampedusa wrote once that nowhere has truth so short a life as in Sicily. On his clock, that was five minutes. He didn't know the United States, or shall we say the stretch from Washington through New York to the North End of Boston. There, truth has an even shorter life. Scarcely a second.
nonsense factory , January 22, 2018 at 3:35 pmRhondda , January 22, 2018 at 3:57 pm
"The primary reason I generally don't believe in conspiracies is that they can usually be better explained as the result of sheer incompetence and hubris."
I divide conspiracy notions into two categories: grand mal and petit mal . The former are generally implausible due to the large number of participants involved and while occassionally attempted, they are typically exposed pretty quickly. They may still have significant effects – for example, there was a large conspiracy to sell the Iraqi WMD story to the public, involving top levels of the British and American governments and a good section of the corporate media. That's the grand mal version.
Petit mal is your typical small criminal conspiracy. The FBI, for example, almost always includes 'conspiracy to commit mail fraud' on the list of federal charges.
With Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, there is some evidence that Clinton and Co. actually wanted to run against Donald Trump, and tried to get their allies to manipulate the Republican primary in favor of a Trump victory (hence all the free corporate media coverage of the Donald). The dossier, fabricated or not, seems to have been one of many 'ace in the holes' that the Clinton campaign thought they could use to discredit Trump (including the Access Hollywood tape, etc.) in the general election. If so, this strategy really blew up in their face – they thought they could manipulate the process, so they could ignore the Rust Belt concerns, and that's what handed Trump the presidency.
If the Clintonites were to admit this, however, they'd have to step down from party leadership and let the Sanders Democrats take over, and that's what this is really all about now, their effort to prevent that outcome.3.14e-9 , January 22, 2018 at 6:49 pm
I pay pretty close attention to this topic and I must say I sometimes wonder if the Russians haven't sold the rope to the American political elite. I read all 311 pages of Simpson's testimony. I was struck that much of what he was "fed" by Steele confirmed his "OMG Russia corruption" biases.
And I say "fed to him" when I'm in a generous mood, giving him the benefit of the doubt, because usually I am of the opinion that he's either a really crappy CIA agent posing as a journalist or just a garden variety rat f*!@er. A black job political operative, stitching together a few almost-believable "facts" and out-and-out fabrications with squishy words like "collusion" and "ties."
From the embedded link in Helmer's text above: http://johnhelmer.net/glenn-simpson-chases-his-shadow-into-a-black-hole/
London due diligence firms say the record of Simpson's firm Fusion GPS and Steele's Orbis Business Intelligence operations in the US has discredited them in the due diligence market. The London experts believe the Senate Committee transcript shows Simpson and Steele were hired for the black job of discrediting the target of their research, Trump; did a poor job; failed in 2016; and now are engaged in bitter recriminations against each other to avoid multi-million dollar court penalties.
A source at a London firm which is larger and better known than Steele's Orbis says "standard due diligence means getting to the truth. It's confidential to the client, and not leaked. There are also black jobs, white jobs, and red jobs. Black means the client wants you to dig up dirt on the target, and make it look credible for publishing in the press. White means the client wants you to clear him of the wrongdoing which he's being accused of in the media or the marketplace; it's also leaked to the press. A red job is where the client pays the due diligence firm to hire a journalist to find out what he knows and what he's likely to publish, in order to bribe or stop him. The Steele dossier on Trump is an obvious black job. Too obvious."
Emphasis mine.integer , January 23, 2018 at 4:16 am
I read all 311 pages of Simpson's testimony. I was struck that much of what he was "fed" by Steele confirmed his "OMG Russia corruption" biases.
Same here, but not just about what he was fed by Steele. Simpson claimed to have done some of his own research and said it was consistent with what he got from Steele.
I'm about three-quarters of the way through the transcript of Simpson's interrogation by the House Intelligence Committee, and I've read all 312 pages of the Senate Judiciary Committee transcript, which bears little resemblance to what was reported in the major media – shocking, I know.
Among the "bombshells" the mainstream reported was "proof" that it wasn't the dossier that launched the FBI's investigation of Trump, and therefore the dossier couldn't have been used as justification for a FISA warrant. A bigger bombshell, which of course none of them mentioned, is that Simpson, with his client's consent, was secretly briefing Clinton-friendly reporters on information from Steele's memos, and they used it to write stories based on "unnamed sources." He even admitted that he didn't verify the information before feeding it to the media, said he didn't feel he needed to, because it came from a trustworthy source. Where have we heard that before?
Few in the NC commentariat, at least from what I saw, had any problem accepting that the DNC and the Clinton campaign funded the dossier, so I'm wondering why it's that much of a stretch to believe that the CIA might have engineered the whole thing. It's well-established that the State Department often acts as a cover for the CIA, and the agency under Secretary Clinton had a strong anti-Russia faction that's on the record as meddling in Ukraine's presidential election. And how much doubt could there be that both Clintons kept the CIA connections they made while in office?
Then there was the whole "Grizzly Steppe" report just before Trump's inauguration, presented as a consensus among "17 intelligence agencies" that the Russians "hacked the election" to help Trump win.
I'm not 100-percent convinced that U.S. intelligence was behind the dossier, but it's enough of a possibility that I'm not writing it off as some nutty "conspiracy theory."Scott1 , January 22, 2018 at 4:37 pm
Few in the NC commentariat, at least from what I saw, had any problem accepting that the DNC and the Clinton campaign funded the dossier, so I'm wondering why it's that much of a stretch to believe that the CIA might have engineered the whole thing.
FWIW this NC commenter has never had any problem believing that this may be the case. In fact I am fairly certain that it is the case, although from what I understand the FBI and MI6 were also involved.
Adding: Heh. I posted this before looking at Rev Kev's link to the Raimondo article, which comes to the same conclusions. Interesting times!The Rev Kev , January 23, 2018 at 12:29 am
I believe that Seth Abramson or someone put photographs to the Steele dossier showing people in the places & at the times delineated in the Steele dossier. From the very first Steele said he would not & could not reveal his sources. It was from the first indicated that it would be to the FBI & CIA to discover. He said he believed that his sources were credible.
When I was studying Intelligence services the CIA was said to be the private army of the CIA. These days I don't know exactly who the CIA works for, or answers to. I certainly don't think well of the CIA believing they are wrapped up working for their Front businesses more than focusing on the mission of spying in the interests of the American people. Of private intelligence companies I get what I can from IHS Jane's. That the CIA lost 20 assets, human beings, in China for incompetent secret communications methods would lead professionals to withhold as much of identities as possible.
For awhile there I believe Steele was worried about his own health.
David Corn at Mother Jones was reticent to break the story. So now what I see to look for is what Steele said needed to be done, & that being what Mueller is doing at the behest of the DOJ.
The US has been at war, albeit Hybrid war since the imposition of sanctions for their violations of international law as regarded the annexation of Crimea & the attack on the Ukraine. Sanctions are Economic Warfare.
That the US feels the right to engage in warfare of any kind Economic or Hot over violations of International Law leads me to believe that the UN will fail to prevent the apocalyptic riot. But that as regards Trump becomes neither here nor there, correct?John Gilberts , January 24, 2018 at 12:25 am
Justin Raimondo has weighed in on this story at https://original.antiwar.com/justin/2018/01/22/russsia-gate-implodes/ and he does not sound like a happy camper.
William Binney, former NSA technical official and whistleblower, comments on the FISA memo, that has apparently just been released. Obviously, a major development in 'Russia-gate'.
William Binney Exposes Secret FISA Memo
Feb 11, 2018 | www.truthdig.com
The problem with the Isikoff report is the similarity between it and a July 20, 2016, report Steele prepared and provided to the FBI during their meeting in Rome. The FBI asked Steele if he was the source for the Isikoff report, something Steele denied. This was a lie.
In documents submitted to a British court, Steele acknowledged that he was the source for the Isikoff article, something Simpson confirmed in his congressional testimony. The Steele lie played an important role in shaping the information the FBI and DOJ provided in support of their Oct. 21, 2016, FISA warrant application targeting Page. The Isikoff article was submitted to the FISA court as corroborating evidence, along with a statement attributed to Steele denying that he was the source of the information used by Isikoff.
Steele's lies caught up with him when, on Oct. 31, 2016, David Corn wrote an article in Mother Jones titled "A Veteran Spy Has Given the FBI Information Alleging a Russian Operation to Cultivate Donald Trump," with a subtitle asking, "Has the bureau investigated this material?" Steele, the much-admired former British intelligence officer, had committed the ultimate sin an FBI confidential human source can commit---he lied to his handlers. Describing Steele (whom the article did not name) as a "credible source with a proven record of providing reliable, sensitive and important information to the US government," David Corn wrote that "the former spy told me that he was reluctant to be talking with a reporter. He pointed out this was not his common practice. 'Someone like me stays in the shadows,' he said. But he indicated that he believed this material was important, and he was unsure how the FBI was handling it. Certainly, there had been no public signs that the FBI was investigating these allegations."
The problem for the FBI was that it had used Steele's information to support its investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, mainly in the form of sworn affidavits submitted in support of a FISA warrant derived from the FBI's interactions with Steele. Corn's article exposed as a lie the information at the heart of the FBI and DOJ's FISA warrant application, simultaneously invalidating any information attributed to Steele, as well as all information that relied upon Steele's now-tainted information for corroboration. This included both Isikoff's appended article and the Papadopoulos information. As of October 2016, the FBI had yet to interview Papadopoulos. Without corroboration of the information Steele provided in his June 20, 2016, report, turned over to Gaeta on July 5, 2016, the counterintelligence investigation Strzok headed would have not been able to act on the information the Australian government provided concerning alleged barroom conversations between Papadopoulos and Downer. The "emails" allegedly alluded to by Papadopoulos that Mifsud claimed Russia possessed would have had no "hook" to corroborate them. The emails WikiLeaks released in July 2016 that triggered Strzok's investigation had either not been written at the time Papadopoulos spoke with Mifsud in April 2016 or had not yet been compiled by the malware alleged by the cybersecurity company CrowdStrike to have been behind the theft of the DNC emails.
Void of the Steele dossier as corroboration, the Papadopoulos-Mifsud conversation, as reported by Downer, simply had no legal legs to stand on, and as such would have been unusable in support of a FISA warrant application. Underscoring the seriousness the FBI attached to this issue, James Baker , the FBI's general counsel, met with Corn prior to the 2016 election. Corn specifically denies that Baker was a source for his article on Steele. The only other explanation for a Baker-Corn meeting would be for the FBI's general counsel to confirm Steele as Corn's source in support of the FBI's subsequent decision to sever relations with Steele, including the forfeiture of the $50,000 payment Steele was to have received for his work.
The FBI's decision to suspend and then sever its confidential human source relationship with Steele is reflected in the House intelligence committee majority memo, as is the FBI's decision to not give Steele the payment that had been authorized for his work on behalf of the FBI, reflected in the three October memorandums previously cited.
The House intelligence committee majority memo specifically notes that Steele had lied to the FBI about his contact with Isikoff. This helps explain the Jan. 18, 2018 , letter from the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, together with Sen. Lindsey Graham, chairman of the subcommittee on crime and terrorism, which referred Steele to the DOJ on suspicion of lying to the FBI about the dissemination of information by Steele to the media. The referral contained a top-secret memorandum prepared by the judiciary majority staff that would, from its classification, appear to be derived from information relating to statements made by Steele to the FBI about the Isikoff article.
The role the FBI general counsel played in investigating the link between Steele and the media brings to light another important facet of the complex web woven by Steele in marketing his Fusion GPS-funded opposition research as "intelligence." Corn, in his Mother Jones article, cites communications between Sen. Harry Reid and FBI Director James Comey, in which Reid refers to "explosive information" in the possession of the FBI pertaining to Page's alleged meetings in Moscow in July 2016 with "sanctioned" Russian officials. The specificity of the information cited by Reid strongly mirrors the information contained in Steele's July 26, 2016, report detailing his sub-sources' allegations about Carter's purported meeting with Russian officials. Reid's communication with Comey closely tracks with a top-secret briefing provided to Reid by former CIA Director John Brennan, in which the information about Page was shared.
Feb 11, 2018 | www.truthdig.com
This presupposes that the FISA renewal left unchanged the information linked to Steele that underpinned its initial application. By January 2018, however, the FBI had terminated its relationship with Steele based on the deceit of the former British intelligence officer. As such, all Steele's reporting should have been recalled as unreliable, as well as any corroborating information that could be linked to Steele in any way (such as the Isikoff article, the Papadopoulos investigation and the CIA's information as briefed to Sen. Reid). Any sworn affidavit and application used in support of a FISA renewal that sustained the Steele reporting would have been misleading at best, and most probably false, making anyone whose signature appears in any certifying capacity open to charges of making a false statement---including both Comey and Yates.
The next application for renewal occurred in April 2017. This one would have been signed off by Comey and then-acting Attorney General Dana Boente, who took over from Yates after she was fired by Trump in January 2017---shortly after she signed off on Page's FISA warrant renewal application.
What is interesting about the April 2017 application is that the level of public scrutiny of the Steele dossier engendered by BuzzFeed's publication of it in January 2017 would seem to have at least raised the issue of Steele's credibility as a source, something that should have been reflected in the FISA renewal application.
Moreover, by the time of the renewal application, Page had met with the FBI over the course of 10 hours in March 2017, when he was questioned in depth about his interactions with Russia. Following past practice, the FBI agents conducting the interview would have relied upon FISA material to try and catch Page in a "perjury trap," where it could be proved that he made a false statement to a federal agent. No such charges have been filed, strongly suggesting that Page was honest and forthright with the FBI. To what extent, if any, the Steele dossier factored in the April 2017 application for renewal, and whether the FBI informed the FISA court about the 10 hours of questioning it conducted with Page, is not known. Nor is the context, if any, the FBI provided to any intercepted communications that would raise them to the level needed to sustain a renewal of a FISA warrant.
The final FISA renewal application was submitted and approved in July 2017. This one was signed off by McCabe and acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. By this time, the media had run with numerous stories about Page being the subject of a FISA warrant, and Page himself had appealed to both Rosenstein and Mueller to make public the application used to grant his FISA warrant. Page was unemployed, his professional life ruined by the public revelations about allegations that he had colluded with the Russians and was under active FBI investigation, the totality of which could be linked back to the information Steele provided the FBI.
And yet somehow, in the face of overwhelming evidence of Page's innocence, the FISA court saw fit to grant yet another renewal of its warrant.
... ... ...
The bottom line is that the memo exposed the ugly truth that, at least in the case of Page, the FBI and DOJ, on multiple occasions, deliberately lied to or otherwise misled the FISA court in an effort to violate Page's Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure, or that the FISA court is, in fact, little more than a rubber-stamp entity incapable of adequate oversight of the enormous responsibilities it has been entrusted with---or both.
Scott Ritter spent more than a dozen years in the intelligence field, beginning in 1985 as a ground intelligence officer with the US Marine Corps, where he served with the Marine Corps component of the Rapid Deployment Force at the Brigade and Battalion level. In 1987 Ritter was hand-picked to serve with the On Site Inspection Agency, where he was responsible for carrying out the provisions of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed by American President Ronald Reagan and Soviet Chairman Mikhail Gorbachev. Ritter served as a Deputy Site Commander of a specialized inspection team stationed outside a Soviet missile factory. For his work, Ritter received two classified commendations from the CIA. After Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, Ritter was assigned to a special planning cell that reported directly to the Commandant of the Marine Corps, where he helped plan the employment of Marine Corps combat forces in response to Iraq's actions. He was later deployed to Saudi Arabia, where he served on the intelligence staff of General Norman Schwartzkopf .
truthynesslover , February 9, 2018 1:29 PMcoronaoutgloria2 , February 8, 2018 9:09 PM
It gets better.......Carter Page was an FBI informant.
WSJ confirms Carter Page was cooperating with FBI before he entered campaign
'What's notable here that seems to have evaded previous notice is that instead of being a Russian agent of influence, Page at the time he spang briefly into a prominent role within the Trump campaign in early 2016, was already an FBI informant, something the Russians would obviously know. This becomes even more crucial later that summer after Page returned from a business trip to Moscow when he was repeatedly named in the James Steele "dirty dossier" as a close confident of Russian energy officials and bankers. Page actually appears to have all the hallmarks of an FBI informant, or an agent provocateur, who was planted into the Trump campaign as part of an intelligence operation. Only, it seems apparent, the intelligence service he was actually serving was American rather than Russian.
That is significant for another very important reason – according to the Washington Post, the FBI obtained a FISA warrant last summer to spy on the Trump campaign under the pretext that Page was alleged to be a Russian agent.
https://www.washingtonpost.... ...Kronosaurus , February 7, 2018 3:14 PM
First!! the agony of those democrats (union rights, civil liberties, protection of the poor etc.) is understood in the light that there is no democratic party. where have you been?? the clintons and all their charm have wrecked it. bernie sanders is nothing but 'clinton lite'. look at the record and enlighten yourself. if hellary were elected in 2016 we would be in trouble more so than trump. fascism is crawling beneath the feet of both these miscreants but hellary had the mechanism of the deep state. they failed to elect her. forget about the rules and know that, now, trump is the deep state's favorite boy (look his people). trump has failed to gain the media's favoritism but that will change. given what the FBI has done (if there is no punitive action) we will have slipped another gear into grinding fascism. we are reaching an overt state. Scott Ritter did well writing about the bungling of the FBI but that is not new. Some people are welcomed to lie to agents some are not.
But most of all do not forget what Scott Ritter did in the investigation of WMD prior to Bush (deep state) and the Iraq war. Nobody listened because they did not know how.mulga mumblebrain Kronosaurus , February 8, 2018 12:51 AM
If Ritter has the correct analysis then we are all royally screwed. The Dems will be burned for a generation, Trump will be vindicated and we will all have to drag our sorry butts to Trumps military parade and lick his shoes. I am so depressed after reading this. I hope Ritter is wrong and overlooking that he may not have all the facts himself. I find it hard to believe the FISA courts would renew three times when public skepticism was in the air. That would be a major scandal. The problem is that the GOP won't get religion and start distrusting the police state they helped create. They will ignore the fact that they just passed legislation bolstering the FISA courts and go back to locking up the plebes and shielding their big money benefactors.
What's funny about this is that this piece is way more solid then the "memo". That alone makes you wonder. I'm not sure what it means. I await the counter memo with much interest.truthynesslover Kronosaurus , February 7, 2018 5:24 PM
The Nunes memo is just a precis of good deal of information, and even that is but a part of the evidence of the Demonazi, and elements of the FBI and Justice Department, conspiracy to stop Trump. If Trump is capo di tutti capi in Thanatopolis DC, it is Clinton and her incompetent fellow conspirators' fault.truthynesslover Kronosaurus , February 8, 2018 1:59 PM
The dems deserve to be burned to the ground........next stop republicansRoloTomassi truthynesslover , February 8, 2018 8:48 AM
Trump ran against the GOP and neo-cons like Bush.
Democrats are now the Neo-con party and far more dangerous.
Neo -cons wanted Hillary and its why they are going after Trump.Trump was never supposed to win.Trump was a anti-gop candidate.So republicans are the anti -war party now.
How Donald Trump blasted George W. Bush in S.C. -- and won ...
Feb 21, 2016At a CNN town hall in Columbia on Thursday, Trump stopped short of repeating the claim that George W. Bush ...
Breaking taboos: Donald Trump and Bush's WMD 'lie'
| USA | Al Jazeera
Feb 22, 2016In the Republican debate in South Carolina last weekend, presidential candidate Donald Trump declared live ...
Donald Trump in 2007: Bush's War Was Based On Lies, Iraq Will ...
Sep 11, 2015In 2007 in an interview with Wolf Blitzer, Donald Trump spoke about the Bush administration and the Iraq War ...truthynesslover RoloTomassi , February 8, 2018 2:05 PM
These people--and all these folks in law enforcement and corporate hierarchies and the list goes on and on--they LIE. They manipulate. Newsflash, that is human nature, despite all of the bogus, idealistic posturing made in these comments and in the world at large.
But my point is that these same people play by a set of rules that they defined for themselves, and now the conservative faction wants special treatment for their buffoon Trump. They need to suck it up and take their medicine. Trump is a vile, unintelligent cretin and a criminal, and I really don't care if the means by which they remove him doesn't rise to the level of your or others supposed BS-idealism.
The U.S. government is an unethical $hit show driven by the most heinous form of capitalism ever imagined, so what the hell do you expect? Do try to get in touch with reality and put down your tome of rightwing talking points.truthynesslover Calvinius , February 7, 2018 7:55 PM
Im a left Sanders voter.Trump is literally doing what you say you want and your too bias to notice.
Newsflash........Trump is bringing to the forefront just how corrupted our system is.The $shitshow has just started........even MSNBC cant ignore the treason of the FBI and DOJ any more.
And did you miss Trump tweet about the wallstreet crash?
Didnt he call out the fact wallstreet bets against the US economy?
Trump tweeted Wednesday:
"In the 'old days,' when good news was reported, the Stock Market
would go up. Today, when good news is reported, the Stock Market goes down. Big mistake, and we have so much good (great) news about the economy!"
Didnt Trump just make an important criticism of capitalism?.....I think he did.Sorry you missed it.
The entire corporate media is coming down with the Russia ruse....
from James Petras:
The Logic behind Mass Spying: Empire and Cyber Imperialism
The Deeper Meaning of Mass Spying in America
The Two Faces of a Police State: Sheltering Tax Evaders, Financial Swindlers and Money Launderers while Policing the Citizens
The Rise of the Police State and the Absence of Mass Opposition
The Great Transformation: From the Welfare State to the Imperial Police State
Feb 11, 2018 | theduran.com
Fox News reports that former British MI-6 intelligence officer Christopher Steele was a no-show on Monday at a London courthouse.
Steele was expected for a long-requested deposition in a multi-million dollar civil case brought against Buzzfeed, which published a salacious and unverified "Trump-Russia" dossier.
Steele may have skipped out over concerns that he would be asked questions about his contacts with various media outlets in connection with at least two dossiers he had a hand in assembling and disseminating -- for which he stands accused by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) of misleading the FBI about his contacts with journalists at various news outlets during the 2016 election.
"There is substantial evidence suggesting that Mr. Steele materially misled the FBI about a key aspect of his dossier efforts, one which bears on his credibility ," reads the unredacted document that refers Steele for criminal prosecution in the US.
12) The Issue at Hand
"it appears that either Mr. Steele lied to the FBI or the British court, or that the classified documents reviewed by the Committee contain materially false statements." pic.twitter.com/KQ2OmVjOMI
-- TrumpSoldier (@DaveNYviii) February 5, 2018
13) We have the statements from the British Court documents but until the #GrassleyMemo is released we cannot identify the contradictions that Grassley found!
British Court Document (pgs 4-20) PDF> https://t.co/ljP02AAuyG pic.twitter.com/w1zl5JOudX
-- TrumpSoldier (@DaveNYviii) February 5, 2018
It therefore stands to reason that Steele wanted to avoid any uncomfortable questions which might apply to ongoing investigations in US House and Senate. Separately, records obtained and reviewed by Fox News from related civil litigation in Florida reveal that Steele maintains that even showing up for a deposition would "implicate state secrets in London."
According to Fox News , Evan Fray-Witzer, a Boston-based attorney representing Russian tech tycoon Aleksej Gubarev in multi-million dollar civil litigation, described Monday's U.K. court actions to Fox News. "My understanding is that Mr. Steele's lawyers spent a good deal of time arguing why they thought he (Steele) should not be required to sit for a deposition and that ultimately the court took the entire matter under advisement."
Gubarev is suing the British-based Steele's company Orbis Business Intelligence because the dossier claimed Gubarev's companies, including XBT Holdings and Webzilla, used "botnets and port traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs and steal data."
Fray-Witzer said, "Certainly with respect to Mr. Gubarev, Webzilla and XBT there has never been a single scrap of evidence about them in the dossier."
Congressional testimony and ongoing Fox News reporting revealed that Steele and Orbis Business Intelligence were paid $168,000 by Fusion GPS' Glenn Simpson to write and promote the dossier among select journalists when it was opposition research funded in part by the Democratic National Committee. As Fox News has reported based upon review of British court records, Steele promoted and met with five media outlets repeatedly between the spring and fall of 2016. At the same time, Steele also was meeting with the FBI in Rome, according to reports.
Meanwhile, records obtained and reviewed by Fox News from related civil ligitation in Florida reveal that Steele maintains that even showing up for a deposition would "implicate state secrets in London."
Fray-Witzer stressed in that hearing that the British government "has not asserted" Steele's claims. The attorney has said Steele "is asserting he can't speak about things. We have pointed out that he's spoken to anyone who is willing to listen, every journalist, and the FBI."
Zerohedge further reports that the Senate Judiciary Committee's January 4 criminal referral of Steele also reveals that the former British spy was involved in a second anti-Trump opposition research dossier. This second dossier went from Clinton "hatchet man" Cody Shearer, who gave it to an unnamed official in the Obama State Department, before it was routed to Christopher Steele. It is unknown what happened to the document after that.
According to the referral, Steele wrote the additional memo based on anti-Trump information that originated with a foreign source. In a convoluted scheme outlined in the referral, the foreign source gave the information to an unnamed associate of Hillary and Bill Clinton, who then gave the information to an unnamed official in the Obama State Department, who then gave the information to Steele. Steele wrote a report based on the information, but the redacted version of the referral does not say what Steele did with the report after that.
Published accounts in the Guardian and the Washington Post have indicated that Clinton associate Cody Shearer was in contact with Steele about anti-Trump research, and Obama State Department official Jonathan Winer was a connection between Steele and the State Department during the 2016 campaign. – Washington Examiner
Shearer's brother served as an ambassador during the Clinton administration, and his late sister was married to Strobe Talbott, the chief authority on Russia in President Bill Clinton's State Department, according to ProPublica.
Recalling that the dossier was published by Buzzfeed after the election, we're sure that much like the rest of the swamp; Clinton, Obama, Comey, McCabe, Mueller, Rosenstein, Strzok, Page, and the rest of the gang – Christopher Steele thought Hillary would win, and none of this would have ever come to light – Zerohedge
6.14 miles this morn from Home 2 Dome for my bday. 1 hr 23 mins. Left at 4:15AM pic.twitter.com/TukSOe6sIE
-- ChuckGrassley (@ChuckGrassley) September 17, 2015
Feb 09, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.orgWith text messages between US Justice Department (DOJ) conspirators Peter Strzok and his adulterous main squeeze Lisa Page now revealing that then-President Barack Obama "wants to know everything we're doing," it now appears that the 2016 plot to subvert the rule of law and corrupt the US organs of state security for political purposes reached the very pinnacle of power. To call the United States today a "banana republic" increasingly may be seen as a gratuitous insult to the friendly spider-infested nations to our south .
Still, don't expect to see Barry Hussein Saetoro doing the perp walk anytime soon or even being deported back to Kenya. Don't expect to see orange prison suits on Strzok, Page, former FBI Director James Comey, former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and others implicated in putting a political thumb on the scales to, first, get Hillary Clinton elected, and then, when that failed, to neuter Donald Trump's presidency with a phony Russiagate probe.
Officials' getting "former-ed" is one thing, their getting prosecuted quite another. (Just imagine if a GOP administration had similarly skewed the supposedly non-political law enforcement and intelligence services for partisan reasons. We'd have Watergate on steroids. The New York Times, Washington Post and CNN would be calling for hanging, drawing, and quartering .)
Indeed, it's not even clear the Russiagate investigation itself will be impacted. After all, the narrative may have flipped on one variable -- from Trump campaign collusion to Democratic and FBI collusion -- but the constant remains the same: Russia . Trump's defenders are as insistent as his detractors that the real culprit is Russia! Russia! Russia!
Sean Hannity of Fox News has been particularly hyperventilative that the entire Steele Dossier lying at the black heart of the mess consists of "phony, fake-news Russian propaganda" and "Russian intelligence lies" from British MI6 (supposedly "former") spymaster Christopher Steele's "Russian sources." Even level-headed observers like Paul Sperry and Patrick Buchanan characterize the file as a " Kremlin-aided smear job " and " Russian dirt [that] Steele was spoon-fed by old comrades in the Kremlin's security apparatus ."
Christopher Steele is not Russian
But what do we really know about Steele's claimed sources? Not much.
Sure, maybe Vladimir Putin personally whispered every word of the dossier into Steele's ear. Or maybe Steele invented his supposed sources from whole cloth: your clients are paying for sleaze, you give them sleaze. Or anything in between: maybe Steele consulted some imaginative Russian cranks with only a marginal, and most likely adversarial, relationship to the Russian authorities, whose "inside knowledge" Steele padded to justify his fee. (Steele claims he didn't pay his "sources" -- assuming they exist at all -- but that's no more worthy of credit than anything else he says.)
As analyzed by Russia expert Stephen F. Cohen:Where, then, did Steele get his information? According to Steele and his many stenographers -- which include his American employers, Democratic Party Russiagaters, the mainstream media, and even progressive publications -- it came from his 'deep connections in Russia,' specifically from retired and current Russian intelligence officials in or near the Kremlin . From the moment the dossier began to be leaked to the American media, this seemed highly implausible (as reporters who took his bait should have known) for several reasons:The reference to "people personally close to Hillary Clinton and who shared their 'findings' with Steele" dovetails with another intriguing suggestion from former Clinton insider Dick Morris, who knows the modus operandi of the Clinton lie generator better than anyone else. On the Fox News "Ingraham Angle" show, Morris suggested to host Laura Ingraham that the bulk of the dossier was invented by veteran political dirty tricksters and Clinton-machine hatchet men Sid Blumenthal and Cody Shearer , who then engaged "former" spook Steele, because of the Brit's known relationship with the FBI, as their conduit to give their garbage credibility. (Never underestimate the residual "colonial" mentality of Yanks to find any sort of gibberish convincing if delivered with a British accent, as confirmed by the ubiquity of posh Brit voices in American advertising .)- Steele has not returned to Russia after leaving his post there in the early 1990s. Since then, the main Russian intelligence agency, the FSB, has undergone many personnel and other changes, especially after 2000, and especially in or near Putin's Kremlin. Did Steele really have such "connections" so many years later? [JGJ: Is it credible that the head of MI6's Russian branch is on a first-name basis with top Kremlin insiders? Turn the identities around and ask whether the chiefs of the US section of Russian or Chinese intelligence are on intimate speaking terms with the US president's top advisers or with the leadership of the CIA or FBI. Hardly.]And indeed we now know that Steele had at least three other 'sources' for the dossier, ones not previously mentioned by him or his employer. There was the information from foreign intelligence agencies provided by Brennan to Steele or to the FBI, which we also now know was collaborating with Steele. There was a ' second Trump-Russia dossier ' prepared by people personally close to Hillary Clinton and who shared their 'findings' with Steele. And most intriguingly, there was the 'research' provided by Nellie Ohr, wife of a top Department of Justice official, Bruce Ohr, who, according to the Republican memo, 'was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife's opposition research.' Most likely, it found its way into Steele's dossier. (Mrs. Ohr was a trained Russian Studies scholar with a PhD from Stanford and a onetime assistant professor at Vassar, and thus, it must have seemed, an ideal collaborator for Steele.)
- Even if he did, would these purported Russian insiders really have collaborated with this "former" British intelligence agent under what is so widely said to be the ever-vigilant eye of the ruthless "former KGB agent" Vladimir Putin, thereby risking their positions, income, perhaps freedom, as well as the well-being of their families?
- Originally it was said that his Russian sources were highly paid by Steele. Arguably, this might have warranted the risk. But subsequently Steele's employer and head of Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, wrote in The New York Times that "Steele's sources in Russia were not paid." If the Putin Kremlin's purpose was to put Trump in the White House, why then would these "Kremlin-connected" sources have contributed to Steele's anti-Trump project without financial or political gain -- only with considerable risk?
- There is the also the telling matter of factual mistakes in the dossier that Kremlin "insiders" were unlikely to have made, but this is the subject for a separate analysis.
Andrew Wood is not Russian
But Steele isn't the only limey link to #Dossiergate . In late 2016, after Trump's election victory, Andrew Wood, a former British ambassador to Russia , told US Senator John McCain about the existence of compromising material on Donald Trump, according to Wood's account to BBC4. Wood then set up a meeting between Steele and David Kramer, an associate of McCain's. It's unclear whether McCain already knew about the dossier at that point or whether Wood alerted the Senator to its existence.
For what it is worth -- not much -- Wood states that McCain had obtained the documents from the Senator's own sources . "I told him I was aware of what was in the report but I had not read it myself, that it might be true, it might be untrue. I had no means of judging really," and that he served only to inform McCain about the dossier contents: "My mission was essentially to be a go-between and a messenger, to tell the Senator and assistants that such a dossier existed," Wood told Fox News. Wood elsewhere relates that McCain was "visibly shocked " at his description and expressed interest in reading the full report. That doesn't sound as though McCain had already obtained the dossier from his "own sources" but, rather, that Wood was the instigator.
So which is it? Did McCain already know about the dossier, and if so how did it "happen" to get raised with a British diplomat? Conversely, was the initiative from Woods to induce the Senator -- known to be a strong Trump critic as well as for his hostility to Russia -- to pass the dossier on in Washington? Keep in mind that the dossier had already been used to secure a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to monitor Carter Page, a peripheral asteroid in the Trump orbit, and that Trump had already been elected. By this time the conspiracy's purpose had shifted from preventing Trump's victory to tying down his incoming administration, especially with respect to blocking any opening to Moscow as Trump said he intended to do. What better way to set the cat among the pigeons than for a supposedly totally non-political British diplomat (certainly no intelligence officer, he!) to quietly peddle the material from Steele (whom Wood called a "very competent professional operator I do not think he would make things up .") to the right man in Washington?
GCHQ is not Russian
Finally, while it's clear the dossier served to get a FISA warrant for American services to spy on the Trump campaign and later the transition team, US agencies' might not have been the only eyes and ears monitoring them. Amid all the hubbub over Michael Wolff's slash-and-burn Fire and Fury, little mention (other than a heated denial on the floor of the House of Commons , from the notoriously truth-challenged former prime minister Tony Blair , and from the relevant British agency itself !) has been made of the suggestion that the UK's Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) -- Britain's version of the NSA -- was spying on Trump and providing their sister agencies in the US with additional data. Keep in mind the carefully worded deflection last year from James Clapper , former Director of National Intelligence (DNI), that "there was no wiretap against Trump Tower during the campaign conducted by any part of the national intelligence community... including the FBI," thus begging the question of whether Trump was spied on not by a US "national" agency but by one of the Anglosphere "Five Eyes" agencies -- most likely GCHQ -- which then passed the information back to their American colleagues. With Steele's and Wood's involvement, and given the virtual control of America's manifestly corrupted agencies of their counterparts in satellite countries like the United Kingdom, involvement by GCHQ and perhaps other "friendly" foreign agencies cannot be dismissed out of hand.
Madame Prime Minister is not Russian
To be sure, in 2016 the majority opinion in Russia was that Donald Trump's election would be preferable to Hillary Clinton's for the simple reason that the former openly advocated better relations with Moscow while the latter was a notorious warmonger. But there was also a strong minority view , especially among more pro-Western elements of the Russian establishment, that Hillary -- " the devil you know " -- was preferable to rolling the dice on an unpredictable and unknown quantity. Plus, Hillary was delightfully corrupt , with the Clinton Foundation an open invitation for many foreign powers to buy influence .
There was no ambiguity in the position of the British government, however. In 2016 Prime Minister Theresa May, like her German counterpart , made little effort to hide her disdain for the "just plain wrong" Trump and her preference for Hillary Clinton, whom she expected to win (as did most other observers ). Why should anyone be surprised that her MI6 and GCHQ minions would share the same views and perhaps acted on them to provide some helping " hands across the water " to their US counterparts whose anti-constitutional conspiracy now stands exposed?
Reprinted with permission from Strategic Culture Foundation .
Feb 11, 2018 | legalinsurrection.com
The Clintons created a media and law enforcement echo chamber of Russia collusion. Earlier this week we wrote about the possible involvement of Clinton operative Sidney Blumenthal in feeding information to Christoper Steele, author of the infamous Clinton/DNC funded dossier. That dossier formed a key part of the FBI's presentation to the FISA court to obtain a warrant to surveil Carter Page.
One of the key links in the Blumenthal-Steele stories was former State Department employee Jonathan Winer :
Devin Nunes has a new target: Jonathan Winer, the Obama State Department's special envoy to Libya, and longtime Senate aide to John Kerry. Winer received a memorandum written by political activist Cody Shearer and passed it along to Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence official who had compiled his own dossier on Donald Trump.
The release of last week's House Intelligence Committee memo accusing the FBI of surveillance abuses marked the end of the first phase of Nunes's investigation into the probe of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election. Now, the committee chair told Fox News on Friday, the probe is moving into "phase two," which involves the State Department. His focus is on the dossier compiled by Shearer, and passed along by Winer, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
That Blumenthal was the source of the information passed on to Winer appeared to be confirmed by Trey Gowdy in an interview with Martha McCallum, Trey Gowdy suggests Clinton operative Sidney Blumenthal fed info to Steele weeks before election:
Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., strongly implied to Fox News Tuesday night that Clinton family confidant Sidney Blumenthal was a key link in a chain of information that helped create the controversial Trump-Russia dossier.
Gowdy told Fox News' "The Story" that "when you hear who one of the sources of that information is, you're going to think, 'Oh my gosh, I've heard that name somewhere before.'"
When host Martha MacCallum asked if he was referring to Blumenthal, Gowdy answered, "That'd be really warm. You're warm, yeah."
Winer has published an Op-Ed at WaPo in which he confirms his involvement with Blumenthal, though he downplays its significance, Devin Nunes is investigating me. Here's the truth.
In the summer of 2016, Steele told me that he had learned of disturbing information regarding possible ties between Donald Trump, his campaign and senior Russian officials. He did not provide details but made clear the information involved "active measures," a Soviet intelligence term for propaganda and related activities to influence events in other countries.
In September 2016, Steele and I met in Washington and discussed the information now known as the "dossier." Steele's sources suggested that the Kremlin not only had been behind the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign but also had compromised Trump and developed ties with his associates and campaign.
I was allowed to review, but not to keep, a copy of these reports to enable me to alert the State Department. I prepared a two-page summary and shared it with Nuland, who indicated that, like me, she felt that the secretary of state needed to be made aware of this material.
In late September, I spoke with an old friend, Sidney Blumenthal, whom I met 30 years ago when I was investigating the Iran-contra affair for then-Sen. Kerry and Blumenthal was a reporter at The Post. At the time, Russian hacking was at the front and center in the 2016 presidential campaign. The emails of Blumenthal, who had a long association with Bill and Hillary Clinton, had been hacked in 2013 through a Russian server.
While talking about that hacking, Blumenthal and I discussed Steele's reports. He showed me notes gathered by a journalist I did not know, Cody Shearer, that alleged the Russians had compromising information on Trump of a sexual and financial nature.
What struck me was how some of the material echoed Steele's but appeared to involve different sources.
On my own, I shared a copy of these notes with Steele, to ask for his professional reaction. He told me it was potentially "collateral" information. I asked him what that meant. He said that it was similar but separate from the information he had gathered from his sources. I agreed to let him keep a copy of the Shearer notes.
Given that I had not worked with Shearer and knew that he was not a professional intelligence officer, I did not mention or share his notes with anyone at the State Department. I did not expect them to be shared with anyone in the U.S. government.
But I learned later that Steele did share them -- with the FBI, after the FBI asked him to provide everything he had on allegations relating to Trump, his campaign and Russian interference in U.S. elections.
The Clintons created a media and law enforcement echo chamber of Russia collusion.
Hillary's campaign and the DNC paid for the Steele dossier. Other Clinton operatives, such as Sidney Blumenthal and Cody Shearer, were spreading similar accusations and sharing information with Steele. Steele was also feeding accusations to the media. Employees of the FBI and possibly other agencies who hated Trump used that information both before and after the election.
In assessing the threats that Hillary and Trump posed to our liberty, respectively, in October 2016 I wrote that Hillary represented the greater threat because Hillary was "a systemic threat."
I was right.
Feb 11, 2018 | www.thesmokinggun.com
The 64-year-old Blumenthal -- who was unaware that he had been hacked by "Guccifer"--worked as an assistant and senior adviser to Clinton for about 3-1/2 years, ending in January 2001. He worked as a senior adviser to Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign and has remained one of her closest confidants.
By breaching Blumenthal's account, "Guccifer" was able to access his correspondence (dating back to at least 2005) with an array of Washington insiders, including political operatives, journalists, and government officials. As with the hacker's other victims, it is unclear how Blumenthal's account was illegally accessed or why he was targeted.
However, based on screen grabs made by "Guccifer," the hacker specifically zeroed in on Blumenthal's extensive correspondence with Hillary Clinton, sorting Blumenthal's account so as to single out all e-mail sent to Clinton. Additionally, "Guccifer" further sorted the mail to list (and presumably download) all Word files attached to e-mails sent to Clinton.
It is unknown what plans "Guccifer" has for these documents, which include foreign policy and intelligence memos that Blumenthal sent to Clinton while she served as Secretary of State.
Blumenthal told TSG that when he attempted to access his e-mail yesterday morning, he could not successfully log in. He then contacted an AOL representative and was told that his account had been compromised. Blumenthal said that he subsequently reset the password and regained control of his account.
In e-mail screeds, "Guccifer" seems to subscribe to dark conspiracies involving the Federal Reserve, the Council on Foreign Relations, and attendees of Bohemian Grove retreats. "the evil is leading this fucked up world!!!!!! i tell you this the world of tomorrow will be a world free of illuminati or will be no more," the hacker declared.
Over the past few months, the list of "Guccifer" hacking victims has included several Bush family members and friends ; Powell; U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski ; a senior United Nations official; Rockefeller family members; former FBI agents; security contractors in Iraq; a former Secret Service agent; and John Negroponte, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. A majority of these breaches have involved AOL e-mail accounts.
Feb 11, 2018 | www.weeklystandard.com
There are plenty of reasons why, after years of spreading the conspiracy theory, Donald Trump should not be given a pass after his sudden public disavowal of previous claims that President Obama was born in Kenya. However, the media are zeroing in on Trump's assertion Hillary Clinton is responsible for starting birtherism. In fact, the Washington Post declared it categorically false in the lede of their story on Trump's press conference this morning:
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Friday acknowledged for the first time that President Obama was born in the United States, ending his long history of stoking unfounded doubts about the nation's first African American president but also seeking to falsely blame Democratic rival Hillary Clinton for starting the rumors.
Not so fast. Just yesterday, James Asher, the former Washington bureau chief for the news agency McClatchy , tweeted that longtime Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal was spreading the conspiracy theory that Obama was born in Kenya while he was a senior Clinton campaign advisor in 2008, long before Trump ever parroted the claim:
That Blumenthal would have done this seems in keeping with what was reported about Blumenthal's actions at the time :
Almost every day over the past six months, I have been the recipient of an email that attacks Obama's character, political views, electability, and real or manufactured associations. The original source of many of these hit pieces are virulent and sometimes extreme right-wing websites, bloggers, and publications. But they aren't being emailed out from some fringe right-wing group that somehow managed to get my email address. Instead, it is Sidney Blumenthal who, on a regular basis, methodically dispatches these email mudballs to an influential list of opinion shapers -- including journalists, former Clinton administration officials, academics, policy entrepreneurs, and think tankers -- in what is an obvious attempt to create an echo chamber that reverberates among talk shows, columnists, and Democratic Party funders and activists.
Among the "fringe right-wing" attacks Blumenthal was sending out were actually from respectable conservative publications such as City Journal , National Review , and, yes, The Weekly Standard. This is more than a little ironic because Blumenthal is often credited with coining the phrase "vast right-wing conspiracy," arguably the most famous phrase Hillary Clinton ever uttered.
But Blumenthal also dabbled spreading much less reliable reports, such as conjecture about Obama's "communist mentor" Frank Marshall Davis. Further, Blumenthal's reputation for dishonesty and underhanded tactics is well-established. It is generally accepted that he lied to the media and publicly smeared Monica Lewinsky and other Bill Clinton accusers when he worked in the White House. Christopher Hitchens, no card carrying member of the vast right-wing conspiracy, testified before Congress toBlumenthal's lies and wrote a book about it .
When you combine the report Blumenthal was saying Obama was born in Kenya with the fact that Clinton campaign did circulate a memo outlining plans to attack Obama's "lack of American roots," it doesn't seem far fetched that the Clinton campaign played a much bigger role in midwifing birtherism than they or the media would like to admit.
Clinton later tried to bring Blumenthal with her to the State Department (a plan the Obama administration nixed, probably at least in part because they were familiar with Blumenthal's lengthy record of trashing Obama). She then put him on the payroll at the Clinton Foundation, and he was found in Clinton's emails engaging with her as Secretary of State in an ultimately unsuccessful scheme to profiteer off of war-torn Libya as a result of his involvement with a private military company. Clinton and Blumenthal's relationship is obviously close and has existed for decades. IIf the report Blumenthal was spreading birtherism in 2008 is accurate, it would be very hard for Clinton to evade some responsibility for the birther rumors getting out of control.
Feb 11, 2018 | www.breitbart.com
The Washington Post on Tuesday reported that Steele gave the FBI a report in October 2016 that he received from a State Department employee about Trump and Russia.
According to the Post , the report was written by Cody Shearer, a former journalist with close ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton, who gave it to Blumenthal, who gave it to State Department official Jonathan Winer, who gave it to Steele, who then gave it to the FBI.
Shearer's report claimed a source inside the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) spy agency alleged that Trump had financial ties to influential Russians and that the FSB had evidence of him engaging in compromising personal behavior.
A lawyer for Winer, Lee Wolosky, told the Post his client told the Post his client's actions were "grounded" in concerns that a candidate for the presidency may have been compromised by a hostile foreign power. Wolosky did not say why Winer gave the report to Steele instead of the FBI.
The Guardian , which has ties to ex-British spy Steele, also reported recently that Shearer wrote a report that was given to Steele. Shearer had also shared his report with "select media organizations before the election," according to the British paper.
Blumenthal and Shearer's names were first tied to the FBI's investigation of the Trump campaign in a letter sent last month by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to the Democratic National Committee.
Grassley and Graham wanted the DNC to disclose any communications with Blumenthal and Shearer from March 2016 to January 2017. Earlier this week, the two GOP senators released a redacted memo that described the transmission of a report from a Clinton friend to Steele:
"One memorandum by Mr. Steele that was not published by Buzzfeed is dated October 19, 2016. The report alleges [redacted], as well as [redacted]. Mr. Steele's memorandum states that his company "received this report from [redacted] U.S. State Department," that the report was the second in a series, and that the report was information that came from a foreign sub-source who 'is in touch with [redacted], a contact of [redacted], a friend of the Clintons, who passed it to [redacted]."
They added, "It is troubling enough that the Clinton Campaign funded Mr. Steele's work, but that these Clinton associates were contemporaneously feeding Mr. Steele allegations raises additional concerns about his credibility."
Since the names are redacted by the FBI, they cannot be disclosed publicly by those who have seen them. Lawmakers who have seen the unredacted versions have danced around who they are.
When asked on FOX News's The Story, House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) told anchor Martha MacCallum that she was "really warm" if she believed that Blumenthal was part of the chain of information to Steele described by Grassley and Graham.
"I'm trying to think how Secretary Clinton defined him. I think she said he was an old friend who emailed her from time to time," he said on Tuesday.
MacCallum then asked, "Sidney Blumenthal?" Gowdy responded , "That'd be really warm. You're warm. Yeah."
House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) also mentioned Blumenthal and Shearer's role on Fox & Friends on Tuesday.
"What it looks like is, they paid Steele to put together the dossier and told him what to put in," he said.
Micah Morin, chief investigative reporter at Judicial Watch, questioned whether Shearer and Blumenthal were also behind the dossier's sources. He wrote :
According to the Guardian , Steele provided 'a copy [of the Shearer report] because it corresponded with what he had separately heard from his own independent sources.' If the reporting here is accurate, that's quite a coincidence -- that Cody Shearer and Christopher Steele were hearing the same things from different sources at pretty much the same time. A closer look at timelines and sources might be revealing. If Sid and Cody are behind the original Russian dossier sources, that would be big news indeed.
"It's an astonishing, convoluted and somewhat circular chain of custody in which a Clinton source, that is Shearer and Blumenthal, gives it to the former, to the State Department where she used to be Secretary of State, who gives it to Christopher Steele, who's being paid by the Clinton campaign, who then gives it to the FBI," the Washington Examiner 's Chief Political Correspondent Byron York said on the Hugh Hewitt radio show Wednesday.
Blumenthal has a known history of smearing opponents of the Clintons.
During Bill Clinton's impeachment crisis, as one of Clinton's special advisers, he spread rumors that one of independent counsel Kenneth Starr's prosecutors abused young boys at a Christian summer camp and that Monica Lewinsky was stalking the president, according to the Observer . He also spread rumors that Colin Powell's wife suffered from clinical depression and was unfit to be a first lady, according to publication.
As a former journalist, Blumenthal also used his media contacts to give the Clintons a heads up about forthcoming stories, and advised the Clinton campaign in 2008 to target then-candidate Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) ties to Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan.
After Obama White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel refused to allow Blumenthal to join the Clinton State Department, he became a Clinton Foundation consultant, earning at least $120,000 a year. He continued to advise her in a number of areas, according to emails released by the State Department.
Less is known about Shearer. According to a recent article in the Washington Times , he was dubbed "Mr. Fixer" for Bill and Hillary Clinton and was a "workmate" of Blumenthal.
Shearer went from a journalist decades ago to foreign policy freelancer – once trying to broker some sort of peace deal in Bosnia, although he was not a U.S. official, – and working with Blumenthal to supply intelligence on Libya to Clinton when she was secretary of state. According to investigative journalist Sara Carter, Shearer worked in the 1990s for President Bill Clinton.
Nonprofit investigative journalism outlet ProPublica described Shearer as "a longtime Clinton family operative -- his brother was an ambassador under Bill Clinton and his now-deceased sister was married to Clinton State Department official Strobe Talbott -- who was in close contact with Blumenthal."
According to Judicial Watch's Morin, Shearer "has a long history of dirty tricks."
"He's been linked to Whitewater-era efforts to dirty up Bill Clinton critics; to shakedown politics involving the Cheyenne-Arapaho Indian tribe; and to fronting for Bosnian Serb butcher Radovan Karadzic," he wrote.
As the Times has noted, for whom Shearer produced his anti-Trump report is unclear.
Even less known about Jonathan Winer. Winer served as the State Department's Special Envoy for Libya and Senior Advisor for MEK resettlement, according to the State Department website.
According to CNN , Winer worked with Steele from 2014 through 2016. Steele reportedly provided Winer with reports related to the conflict in Ukraine and Russia as a courtesy.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA), who led efforts to show that senior FBI and DOJ officials relied on the dossier to get a surveillance warrant on a former Trump campaign adviser, has said there will be a forthcoming memo on the State Department's role in the FBI's investigation of Trump, but has not said when that might be released.
Feb 11, 2018 | www.cnn.com
How Shearer's notes got to Steele
Shearer, an independent journalist, decided to investigate potential Trump-Russia connections after seeing stories about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, the source said.
Shearer's so-called dossier is actually a set of notes based on conversations with reporters and other sources, according to the person who spoke to CNN, and he circulated those notes to assorted journalists, as well as to Blumenthal.
Blumenthal then passed the notes to Jonathan Winer, who was a State Department special envoy for Libya under former Secretary of State John Kerry, the source said. Winer had a previous relationship with Steele, and he passed it along to Steele in order to get his assessment.
Carter Page struggles to explain how he could advise both Kremlin and Trump team
Related Article: Carter Page struggles to explain how he could advise both Kremlin and Trump team
Blumenthal, according to the source, did not know that Winer would consult Steele on the Shearer document, and said Winer made that decision on his own.
After Winer gave Steele the notes from Shearer, Steele wrote that he found it interesting and it tended to corroborate some of what he found, but he also noted that it was uncorroborated, the source said.
Shearer's notes, a copy of which were obtained by CNN, make uncorroborated allegations involving Trump and Russia, and they cite unnamed Russian intelligence and Turkish sources.
Steele provided Shearer's notes to the FBI in October 2016.What are the GOP allegations? Steele was being paid for his research by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which was hired by a law firm on behalf of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. A key allegation in last week's Nunes memo was that Steele's political connections to Democrats were not told to the FISA court, and Republicans are charging that Shearer's involvement could show Steele was receiving information from Clinton associates that went into the dossier he gave to the FBI. The criminal referral from Grassley and Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham -- which was unclassified with some redactions this week -- states that Shearer's notes went to Steele through an official at the State Department and another person who was a "friend of the Clinton's." "It is troubling enough that the Clinton Campaign funded Mr. Steele's work, but that these Clinton associates were contemporaneously feeding Mr. Steele's allegations raises additional concerns about his credibility," the senators wrote in the criminal referral, which does not accuse Steele of wrongdoing but urges the Justice Department to investigate the matter. Winer worked with Steele from 2014 through 2016, according to another source familiar with their interactions. Steele provided Winer with reports related to the conflict in Ukraine and Russia as a courtesy, which was not unusual and considered one source among many used for assessing the situation on the ground in Ukraine, the source said.
Former CIA Director Brennan says Nunes 'abused his office' Steele also gave the dossier to Winer, who flagged to his superiors at the State Department, according to the source. Kerry was eventually briefed on its existence, and that it wasn't known how much was true.
Senior State Department officials showed the dossier to Kerry once it was clear the document was in wide circulation around Washington, according to the source. Kerry was not briefed on the Shearer document, the source said. Lee Wolosky, an attorney for Winer, said in a statement that Winer was "concerned in 2016 about information that a candidate for the presidency may have been compromised by a hostile foreign power." "Any actions he took were grounded in those concerns," Wolosky said.
"Today's attacks are nothing more than a further attempt to undermine the independence and credibility of special (counsel Robert) Mueller's ongoing investigation into those and related issues." What are Republicans saying? Republicans haven't come out and accused Blumenthal of any wrongdoing, but they've hinted in public appearances that raw intelligence may have been distributed for partisan purposes. Rep. Trey Gowdy, who chairs the House Oversight Committee and is a senior Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, discussed Nunes' State Department investigation a Fox News interview Tuesday, saying he was "troubled" by the role the State Department played. Gowdy read the classified FISA documents that the Justice Department gave congressional committees access to on the condition that only one member of the majority and minority would view them. "When you hear who the source, or one of the sources of that information is, you're going to think, 'Oh, my gosh, I've heard that name somewhere before. Where could he possibly have been?'" the South Carolina Republican said.
Gowdy: Memo has no impact on Russia probe "A domestic source. I'm trying to think of Secretary Clinton defined him. I think she said he was an old friend who emailed her from time to time," Gowdy continued. "Sidney Blumenthal?" Fox News' Martha MacCallum asked. "That would be really warm," Gowdy concluded. Nunes made headlines over the weekend when he predicted more memos would be coming from his committee, but he says that the investigation into the State Department has already been in the works. "We have an active investigation into the State Department. That has been ongoing for a while now," Nunes told Fox News' Sean Hannity.
Nunes has repeatedly declined to discuss his investigations with CNN, saying he doesn't discuss committee business "in the halls." Graham declined to discuss Blumenthal's role in the committee's investigation into Steele, but said the State Department is one element of it. "There's some connections outside the Department of Justice and the dossier that we're looking at. One of them goes to the State Department," Graham told CNN. "It's clear to me he was using the dossier for political purposes and that should have been more alarming than it was."
Who are the players?
Blumenthal is no stranger to congressional investigations, playing a role in the House Benghazi Select Committee investigation that was led by Gowdy. Blumenthal testified behind closed doors as part of the Benghazi investigation, and he provided the committee with emails he exchanged with Clinton , who was secretary of state when the 2012 Benghazi attack occurred. Blumenthal sent Clinton dozens of emails while she was secretary of state on various foreign policy topics, some of which were unsolicited and others that were requested by Clinton.
A former journalist, Blumenthal has known the Clintons for more than 30 years, and he worked in the Clinton White House as senior adviser from 1997 to 2001. He's been by the family's side during difficult moments, including President Bill Clinton's impeachment trial.
Feb 10, 2018 | www.thegatewaypundit.com
Outgoing Republican Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) strongly implied to Fox News host Martha MacCallum Tuesday evening that Clinton confidant, Sidney Blumenthal, was a source for Christopher Steele's anti-Trump dossier.
MACCALLUM: So weeks before the election, somebody in the Obama State Department was feeding information from a foreign source to Christopher Steele?
GOWDY: When you hear who the source, or one of the sources of that information is, you're going to think, "Oh, my gosh. I've heard that name somewhere before. Where could he possibly have been?"
MACCALLUM: A foreign source?
GOWDY: A domestic source. I'm trying to think of how Secretary Clinton defined him. I think she said he was an old friend who emailed her from time to time.
MACCALLUM: Sydney Blumenthal?
GOWDY: That would be really warm.
Trey Gowdy just heavily implied that Sydney Blumenthal was a source for Christopher Steele's oppo dossier on Fox News:
7:28 PM-Feb 6, 2018
Partial transcript via POLITICO:
During an interview on Fox News, Gowdy was asked by Fox News' Martha MacCallum about whether "weeks before the election, somebody in the Obama State Department was feeding information from a foreign source to Christopher Steele."
"When you hear who the source, one of the sources of that information is, you're going to think, oh, my gosh, I've heard that name somewhere before. Where could it possibly have been," Gowdy replied.
When asked whether it was a foreign source, the South Carolina Republican said it was domestic.
"I'm trying to think of how Secretary Clinton defined him. I think she said he was an old friend who emailed her from time to time," Gowdy said.
When asked whether it was Blumenthal, Gowdy said: "That would be really warm. You're warm."
In a letter released Monday, Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) suggested Clinton contacts fed information to former British spy and dossier author Christopher Steele. "Another connection to the second dossier, according to several sources who spoke to this reporter, is close friend and advisor to Hillary Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal," reported Sara Carter.
Carter previously reported Blumenthal was grilled by the FBI in 2016 in connection to the Steele dossier.
Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm behind the discredited Steele dossier, is still investigating alleged ties between President Trump and Russia, Carter reported last month.
ShriekingHysteric , February 6, 2018 8:48 PMJulie -> ShriekingHysteric , February 6, 2018 9:01 PM
Trey is getting a bad rap methinks.
Look at what he had to deal with in the Benghazi hearings, exactly the same as Trump has had to put up with.
There was an astonishingly corrupt and deceitful Dem party with a fully compliant media totally in the Dem's corner, covering their tracks and supporting their shrieks, double standards and outright lies.
Give him a break!constitutionminded -> Julie , February 6, 2018 9:10 PM
SORRY, Gowdy has NOT near had to endure what President Trump has gone through. No one has.
I don't trust him. He thinks Mueller is a good man. Mueller is so corrupt.
He thinks Mueller's investigation on Trump should continue.Cuffs Julie , February 7, 2018 10:41 AM
I believe that Gowdy is correct. Pres. Trump can't shut down the Mueller investigation. Think of what a sh*t storm that would be in the media and how they would spin it. Mueller hasn't found diddly squat in a year and he never will. Let it play out and be proven that there is nothing there and then come down hard on the previous administration and it's players. When Mueller fails the democrats will be broken.Dave S. constitutionminded , February 6, 2018 9:38 PM
He's the President, for Pete's sake. Why would he subject himself to Mueller who's accountable to no one, has an unlimited budget & time frame & is ripping through taxpayer money like its water & after all this time has revealed squat.
Mueller is a tick on the ear of our republic.
Mueller NEEDS to be HANGED too!! His main job has been to destroy whatever evidence he can find
Feb 06, 2018 | www.foxnews.com
EXCLUSIVE – Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., strongly implied to Fox News Tuesday night that Clinton family confidant Sidney Blumenthal was a key link in a chain of information that helped create the controversial Trump-Russia dossier.
Gowdy told Fox News' "The Story" that "when you hear who ... one of the sources of that information is, you're going to think, 'Oh my gosh, I've heard that name somewhere before.'"
When host Martha MacCallum asked if he was referring to Blumenthal, Gowdy answered, "That'd be really warm. You're warm, yeah."
Gowdy, who is among a host of Republican lawmakers not running for re-election is November, played a key role in the drafting of a recently declassified memo detailing alleged surveillance abuses by the federal government. The memo took specific issue with the FBI's use of information from the dossier, which was compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele and claimed to reveal deep ties between President Trump and Russian officials.
Last month, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., made a criminal referral regarding Steele to the FBI. The referral, parts of which were declassified Monday, included a reference to "a foreign source [who] gave information to an unnamed associate of Hillary and Bill Clinton, who then gave information to an unnamed official in the Obama State Department, who then gave the information to Steele."
In another section, the referral stated that Steele received information from "a foreign sub-source who is in touch with (redacted), a contact of (redacted), a friend of the Clintons, who passed it to (redacted).'"
Gowdy told MacCallum that "there is a State Department component" to the dossier that "needs to be investigated."
"I'm pretty troubled by what I read in the documents with respect to the role the State Department played in the fall of 2016 with including information that was used in a [FISA] court proceeding," Gowdy said. "I am troubled by that."
However, Gowdy admitted that special counsel Robert Mueller would have been called in to investigate Russian actions during the 2016 election "regardless of whether or not there's a dossier."
"The dossier has nothing to do with the fact that someone tried to hack into the [Democratic National Committee] server," he said. "The dossier has nothing do with the meeting George Papadopoulos had in Great Britain. The dossier has nothing to do with [Donald Trump Jr.] meeting at Trump Tower [with a Russian lawyer]. The dossier has nothing to do with allegations of obstruction of justice."
Gowdy also addressed his decision to leave Congress, saying it was "just the right time." "I won't ever run for office again," he promised. "When you leave politics, to me, it's important that you leave. And I'm at peace with that."john9hoffmanTrey Gowdy is a real American Patriot!aa1238I dunno about you, but I downloaded the pdf file from the Senate Judiciary website. Then I went to a pdf editor with text, and typed in the names "Cody Shearer", "Sidney Blumenthal" and "Steele" in the redacted spaces. They were a PERFECT FIT ON THE PAPER.dwginsc -> belfastbob1
The whole phrase would be: "a foreign sub-source who is in touch with Cody Shearer, a contact of Sidney Blumenthal, a friend of the Clintons, who passed it to Steele." But I'm kinda skeptical of the Shearer piece. Blumenthal's name is definitely in there, though.Staubach12 -> belfastbob1
Gowdy is saying that the American federal government's law enforcement agencies are lying to the American judiciary to use foreign intelligence resources to investigate political opponents based upon false or significantly biased information. I will let you guess have many constitutional rights and federal laws are violated by those actions.
Gowdy is saying in a nation based upon the Rule of Law, the government cannot operate under the "ends justifies means" philosophy, especially when it is used by the in-power party to target the opposition party. And, yes, we throw out cases all the time when law enforcement agencies violate the constitutional rights of defendants. I have argued those rights as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney. I share Trey's concern about political operatives using law enforcement agencies a a political tool.
I think you need to read up on what has transpired. Carter Page has never been found guilty of a crime, nor ever charged with a crime, nor has he been accused of anything. The FBI investigated Page because he had been identified as a potential target for an attempt by Russia to recruit him. But the FBI concluded in 2015 that the Russian agencies that had targeted Page had not progressed far enough in their attempt before they were caught and shut down. In other words, Page was never accused of wrongdoing and was cleared by the FBI in 2015. Despite the fact the FBI closed the book on Page, the Hillary campaign, using the fake dossier and using Page as a scapegoat, obtained a FISA warrant to spy on Page in order to spy on the Trump campaign. This is why this is such a serious offense and probably the biggest political scandal ever.
Would this by chance be the same Clinton family friend Sidney Blumenthal who traveled to war-torn Libya to assist the Clinton's in profiting from Libyan oil reserves, Gadhafi's gold and silver reserves, and illegal arms sales while allowing US Ambassador Stevens to be murdered in order to silence him? THAT Sidney Blumenthal???
TyJuanOwen -> Warlock Woods
I suppose Sidney Blumenthal traveled to Libya to sip on cocktails and lounge upon the beach? And I'm sure that you can offer us a valid source of the formerly "dead broke" Clinton's current $200 million bank account?
Ignore all those that are either George Soros employees or those that are here to rile up those that actually care about this country.
Ignoring them is the only way to stop their garbage of attempting to pull attention away from the crimes the previous administration and Hillary Clinton were part of. These people attended the same meeting to discredit and disavow any and all things about the memo. The much repeated words "cherry picked" should have been a clue to everyone there is a major effort to install propaganda into anything that is not flattering to the previous administration and Hillary Clinton. Not sure even George Soros has the money to pay for this, likely a collection of many billionaires or PACs or FOUNDATIONS are funding this disinformation.
Ignoring them is the only way to shut them down. My understanding of how they are paid is they get bonus if they get a response from you. Ignore no matter how vile they become.
Feb 10, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
by Chuck Ross of Daily Caller
When they said "Russian collusion", few expected it to be between the CIA and a "shadowy Russian operative." And yet, according to a blockbuster NYT report, that's precisely what happened.
* * *
The CIA paid $100,000 last year to a Russian operative who claimed to have derogatory information about President Trump, including a video tape of the Republican engaged with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room. If the video showed Trump, it would support claims made in the infamous Steele dossier, the salacious opposition research report financed by the Clinton campaign and DNC.
But U.S. intelligence officials have reason to doubt the veracity of the video and other information about Trump associates provided by the Russian, according to a fascinating report from The New York Times.
American spies made contact with the Russia early in 2017 after he offered to sell the Trump material along with cyber hacking tools that were stolen from the NSA that year, according to The Times. U.S. intelligence officials told The Times they were so desperate to retrieve those tools that they negotiated with the operative for months despite several red flags, including indications that he was working in concert with Russian intelligence.
Another red flag was the Russian's financial request. He initially sought $10 million for the information but dropped the asking price to $1 million.
After months of negotiations, American spies handed over $100,000 in cash in a brief case to the Russian during a meeting in Berlin in September.
The operative also offered documents and emails that purported to implicate other Trump associates, including former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. But The Times viewed the documents and reported that they were mostly information that is already in the public domain.
The Russian, who has ties to organized criminals and money launderers, showed the video purported to be Trump to a Berlin-based American businessman who served as his intermediary to the CIA. But according to the Times, the footage and the location of the viewing raised questions about its authenticity.
The 15-second clip showed two women speaking with a man. It is not clear if the man was Trump, and there was no audio. The Russian also showed the video to his American partner at the Russian embassy in Berlin, a sign that the operative had ties to Russian intelligence.
The Russian stonewalled the production of the cyber tools, and U.S. officials eventually cut ties, according to The Times. After the payout in Berlin, the man provided information about Trump and his associates of questionable veracity.
The Americans gave him an ultimatum earlier in 2018 to either play ball, leave Western Europe, or face criminal charges. He left, according to The Times, which interviewed U.S. officials, the American intermediary and the Russian for its article.
The Times' U.S. sources -- who appear to paint the American side in a positive light -- said that they were reluctant to purchase information because they did not want to be seen buying dirt on the president.
The officials also expressed concern that the Russian operative was planting disinformation on behalf of the Russian government. U.S. officials were worried that the Russian government has sought to sow discord between U.S. intelligence agencies and Trump. The revelation that the CIA purchased dirt on him would likely do the trick.
The Times report also has other new details.
Four other Russians with ties to the spy world have surfaced over the past year offering to sell dirt on Trump that closely mirrors allegations made in the dossier, according to the article. But officials have reason to believe that some of sellers have ties to Russian intelligence agencies.
The Times also provides new details on Cody Shearer, a notorious operative close to the Clintons. Shearer was recently revealed to have shopped around a so-called "second dossier" prior to the campaign which mirrored the sex allegations of the Steele report.
According to The Times, he has criss-crossed Europe over the past six months in an attempt to find video footage of Trump from the Moscow hotel room. Shearer claimed to have information from the FSB, Russia's spy service, that a video existed of Trump with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room.
He shared a memo making the allegations with his friend and fellow Clinton fixer, Sidney Blumenthal. Blumenthal in turn passed the memo to his friend, Jonathan Winer, a Department of State official. Winer then gave the information to Steele who provided it to the FBI in October 2016.
Steele also provided information to Winer, who wrote up a two-page memo that was circulated within the State Department.
Trump has denied allegations that he used prostitutes in Moscow. He has called the dossier a "hoax" and "crap."
* * *
On Saturday morning, Trump tweeted that "according to the @nytimes, a Russian sold phony secrets on "Trump" to the U.S. Asking price was $10 million, brought down to $1 million to be paid over time. I hope people are now seeing & understanding what is going on here. It is all now starting to come out - DRAIN THE SWAMP!
Of course, if Trump really wants to "drain the swamp", any such decision would have originate with him. Tags Politics Commercial Banks
InjectTheVenom -> Global Hunter Feb 10, 2018 11:47 AM PermalinkBilly the Poet -> InjectTheVenom Feb 10, 2018 12:04 PM Permalink
DRAIN. THE. SWAMP.caconhma -> Billy the Poet Feb 10, 2018 12:42 PM Permalink
Release the pee pee video now! No one pee peed in the $100,000 video in question. The 15-second clip showed two women speaking with a man. It is not clear if the man was Trump, and there was no audio. And how can anyone be more fascinated by the prospect of pee pee than by the fact that US intelligence agencies were buying bad information from extremely shady foreigners in an attempt to overthrow the President of the United States?gatorengineer -> caconhma Feb 10, 2018 1:05 PM Permalink
Trump is the swamp. If zio-Banking Mafia did not have enough dirt of Trump, he would not be elected.Arrowflinger -> InjectTheVenom Feb 10, 2018 12:18 PM Permalink
Trump is starting to assume that the people are dumber than Obowel did. Earth to Don, you sir have the drain pump, you sir have surrounded yourself with Swamp creatures.... You sir are.............gatorengineer -> Arrowflinger Feb 10, 2018 1:06 PM Permalink
According to this, the Russians stole the hacking tools needed to cut through the Swamp levee, which were developed by the NSA, and now the CIA cannot buy them back. Now, since the USA wanted its Swamp, the Russians are more than happy to let the USA drown in its swamp.
What a country!El Oregonian -> Global Hunter Feb 10, 2018 11:53 AM Permalink
Anyone have a link for the Qanon posts. I haven't seen them in a couple of weeks since he left 8chan where he was posting. I don't want the Youtube BS, I just want the link... anyone got one. Its strangely not googleable... LOLZ.Bula_Vinaka -> El Oregonian Feb 10, 2018 12:10 PM Permalink
If you think that the CIA is a U.S. intelligence agency working on the best interests of the United States, you better wake up and smell the treason. They only work for the best interests of themselves.BurningFuld -> Bula_Vinaka Feb 10, 2018 12:40 PM Permalink
They are parasites and nothing more.Ahmeexnal -> caconhma Feb 10, 2018 1:03 PM Permalink
Here is a question. Why does the CIA not come out and clear the air re: Trump?
I mean they were even paying people to come up with dirt. He is now your president and the country is a fucking mess. Should the CIA not come out and say we tried but we got nothing? They do have the ability to fix all this Trump shit and yet crickets.MarshalJimDuncan -> El Oregonian Feb 10, 2018 12:12 PM Permalink
CIA is the covert dirty dealing arm of the VATICAN.Posa -> El Oregonian Feb 10, 2018 12:56 PM Permalink
ooohh... they release this questionable information for all to hear and paid a lot of money for it too. this fucking government is a jokeAlfred -> El Oregonian Feb 10, 2018 12:59 PM Permalink
And the best interests of clients. The CIA started out is the muscle for the Dulles Brothers clients who were being booted out of various countries they were super-exploiting. The Agency hasn't looked back since.Guitarilla -> Global Hunter Feb 10, 2018 12:35 PM Permalink
Seems wrong to call them 'intelligence' agencies. There must be a more descriptive name we can use... Anyone?DownWithYogaPants -> Dr. Acula Feb 10, 2018 11:47 AM Permalink
Nobody got whizzed on. That lurid fantasy came soley out of the head of Hillary Clinton, given to Blumenthal, passed around and made to look like it came from Russia.Killtruck -> shimmy Feb 10, 2018 12:51 PM Permalink
CIA killed Kennedy. This pretty much removes all doubt. They are willing to do anything.Able Ape -> shimmy Feb 10, 2018 12:57 PM Permalink
"Oswald killed Kennedy. That's it."
It IS remarkable the stuff people believe when all logic goes against it. Like Oswald firing magic bullets from an old Italian Carcano...and jet fuel melting steel beams...and a building collapsing through the path of greatest resistance into its own footprint after NOT being hit by an airplane...and Kennedy being shot from behind, but his head snapping backwards from the impact...and Oswald picking the worst possible shooting location, but in front of Kennedy were two intersecting highways going in any direction...and terrorist passports floating gently down from the sky.
It sure is remarkable.
possible band name
OswaldandtheMagicBulletsPosa -> shimmy Feb 10, 2018 1:05 PM Permalink
What was Oswald's reason to kill JFK? And yeah, he picked the very building he worked at to commit the crime. He wasn't THAT stupid!...mobius8curve -> Dr. Acula Feb 10, 2018 11:49 AM Permalink
RFK and Nixon knew immediately the assassination of JFK was a CIA hit job because they had CHAIRED those hit squad operations themselves for Cuban Operations. They saw the CIA- Cuban hit squad fingerprints all over the kill. RFK had personally fired Wm Harvey, Dulles' chief of assassinations. However, RFK was silenced because he and Jack had been tag-teaming Marilyn Monroe.
The reason JFK was killed was a) his openly stated determination to shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces so they could no longer operate as a dangerous, renegade private army; and b) in the Spring of '63 JFK delivered his famous American U address calling for the end of the Cold War...
Oswald was always a patsie... the WC documents how his rifle was inoperable... scope needed parts just to be be sited and take aim... even after parts installed the rifle attributed to Oswald remained highly inaccurate... Military sharpshooters couldn't even hit stationary targets reliably.oDumbo -> Dr. Acula Feb 10, 2018 12:19 PM Permalink
If there is a video you can be sure it was manufactured using these tools:
Lawlessness is arising exponentially:
https://sumofthyword.com/2017/01/18/the-mystery-of-lawlessness/Kelley -> Dr. Acula Feb 10, 2018 12:34 PM Permalink
Drain the swamp! Townsquare justice for Odumbo and Hitlery! George Soros to bathe in the Amazon River with 1 million Piranha Fish until it completely disappears. Drain the evil Dumorat swamp. Drain the banana republic CIA and FBI. Our tax dollars and constitution did not pay for this shit.shovelhead -> Dr. Acula Feb 10, 2018 12:55 PM Permalink
With today's technology, the CIA is most likely working on a fake video for you right now. They might release it on Vimeo or Netflix to cover the costs and give themselves plausible deniability. To add a finishing touch they will make a fake video of Julian Assange claiming he is releasing it. You'll be in hog heaven. Which is where folks like you go just before being slaughtered by your owners and turned into spam.algol_dog Feb 10, 2018 11:38 AM Permalink
Ok, How about $9.99DosZap -> algol_dog Feb 10, 2018 11:40 AM Permalink
Move along. Nothing to see here ...SRV -> DosZap Feb 10, 2018 11:54 AM Permalink
What a load of camel dung, if there was a sex tape of Trump w/Russian hookers, it would have been out while he was RUNNING for the job, FAKE NEWS.vulcanraven -> DosZap Feb 10, 2018 12:08 PM Permalink
Of course the story is a plant to introduce the hacking tools to cover the payment to Russians for dirt on a sitting POTUS by his own Intel Agency...
And CNN, MSNBC, etc are still wall to wall Trump impeachment... they no longer even pretend. Brain dead Erin Burnett opened with "the Republicans are at it again" to night (in my regular 30 secs of checking in for a laugh)!silvermail -> algol_dog Feb 10, 2018 11:55 AM Permalink
No shit, this is what I tell every Libtard when they cry the tired "Trump is corrupt and evil" meme. If there was ANYTHING on Trump, it would have oversaturated the airwaves 24/7 during his candidacy, and he would have never made it out of the primaries.
So which is it? Is he the world's greatest evil retard idiot, or a 9000+ IQ genius that is so slick and underhanded that he was able to collude with Putin, hide all evidence, and pull off the biggest caper in the history of the United States by sneaking into the Presidency? You can't have it both ways.
We must also give credit to the army of Russian bots that tell us how to think and act all day, where would we be without them?TheWholeYearInn Feb 10, 2018 11:38 AM Permalink
I propose impeachment to any US president for eating, drinking and visiting toilets!Global Hunter -> DosZap Feb 10, 2018 11:47 AM Permalink
What's the difference between prostitutes in a Moscow hotel room, or prostitutes in the FBI/DOJ?
I can't confirm price, so I will go with hotter (can't really confirm that either but Slavic chicks usually seem hot to me).
SRV -> DosZap Feb 10, 2018 11:54 AM Permalinkturkey george palmer -> SRV Feb 10, 2018 1:09 PM Permalink
Of course the story is a plant to introduce the hacking tools to cover the payment to Russians for dirt on a sitting POTUS by his own Intel Agency...
And CNN, MSNBC, etc are still wall to wall Trump impeachment... they no longer even pretend. Brain dead Erin Burnett opened with "the Republicans are at it again" to night (in my regular 30 secs of checking in for a laugh)!A Sentinel -> SRV Feb 10, 2018 1:21 PM Permalink
Fuckin eh right. That's probably the closest thing .vulcanraven -> DosZap Feb 10, 2018 12:08 PM Permalink
Damn good point. And the dates are off too. A 6+/- month zh article about the dark web had the nsa software downloadable long before 2017.
Gee. Why would someone date that hack into 2017? What was different between 2016 and 2017?
SMH Trying to figure that out.Winston Churchill -> buzzsaw99 Feb 10, 2018 12:02 PM Permalink
No shit, this is what I tell every Libtard when they cry the tired "Trump is corrupt and evil" meme. If there was ANYTHING on Trump, it would have oversaturated the airwaves 24/7 during his candidacy, and he would have never made it out of the primaries.
So which is it? Is he the world's greatest evil retard idiot, or a 9000+ IQ genius that is so slick and underhanded that he was able to collude with Putin, hide all evidence, and pull off the biggest caper in the history of the United States by sneaking into the Presidency? You can't have it both ways.
We must also give credit to the army of Russian bots that tell us how to think and act all day, where would we be without them?H-O-W Feb 10, 2018 11:46 AM Permalink
More than you know, whenever Russian is stated, replace with Ukrainian. TPTB cannot help themselves but push forward on another agenda as the current one falls apart. The Russophobia is still being stoked no matter what.
Steele was a double agent, maybe triple. British,Ukrainian and probably American. Does that start to make a little more sense ? Those huuuge donations to the CF from Ukraine, McStains involvement, Steele's early retirement from MI6, Brennan's frequent trips to Ukraine, State Dept.s role. Investigate the Chalupa sisters to find out who the rest of the rats are.Lee Stranahan started before he was shut down.buzzsaw99 Feb 10, 2018 11:48 AM Permalink
The more we learn,
The more it looks like the Russians set this up perfectly.
- Set Hillary up.
- Set Obama up.
- Set the DNC up.
- Set the media up.
They know these scumbags better than we do!Give Me Some Truth Feb 10, 2018 11:49 AM Permalink
the CIA has to turn America into a criminal totalitarian regime in order to make the world safe for democracy.desertboy -> Give Me Some Truth Feb 10, 2018 12:16 PM Permalink
Good point in the last sentence. If someone is going to "drain the swamp" it is going to have to be the president of the United States. I think I'm correct that he can fire anyone that works in the executive department for cause. He can also order investigations or hire people who will launch real investigations.
Mr. President, if you want to "drain the swamp," drain it.
P.S. You can start with an audit of The Fed.Anunnaki -> Thordoom Feb 10, 2018 12:24 PM Permalink
That last sentence assumes a rather critical fantasy.Dre4dwolf Feb 10, 2018 12:11 PM Permalink
The Tripod of Evil
- Deep State
- Corporate DemocratsLord Raglan Feb 10, 2018 12:12 PM Permalink
If there was a video it would of been leaked during the election, they have nothing that sticks on the guy.
All the evidence thus far states
Obama Hillary the FBI, DNC, CIA all spied on Trump and colluded with foreign governments (U.K. , Ukraine , Russia) to try and dig up dirt to use against Trump (and they more or less failed).
They turned over every rock they could, look at that stupid hot-mic video in the bus, how many hours of video did they have to go through to dig up that crumb? they went back searching through 30+ years of content and thats all they could come up with.... some locker room talk lol
People have to just face it.
Your government was and still is corrupt and its a weaponized system of control, Your government colluded with the enemy in a desperate attempt to stop Trump from becoming president. Your government started a sham "Russia investigation" to cover up its own crimes. Your government applied a different standard of justice to the clintons than it would have to you or anyone else.
To date ZERO evidence has been brought forward that Trump or anyone in his campaign did anything wrong, and the only people that have done anything wrong so far were picked by "the swamp" to fill positions..... all the others fell into petty perjury Traps on meaningless topics and insignificant factoids.navy62802 -> Lord Raglan Feb 10, 2018 12:16 PM Permalink
How much you wanna bet that Brennan, Obama's CIA Director, was behind buying this and thus, Obama and Hillary?Kelley Feb 10, 2018 12:16 PM Permalink
You mean the same Brennan who is the godfather of ISIS?desertboy Feb 10, 2018 12:20 PM Permalink
Isn't it lovely to find out that your money and mine is being used by government agents to give us the government they want?
It's sort of like a thug robbing you and using part of your money to pay another thug to rough you up from time time to time if you ask any questions with the thugs believing it's for our own good.
Thanks, Hillary, for looking out for us. You and your best buds are the best. Such bighearted givers! Meanwhile, give our regards to your partner in slime Obama, although it must pain you to have been bested by 'Beavis' who thinks so much of himself to balance out how little he impresses anyone who knows him.Consuelo Feb 10, 2018 12:22 PM Permalink
"U.S. intelligence officials told The Times" Sounds like the Donald is finally learning to cooperate better with his masters. They can call off the hounds.Kelley Feb 10, 2018 1:05 PM Permalink
Ok - so we have yet another (likely factual) story here of overt, in-your-face abuse of power and agency aimed directly at American citizens for political gain. And tomorrow? Probably another. And then another. Until: 'Bimbo Fatigue' Remember that phrase. If real justice isn't thrown down soon, you can forget it. Looks to me like (possibly) Trump imploring for public support - i.e., he can't do this himself, or it's too dangerous and he knows it...indaknow Feb 10, 2018 1:13 PM Permalink
As taxpayers can we sue the CIA for misusing our funds? Pretty sure that buying sex videos for commercial release isn't part of the CIA's lawful mandate even at bargain prices.hooligan2009 Feb 10, 2018 11:49 AM Permalink
Why is the CIA trying to purchase dirt on a sitting President in 2017! Because they have nothing on him! And they are desperate to not all hang by the neck. The times are trying to portray this as Russian intelligence sowing discord between the US intelligence agencies and Trump...Wrong! The US Intel agencies are sowing that discord all on their fucking own. They weren't fooled at all, they created this fucking mess for their own treasonous reasons and now want us to believe that hey...if we fucked up its because the big bad russkies tricked us.
It's not going to work.MusicIsYou Feb 10, 2018 1:14 PM Permalink
my sauces tell me that pink pussyhat wearing hollywood types have been called in because they have a doppelganger for trump and access to 30,000 sexually abused victims that can act as Russian prostitutes for just ten bucks each. snapchat has a trump emoji that can be transplanted onto any porn video star - male or female - thus confirming that trump is a serial (serious?) user of ladies of the night
my sauces also tell me that the CIA offers a reward of 100,000 bucks (or 10 BTC) for every photo-shopped (snap-shopped or porn-shopped) material.
of course, the CIA already owns many many porn movie studios and films, but it would prefer third "party" movies - not from epstein's island where its operatives choose to rela with a pizza.
the CIA "pink" budget for such movies is limited to just 5,000 clips or 5 billion of taxpayers funds, whichever is the higher.
awesome sauce hey?Robert A. Heinlein Feb 10, 2018 1:17 PM Permalink
For only $100,000 that's all? Now I know it's probably not true.hannah Feb 10, 2018 1:33 PM Permalink
'The Russian, who has ties to organized criminals and money launderers' wtf! So far the Russians are playing our CIA like a bunch of amateurs. And the deep state/dem's bought it hook, line and sinker. Trump was right again. Dem's and Russia are colluding against a duly elected Presidential candidate. I guess it's safe to say we need another order for more Rope. Dem's and deepshit state just can't get enough of hanging themselves. This ain't over by a long shot.RKae -> hannah Feb 10, 2018 1:47 PM Permalink
i call bullshit. you dont 'buy back' a software program that can be copied in 30 seconds. this whole story is a fabrication just like the dossier. made up to inflect bad info on to trump.
i call bullshit.Quantify Feb 10, 2018 1:38 PM Permalink
Yeah, I loved that one. "Here. I'm giving you back that software I ripped off from you. I copied it to this CD and then deleted it from my computer... You know: wiped it with a cloth."
And I love that the CIA thinks they can get away with a tale like that when everyone but my 90-year-old mother-in-law knows how a digital file works.RKae Feb 10, 2018 1:39 PM Permalink
The CIA is at the head of the shadow government.vofreason Feb 10, 2018 1:39 PM Permalink
So were these "patriotic" CIA superheroes interested in Bill Clinton's rapes, rapes and more rapes? Were they concerned that he was snorting coke and using Arkansas state troopers for procurers of hosebags for him to screw?
I mean if they're so concerned about Trump and a couple of hookers... Better put some ice on that, CIA.
You all are so ridiculous and fooled with your "drain the swamp" bs. It's a great idea but Trump doing it is a joke, I mean just look at who he has hired, what's wrong with you all are you blind?!!
He can't even fill 1/3 of the government positions he's supposed to and the ones he has have no business holding the positions given to them and are so incompetent, downright criminal or just personally horrendous humans that they can't stay in office more than a few months. All their blatant and moronically concocted lies are backing them into corners every day that they just try and lie out of again. America is over if we really have gotten to the point that a group like Trump's has support, it's just astonishing.
Feb 09, 2018 | www.unz.com
The most plausible hypothesis is that Steele was simply telling Fusion and the DNC what they wanted to hear to collect the money. When you go on a witch hunt you're going to find witches.
From the Nunes memo, there was, at the highest level of the FBI, a cabal determined to derail Trump and elect Clinton. Heading the cabal was Comey, who made the call to exonerate Hillary of criminal charges for imperiling national security secrets, even before his own FBI investigation was concluded.
Assisting Comey was Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose wife, running for a Virginia state senate seat, received a windfall of $467,000 in contributions from Clinton bundler Terry McAuliffe.
Last week, McCabe was discharged from the FBI. Seems that in late September 2016, he learned from his New York field office that it was sitting on a trove of emails between Anthony Weiner and his wife, Clinton aide Huma Abedin, which potentially contained security secrets.
Not until late October did Comey inform Congress of what deputy McCabe had known a month earlier.
Other FBI plotters were Peter Strzok, chief investigator in both the Clinton email server scandal and Russiagate, and his FBI girlfriend, Lisa Page. Both were ousted from the Mueller investigation when their anti-Trump bias and behavior were exposed last summer.
Filling out the starting five was Bruce Ohr, associate deputy attorney general under Loretta Lynch. In 2016, Ohr's wife was working for Fusion GPS, the oppo research arm of the Clinton campaign, and Bruce was in direct contact with Steele.
Now virtually all of this went down before Robert Mueller was named special counsel. But the poisoned roots of the Russiagate investigation and the bristling hostility of the investigators to Trump must cast a cloud of suspicion over whatever charges Mueller will bring.
Now another head may be about to fall, that of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
If Mueller has given up trying to prove Trump collusion with the Kremlin and moved on to obstruction of justice charges, Rosenstein moves into the crosshairs.
For the heart of any obstruction scenario is Trump's firing of James Comey and his boasting about why he did it.
But not only did Rosenstein discuss with Trump the firing of Comey, he went back to Justice to produce the document to justify what the president had decided to do.
How can Rosenstein oversee Mueller's investigation into the firing of James Comey when he was a witness to and a participant in the firing of James Comey?
The Roman poet Juvenal's question comes to mind. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who will watch the watchmen?
Consider where we are. Mueller is investigating alleged Trump collusion with Russia, and the White House is all lawyered up.
The House intel committee is investigating Clinton-FBI collusion to defeat Trump and break his presidency. FBI Inspector General Michael Horowitz is looking into whether the fix was in to give Hillary a pass in the probe of her email server.
Comey has been fired, his deputy McCabe removed, his chief investigator Strzok ousted by Mueller for bigoted anti-Trump behavior, alongside his FBI paramour, Page. Bruce Ohr has been demoted for colluding with Steele, who was caught lying to the FBI and fired, and for his wife's role in Fusion GPS, which was being paid to dig up dirt on Trump for Clinton's campaign
If Americans are losing confidence in the FBI, whose fault is that? Is there not evidence that a hubristic cadre at the apex of the FBI -- Comey, McCabe, Strzok foremost among them -- decided the Republic must be saved from Trump and, should Hillary fail, they would step in and move to abort the Trump presidency at birth?
To the deep state, the higher interests of the American people almost always coincide with their own.
Rurik , February 6, 2018 at 4:53 pm GMTAnonymous Disclaimer , February 6, 2018 at 7:39 pm GMT
a hubristic cadre at the apex of the FBI -- Comey, McCabe, Strzok foremost among them -- decided the Republic must be saved from Trump and, should Hillary fail, they would step in and move to abort the Trump presidency at birth?
Beautifully written article Mr. Buchanan
To the deep state, the higher interests of the American people almost always coincide with their own.
What it always looks like to me, is that the interests of the deep state never coincide with the actual interests of the American people, and that indeed, they are mutually incompatible.
It seems to me that one of, if not the main motivation of the deep state is to dismantle the American people's Constitutional rights, disarm then, and set about creating an Orwellian dystopia for the purpose of exerting total power over them.
Who doubts that Hillary's very grotesque existence is one big collective desire of a certain bent of people to wield total power over others? Why else would she publically cackle at the torture/murder of a man she disliked unless she figured her audience agreed that his murder was a good thing, and that once she came to power, that she's really get to the business of putting it to those deplorables but good! Not for anything they ever did, but for what they were – irredeemable.
In fact, I see the deep state today as an exact incarnation of Orwell's Ingsoc, with it's total surveillance police state, and all the other tyrannical state power abuses over every aspect of our lives. (Even with the ubiquitous televisions with the microphones and cameras monitored by the Ministry of Love)
we have the Newspeak speech codes on our universities. The places where our young and brightest are supposed to be taught to think, and they're doing the opposite- by creating mindless drones who parrot doubleplus good PC bromides.
we have the Eternal Wars
we have the ((inner party))
we have the two minute hate for the Hitler du jour, (Osama, Saddam, Gadhafi, Assad, now Putin )
we have the Ministry of Truth = msm fake news 24/7 lies and more lies
we have the Ministry of Love = Gitmo
we have the all pervasive fear that governs our conversations and alters our behavior. How many dare to discuss the inner party at dinner parties or at work? How many dare to flout the speech codes?
1984 was the most prescient book ever written, with a nod to The Protocols, as runner up. And the deep state today is nothing more than what Orwell was writing about. Men and women who seek power for its own sake. And have a deep-seated imperative to wield that power over others.
That's what the memo is about. Power-crazed assholes hell bent on putting their boot on our collective faces. And mashing it in.
who doubts, for one second, that John Brenan
(or Hillary or John McCain ) would relish the opportunity to put the metaphorical 'deplorable' in this chair?
for some reason, when I look at that photo, (a peek into the id of the deep state personality) I see Ron Paul in that chair, with Rudy Giuliani standing there, but it could just as easily be Edward Snowden in the chair, with Dick Cheney presiding..
But the reason I'm belaboring this Orwellian theme is because it is quintessentially salient to this subject of the deep state.
George really laid it all out for us, with the motivations and methods and thoughtcrimes and doublethink and all the rest@RurikRurik , February 7, 2018 at 12:36 am GMT
"George really laid it all out for us, with the motivations and methods and thoughtcrimes and doublethink and all the rest "
True enough, but it was Huxley who nailed the underlying theme that made it all possible; the people will trade all of their other rights for complete sexual freedom.@AnonymousMiro23 , February 7, 2018 at 4:53 am GMT
on them, and embraced their own genocide? No, no, no. That simply would not due!
There has to be some fun to it, and so you don't want them all to embrace their submission to the police state, since then what's the point?
They have to want to be free, and want to persevere, if enslaving them and replacing them is going to be any fun at all. You see?
And that's why Orwell's methods will win out over Huxley's. Because what fun is wielding power, unless your victims writhe under your lash?@RurikZ-man , February 7, 2018 at 6:02 am GMT
I agree, and you put it very clearly.
Orwell's 1984 was an exposition of Totalitarianism, with the Inner Party using these mechanisms because they work. Like you say, the whole package is now present in the US, although the Inner Party doesn't yet have sufficient power to use full state violence against the public.
But at some point they'll have to , since the system is based on the implicit threat of violence against dissidents, and it has to become explicit (social exclusion is not enough). So, realistically, the cabal needs a National Emergency with an official suspension of Democracy, probably using the framework for emergency rule already in place under Reagan era COG (Continuity of Government) legislation.
The 9/11 Coup was a failed attempt to activate a COG dictatorship under Cheney (halted by the events in Florida that morning), but the same planners will inevitably try again. Their private security depends on public insecurity, allowing them to turn the mechanisms of state power against the public, while paradoxically, they live by the integrity of this same hijacked state structure.
If the state should melt away in generalized anarchy, then the levers of power would no longer work, and they would face the fate of Ceausescu or Gaddafi – hence the deceptive Doublespeak of the "Patriot Act" and "Homeland Security".I'm not following this story much because it's boring but I will always be a fan of Nunes by the enemies he keeps. Ana Navarro, the 'Latina' battle-axe who is a 'Never Trump' 'Republitard' was on TV and made sure to let everybody know that Nunes was not an Hispanic. He's of Portugese decent, racial politics. LOL Devin Nunes is ok in my book. Hopefully he's not an Israeli firster.KenH , February 7, 2018 at 5:21 pm GMT@CorvinusMiro23 , February 7, 2018 at 7:57 pm GMT
Your information is wrong as always, Corvinky. The leftist "Russian collusion" narrative is collapsing and (((Seth))) and other lefties are desperate to keep it alive with spin and fake facts. That's why it's quietly changed from claims of collusion to obstruction of justice since there's no evidence of the former.
If there was other corroborating evidence then why absolutely no mention of it until now? If the (((lamestream media))) knew and sat on it then they are colluding with the Democrat party on how and what to report which we already know they do. And it proves that the (((media)) is hyper partisan and not independent but anyone with half a brain already knows that also.
If there was really any evidence of Trump collusion the NSA would have it, but they don't. In fact, it was the NSA that threatened to spill the beans on the origins of the Steele dossier if the FBI and DOJ failed did not come clean to the FISA court.@RurikMarkinLA , February 7, 2018 at 9:18 pm GMT
remember reading about this "suicide"
San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore. "Science is our best witness in this case. It is not biased and it doesn't lie."
According to police, Zahau bound her own hands and feet with a thick red rope and hanged herself naked off the second-floor balcony of a guest bedroom. She appeared to have secured one section of the rope to the footboard of the bed before she bound her feet, wrapped the rope around her neck, tied her hands behind her back, walked to the balcony, and propelled herself over the railing.
indeed, I suspect that it is because they so often get away with such things that this mega-wealthy Hollywood insider figured he'd also get away with it.
"Well, then," he said to the police, "I guess you'll have to find out who did it."
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/murder-mayhem-torture-sunset-strip-tragic-story-budding-director-his-dead-girlfriend-1068725@CorvinusRurik , February 7, 2018 at 9:37 pm GMT
Doesn't work that way in a criminal investigation. Man, you really have little clue how our legal system works.
Obviously, you don't either. As someone who was against the Clinton witch hunt that created a perjury trap when they couldn't get him on real charges related to Whitewater, I can see perfectly well that this is similar – drag this on and on until they can create some process crime.@Miro23Ilyana_Rozumova , February 8, 2018 at 1:50 am GMT
There's now a mountain of evidence that shows that they are lying, and the only way for US society to stabilize, is to pull every thread of the 9/11 shroud until the whole rotten enterprise is revealed, and the US public can see the plotters in daylight.
[Robert] Mueller took over the FBI one week before the 9/11 attacks
His protestations helped the Bush administration railroad the Patriot Act through Congress, vastly expanding the FBI's prerogatives to vacuum up Americans' personal information
whoever pulls down the "Democratic" facade will be doing the US a favour.
not just the US. They'll be doing the whole planet a favor. 9/11 has been the pretext for serial wars of aggression against nations that have done us no harm. It has been used as the pretext for the total police / surveillance state that has eviscerated our constitution, and rendered it a worthless piece of toilet paper, all to the bovine cud-chewing apathy of the dumbed down Americanus Bovinus. Who can't wait for the next Hollywood movie based on cartoon characters to come out on the big screen.
I was poised to leave this country if Hillary became potus, and still wonder if there's any hope at all.
These psychopaths are as bad as they get. These Straussian neocons and tribalist Jewish supremacists are bad news, man. Very, very bad news. They're ideologically driven by a Satanic imperative to dominate, and they will never, ever stop. Until they are stopped. And that would require a resolve that the Americanus Bovinus is endemically incapable of, because it necessitates a spiritual mettle that's been systematically bred out of them.
They'd rather embrace their smart device chains, than suffer the egregious enormity of breaking a societal taboo or politically correct norm. And this has all been very systematically constructed with schools that dumb them down, and universities that create slavish fealty to virtue signaling uber alles.
It's all so very tragic, because for one thing, these people had it made! They're the most wealthy and powerful demographic in the country. They enjoy assess and perks wildly out of proportion to their fellow Americans. But that is not enough! Then want that boot on everyone's neck and they want it now, God damn it!
So the world is driven to the brink to sate an insatiable appetite for grandiose megalomaniacal power. And once they have the power, what fun is that unless you use it?
George Soros doesn't want his son to see the fall of Europa and Western civilization, HE wants to see it! He wants to cackle like Hillary was able to over the murder of Gadhafi, only he want the stake though the heart of Hungary in particular.
It's this psychotic need of these people to see everyone else suffer, while they laugh at the misery, knowing that they caused it all. Whether it's in Palestine or Libya or Ferguson. Hate all day long, and with a bottomless pit of rancor and bile tossed in for good measure.
Hell, when I contemplate them and their obsession to hate, all day, every day, I almost feel pity. Almost.@RurikRurik , February 8, 2018 at 4:08 pm GMT
It is not lying.
It is damage control.@CassandraMarkinLA , February 8, 2018 at 10:01 pm GMT
hatred of Trump is such that a huge slice of the country would support his removal by extralegal, unconstitutional means. This is bigger than Watergate, a conspiracy at the highest levels, and before it's over, will decide the fate of the nation. I just hope Trump is up to the task.
I very much agree.
I know of liberals who're despondent, and nearly catatonic over Trump. I've heard it said they're psychologically in the fetal position, unable to cope with the ascendancy of Les Deplorables. Or, more precisely, the altering trajectory that doesn't have a demographic dagger being plunged into the necks of 'the irredeemables' and their children as we speak.
They've been so rapturous over the looming evisceration of heritage America for so long, that having to wait a few more extra years until that glorious day when the 'patriarchy' is dead and in its grave- is existential for them. Of course! they'd subvert our 'democracy' and Constitution and all notions of decency in their butt-hurt quest, since they've never had a shred of integrity to begin with. They don't even know what the word means, except as something to mock.
... ... ...@CorvinusLiberty Mike , February 8, 2018 at 10:14 pm GMT
I wonder why when I replace Mueller with Starr in your post I seem to get the same conclusion?
However, I will give you this, Mueller is a POS protecting the Deep State against somebody he deems not worthy of a seat at the table. Starr was a sanctimonious POS thinking he was leading a crusade to keep an uncouth lowbrow sleazeball out of an exalted position.@Rurik
However, I would suggest that some in the cabal have understood, all along, that in order for their dreams and plans to materialize, there would have to be a Long March through the institutions and while they were conquering the institutions, the masses would have to be given their breads and circuses.
A fellow traveler of our cause once said to me, words to the effect that, "they'll let you go on your football trips, and they'll let the drunks enjoy their Budweiser, and of course they'll let people go to the movies and out to dinner."
Mar 08, 2017 | www.frontpagemag.com
Troubling questions about "Umbrage" and potential false-flag attacks. 53
The Central Intelligence Agency now can mimic foreign intelligence agencies' hack attacks by leaving electronic "fingerprints" creating the false impression of a foreign intrusion into computer networks, according to claims accompanying a new WikiLeaks document dump.
In other words, there may not be hard evidence that CIA operatives, say, used cyberspace to create a modern-day Reichstag fire to undermine the Trump administration, but it may be the case that the CIA has the technological capabilities to do such a thing, if it were so inclined.
This assertion that the CIA can hack computer networks and leave behind convincing evidence that somebody else did it, comes with the release by WikiLeaks of a huge collection of documents – 8,761 items in all – collectively dubbed the "Vault 7" leaks that purport to describe espionage techniques used by the CIA. The Vault 7 collection is said to have come from a former U.S. government hacker or contractor associated with "an isolated, high-security network" within the CIA's Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Va. The files made public don't include the actual cyber weapons themselves which WikiLeaks says it will not release for the time being.
This documentary agglomeration covers "the entire hacking capacity of the CIA," Julian Assange's WikiLeaks claimed in a press release, and it is only the first in a series of what he calls the "Year Zero" leaks.
The Year Zero label has a decidedly sinister quality to it and may offer clues into what WikiLeaks hopes to accomplish with these new leaks, apparently the most significant and damaging to the U.S. intelligence community since former NSA contractor Edward Snowden handed over thousands of classified U.S. documents to journalists in 2013.
Year Zero was used by the bloodthirsty Khmer Rouge when it seized power in Cambodia in 1975. The term is analogous to Year One of the French Revolutionary calendar, which implied a violent break with the old system and the merciless leveling of existing institutions.
As one online resource states:
The idea behind Year Zero is that all culture and traditions within a society must be completely destroyed or discarded and a new revolutionary culture must replace it, starting from scratch. All history of a nation or people before Year Zero is deemed largely irrelevant, as it will ideally be purged and replaced from the ground up. In Cambodia, so-called New People -- teachers, artists, and intellectuals -- were especially singled out and executed during the purges accompanying Year Zero.
According to WikiLeaks, "[t]he CIA's Remote Devices Branch's UMBRAGE group collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques 'stolen' from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation."
With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the "fingerprints" of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.
If this new information about "Umbrage" is accurate, this means that, as stated above, the CIA could hack people and institutions and then attribute the cyber-attacks to others in what amount to false-flag operations. For example, in order to create the impression that a foreign power favored one political candidate over another, the CIA or unseen rogue elements with access to "Umbrage," could have hacked into Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee and made it appear that the intrusion was carried out by former KGB lieutenant colonel Vladimir Putin's operatives.
That Russians hacked Clinton and the DNC and gave Trump an unfair advantage in the election is precisely what Democrats allege. Is such a scenario in which U.S. operatives hack one political party to help another at least a little far-fetched?
You bet it is. But given what we've learned about the CIA's anti-Trump shenanigans in recent months, it seems unwise to reflexively rule out the possibility that that's how things could have gone down. Espionage, after all, is all about deception and covering tracks. Things aren't what they seem and the motives of those creating an illusion aren't easily discerned.
On the positive side, "Umbrage," if it is a real thing, is a powerful innovation in tradecraft and an indication that American cyberwarfare is soaring to dizzying new heights.
On the other hand, combine "Umbrage" with the seemingly invincible false narrative that President Donald Trump is a tool of Russian interests, and plenty of Americans would be willing to believe Trump really does have substantial ties to the Kremlin, something that has not been proven. Even now there is still no publicly available evidence the Trump campaign somehow colluded with the Russian government last year. Sources in newspaper articles are never identified. All that exists is the alleged say-so of faceless CIA spooks and people like former CIA employee and would-be presidential spoiler Evan McMullin whose motives are questionable.
It is hard to know what to believe.
And it opens the door to head-spinning possibilities and far-out theories.
As investigative journalist Jerome Corsi writes of Vault 7 and "Umbrage":
This revelation yields a "through the looking glass" possibility that the Obama administration obtained [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] permission to conduct electronic surveillance on Russians believed to be coordinating with the Trump campaign based on intelligence the CIA planted to deceive the NSA into thinking there was actual contact between Russian agents and the Trump campaign.
Possibly, what the CIA was monitoring was not actual contacts between Russian agents and the Trump campaign, but CIA-created counter-espionage designed to implicate Trump and provide the legal context for the [Department of Justice] to have enough "evidence" to obtain a FISA green-light.
This kind of double-level thinking is enough to give anyone a throbbing headache.
Vault 7 also includes eye-opening developments worthy of James Bond 007 and Q Branch.
According to WikiLeaks, the CIA recently "lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized 'zero day' exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation." These cyber weapons can be used "against a wide range of U.S. and European company products, [including] Apple's iPhone, Google's Android and Microsoft's Windows and even Samsung TVs, which are turned into covert microphones."
Something called "Weeping Angel" was created by the CIA's Embedded Devices Branch to infest smart televisions.
"After infestation, Weeping Angel places the target TV in a 'Fake-Off' mode, so that the owner falsely believes the TV is off when it is on. In 'Fake-Off' mode the TV operates as a bug, recording conversations in the room and sending them over the Internet to a covert CIA server."
Another technique allows the CIA "to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the 'smart' phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic before encryption is applied."
"As of October 2014," WikiLeaks claims, "the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks. The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations."
Despite all this intrigue, it needs to be said that the CIA does some valuable work to advance U.S. interests in the world. It's a shame that it has come to be dominated by left-wingers over the years.
There is, though, a certain logic to the agency's slide to port. Not all self-styled do-gooders, after all, land jobs in the nonprofit sector. A leftist member of the intelligence community is fundamentally the same as a community organizer who is convinced he knows what is best for his fellow man.
And left-wingers in all occupations are willing to do whatever it takes to accomplish their objectives.
In the summer 2001 issue of Social Policy magazine, Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) founder Wade Rathke urged his comrades to get in on the ground floor of the cyber-warfare revolution:
Crazy, computer viruses are started by young kids around the world or hackers bored out of their skulls that live right down the street. As union organizers we are still doing 8 point difficulty dumpster dives for alpha lists of employees, when theoretically some good geeks could tap in, load up, and download the whole thing and throw it over our transom window. What a waste of talent when such a huge contribution could be made to the labor movement.
Maybe Rathke missed his calling.
Matthew Vadum, senior vice president at the investigative think tank Capital Research Center, is an award-winning investigative reporter and author of the book, " Subversion Inc.: How Obama's ACORN Red Shirts Are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers ."
Feb 08, 2018 | wearechange.org
Article via Strategic-Culture
New revelations from Wikileaks' 'Vault 7' leak shed a disturbing light on the safeguarding of privacy. Something already known and largely suspected has now become documented by Wikileaks. It seems evident that the CIA is now a state within a state, an entity out of control that has even arrived at the point of creating its own hacking network in order to avoid the scrutiny of the NSA and other agencies.
Reading the revelations contained in the documents released by WikiLeaks and adding them to those already presented in recent years by Snowden, it now seems evident that the technological aspect regarding espionage is a specialty in which the CIA, as far as we know, excels. Hardware and software vendors that are complicit -- most of which are American, British or Israeli -- give the CIA the opportunity to achieve informational full-spectrum dominance, relegating privacy to extinction.
Such a convergence of power, money and technology entails major conflicts of interest, as can be seen in the case of Amazon AWS (Amazon's Cloud Service), cloud provider for the CIA , whose owner, Jeff Bezos, is also the owner of The Washington Post .
It is a clear overlap of private interests that conflicts with the theoretical need to declare uncomfortable truths without the need to consider orders numbering in the millions of dollars from clients like the CIA.
While it is just one example, there are thousands more out there. The perverse interplay between media, spy agencies and politicians has compromised the very meaning of the much vaunted democracy of the land of the Stars and Stripes. The constant scandals that are beamed onto our screens now serve the sole purpose of advancing the deep interest of the Washington establishment. In geopolitical terms, it is now more than obvious that the deep state has committed all available means toward sabotaging any dialogue and détente between the United States and Russia.
In terms of news, the Wikileaks revelations shed light on the methods used by US intelligence agencies like the CIA to place blame on the Kremlin, or networks associated with it, for the hacking that occurred during the American elections.
Perhaps this is too generous a depiction of matters, given that the general public has yet to see any evidence of the hacking of the DNC servers. In addition to this, we know that the origin of Podesta's email revelations stem from the loss of a smartphone and the low data-security measures employed by the chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.
In general, when the 16 US spy agencies blamed Russia for the hacking of the elections, they were never specific in terms of forensic evidence. Simply put, the media, spies and politicians created false accusations based on the fact that Moscow, together with RT and other media (not directly linked to the Kremlin), finally enjoy a major presence in the mainstream media.
The biggest problem for the Washington establishment lies in the revelation of news that is counterproductive to the interests of the deep state. RT, Sputnik, this site and many others have diligently covered and reported to the general public every development concerning the Podesta revelations or the hacking of the DNC.
Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Last night's release of the memo by Senator's Grassley and Graham asking the Department of Justice to open a criminal investigation of Christopher Steele for possible violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 provides critical confirmation of charges presented in the HPSCI memo prepared under the leadership of Devin Nunes, but it also confirms that Christopher Steele was not just some random guy offering good gossip to the FBI. He was an official intelligence asset. He was, in John LeCarre's parlance, our "Joe." At least we thought so. But, there is growing circumstantial evidence that Steele was acting on behalf of Britain's version of the CIA--aka MI-6. If true, we are now faced with actual evidence of a foreign country trying to meddle in a direct and significant way in our national election. Only it was not the Russians. It was our British cousins.
Here are the key take aways from the Grassley/Graham memo :
- The FBI has since provided the Committee access to classified documents relevant to the FBI's relationship with Mr. Steele and whether the FBI relied on his dossier work. . . .it appears that either Mr. Steele lied to the FBI or the British court, or that the classified documents reviewed by the Committee contain materially false statements.
- October 21, 2016, the FBI filed its first warrant application under FISA for Carter Page. . .The bulk of the application consists of allegations against Page that were disclosed to the FBI by Mr. Steele and are also outlined in the Steele dossier. The application appears to contain no additional information corroborating the dossier allegations against Mr. Page, although it does cite to a news article that appears to be sourced to Mr. Steele's dossier as well.
- March 17, 2017 --the Chairman and Ranking Member were provided copies of the two relevant FISA applications, which requested authority to conduct surveillance of Carter Page. Both relied heavily on Mr. Steele's dossier claims, and both applications were granted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).
- December of 2017 , the Chairman, Ranking Member, and Subcommittee Chairman Graham were allowed to review a total of four FISA applications relying on the dossier to seek surveillance of Mr. Carter Page, as well as numerous other FBI documents relating to Mr. Steele.
- When asked at the March 2017 briefing why the FBI relied on the dossier in the FISA applications absent meaningful corroboration--and in light of the highly political motives surrounding its creation--then Director Corney stated that the FBI included the dossier allegations about Carter Page in the FISA applications because Mr. Steele himself was considered reliable due to his past work with the Bureau.
- In short, it appears the FBI relied on admittedly uncorroborated information , funded by and obtained for Secretary Clinton's presidential campaign, in order to conduct surveillance of an associate of the opposing presidential candidate. It did so based on Mr. Steele's personal credibility and presumably having faith in his process of obtaining the information.
- . . . the FBI continued to cite to Mr. Steele's past work as evidence of his reliability, and stated that ''the incident that led to the FBI suspending its relationship with [Mr. Steele] occurred after [Mr. Steele] provided" the FBI with the dossier infonnation described in the application. The FBI further asserted in footnote 19 that it did not ,believe that Steele directly gave information to Yahoo News that "published the September 23 News Article."
The Grassley/Graham memo is devastating for Jim Comey. We can entertain only two possibilities--Jim Comey is a monumental dunce or he is a liar. One need only read the Michael Isikoff piece from 23 September 2016 to realize that Christopher Steele was a primary source for Isikoff. We are asked to believe that Comey is a naive, trusting soul bereft of curiosity, who refused to entertain the possibility that Steele was double dealing intel.
One of the most surprising revelations from the Grassley/Graham memo is in footnote 7. I'm surprised this was not redacted because it is drawn from a redacted/blacked out paragraph. Here is a critical bit of intel:
- The FBI has failed to provide the Committee the 1023s documenting all of Mr. Steele's statements to the FBI, so the Committee is relying on the accuracy of the FBI's representation to the FISC regarding those statements.
This means Steele was a signed up intelligence asset for the FBI. He was our spy. A FD-1023 is an FBI form used to document meetings between FBI and sources. It is also called a CHS Report--CHS aka Confidential Human Source. Here is an example posted by a Trump supporter on Twitter :
With this confirmation the next move is in the hands of the Brits. If Steele became an FBI asset without the knowledge of his former colleagues and chain of command, he faces legal risk. But two development in the last two days suggest that British intelligence officials, at least some key officials, were witting of Steele's activities in gathering information for the FBI.
First, Steele is resisting efforts to face a deposition in a lawsuit over his infamous dossier. Steele's lawyers argued in a court in London this week that a deposition would endanger the former spy's dossier sources as well as harm U.K. national security interests. If the Judge buys this claim then we will not have to speculate anymore about whether or not Steele was acting on his own or had a "wink-and-a-nod" from his MI-6 bosses.
Second, in my mind more telling, were the comments made this week by former MI-6 Chief, Richard Dearlove, on behalf of his former protege:
Among those who have continued to seek his expertise is Steele's former boss Richard Dearlove, who headed MI6 from 1999 to 2004. In an interview, Dearlove said Steele became the "go-to person on Russia in the commercial sector" following his retirement from the Secret Intelligence Service. He described the reputations of Steele and his business partner, fellow intelligence veteran Christopher Burrows, as "superb."
But we do not have to rely solely on Dearlove's glowing remarks about Steele. There is other information indicating that the Brits played a substantial, if not leading, role in spying on Trump and building the Russian meddling meme. The Guardian reported in April 2017 that:
Britain's spy agencies played a crucial role in alerting their counterparts in Washington to contacts between members of Donald Trump's campaign team and Russian intelligence operatives, the Guardian has been told.
GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious "interactions" between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.
Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump's inner circle and Russians, sources said.
So much for our special relationship. As the evidence of British intelligence meddling in the U.S. election piles up it will create some strains in our bi-lateral ties. It has the potential to harm cooperation on military, law enforcement and intelligence fronts. I suspect there is some scrambling going on behind the scenes to come up with a strategy to contain the damage while rooting out the sedition. Stay tuned. Reply 07 February 2018 at 04:20 PM
Prem , 07 February 2018 at 04:22 PMIf it happened, the motivation would have been to curry favour with HRC, whom everybody assumed would be elected.SmoothieX12 , 07 February 2018 at 04:25 PM
Of course, we are only getting a partial view of what happened. Clinton family retainers also had contacts with Russia; it's just not been reported much. And Russia was unlikely to have been the only nation to break the unwritten rule that only Israel is allowed to interfere in US politics - Saudi Arabia, Germany, France, Ukraine etc were almost certainly doing it too.Clueless Joe , 07 February 2018 at 04:38 PM
Steele became the "go-to person on Russia in the commercial sector" following his retirement from the Secret Intelligence Service. He described the reputations of Steele and his business partner, fellow intelligence veteran Christopher Burrows, as "superb."
London-Russian "oligarchy" there, with a very specific outlook on Russia-UK's track record in anti-Russian activities---> hence Steele's sources. Anything Russia-related in Anglo-American IC can not be treated as "superb" or even moderately "good" at all.
I am waiting for Nunes memo on State Department. I am in no position to pass judgements on any legal, let alone operational "superbity" of, say MI-6 but and if it had intentions of influencing US elections (which is scandalous in itself) it is one thing, but in circles it all comes back to this Dossier which stunk to heaven from the get go. In circles less sophisticated than MI-6 it is known as disinformation, which, of course, the first indication of operation of influence. The decision to "believe" in this cocktail of rumors, lies and hearsay was made in Washington, not London.Trump had planned to visit UK this month but cancelled it a few weeks ago. Any possibility that might not just be due to expected protests and lack of British enthusiasm, but also as retaliation after he learned the MI6 and/or GCHQ involvement in this affair? (apparently he's considering a visit late this year, in which case he might have got some assurances that British agencies will stop messing up, or UK authorities will now collaborate with his team)BLL , 07 February 2018 at 04:50 PMCouldn't help but notice the FBI form you used as an example disclosed the sex of the "he/she" informant.Virginia Slim , 07 February 2018 at 04:58 PMQuite an intrigue, isn't it? It reminds one rather of the Tukhachevsky affair.John Minnerath , 07 February 2018 at 05:02 PMAll,Cvillereader said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 07 February 2018 at 05:14 PM
An endlessly convoluted can of worms impossible for anyone not completely up to speed on subjects like this to get a grip on.Reportedly, the Democrat House Intelligence Committee memo contains a great deal of information on Page's background. It will be interesting to see if it survives the declassification process.SmoothieX12 -> Virginia Slim... , 07 February 2018 at 05:15 PM
From the Grassley letter, it doesn't sound like a lot of this information was included in the FISA warrant. If that is the case, one has to wonder why it wasn't.Quite an intrigue, isn't it? It reminds one rather of the Tukhachevsky affair.Navsteva , 07 February 2018 at 05:26 PM
In procedural terms, yes. On substance, no--most of it is as clear as a day. Per Tukhacevsky--his affair is not even in the same league as what is transpiring now in the US. The stakes here are immense since American statehood is under attack. As per Tuchachevsky--he wasn't that good of a general to start with (certainly technologically not astute). Plus, there is a whole other dimension to his, and others, story which should not be discussed in this thread.Excellent summary. Obvious reasons for British meddling in U.S. elections: Trump's pre-election statements on NATO, desire to improve relations with Russia, related Russian sanctions, etc.The Twisted Genius -> blue peacock... , 07 February 2018 at 05:31 PMblue peacock,Cvillereader said in reply to blue peacock... , 07 February 2018 at 05:37 PM
I don't think a Title 1 FISA warrant gives the FBI any additional surveillance capability beyond what could be gained by surveilling a controlled source. In either case the FBI would be listening to all those who came in contact with Page. That's why I have serious doubts about Page being a controlled FBI source/informant. A FISA warrant is just not necessary if the target is already a controlled source/informant. I believe I read somewhere Comey had the FBI surveil himself in order to listen in on conversations he had with White House officials. It didn't take a FISA warrant for that. (Actually, I'm surprised we haven't heard more outrage about this.) In either case I don't think the FBI gets access to retroactive surveillance except for the specific target of the surveillance.
As I mentioned in our earlier conversation, I'm surprised the SVR would try to recruit Page after their earlier experience with him. He's the reason they lost three SVR officers. He was a witness for the Federal prosecution rather than a controlled informant. Years later he looked like a dangle with his trips to Moscow. He's either a clueless idiot or an operator worthy of the title, ace of spies. The questions about his true status are legitimate and worth pursuing.
Was that compliance review you refer to the same one that was released by Coats earlier this year? That long (99 pages or so) report was an annual review conducted by the FISC of all NSA, CIA and FBI FISA activities. It wasn't anything specific initiated by Rogers.
Why was Page let go by the Trump campaign? Perhaps the FBI did tip the campaign off to his Russian connections. Obama warned Trump not to get involved with Flynn.He may have been an accomplice for someone other than the FBI.The Twisted Genius -> Eric Newhill... , 07 February 2018 at 05:41 PM
It might be a mistake to think that state actors would have been the only folks interested in obtaining intelligence about Trump.
It has been reported that he worked on the Clinton transition team in 1992. He was also some kind of liaison to Congress under Les Aspin. His specialty involved nuclear weapons.Eric Newhill,Jack , 07 February 2018 at 05:49 PM
reference your comment at #6
You make a good point about Page not having access to Trump or the Trump campaign or transition team when he was under the FISA warrant and three renewals. I think this was because the target of the Page surveillance was the Russian connection, not Trump himself. An investigation should proceed from established facts rather than some presumed and unsubstantiated conclusion. And I'm pretty sure there are other warrants. Whether they're based on the Steele material I don't know.PTwisedupearly Ceo , 07 February 2018 at 05:52 PMWe can entertain only two possibilities--Jim Comey is a monumental dunce or he is a liar.
All these guys were certain Hillary would win the election. They were convinced their lawlessness would be rewarded and their subterfuge would be conveniently buried.
Unfortunately for them the voters in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin decided otherwise. So they tried to create the casus belli for impeachment. That has now failed. Where this leads to is anyone's guess.So, the Brits passing GCHQ intel that they are seeing suspicious indicators re. TRUMP - Russian contacts to us via long-established channels is now seen as "interfering with our elections"? Not realistic. Preliminary intel is always 99% uncorroborated. Sad, but true.Barbara Ann -> Navsteva ... , 07 February 2018 at 05:53 PM
Should the Brits have waited for full corroboration before informing us? Hell, no. As I understand it we get everything automatically. Nothing is withheld, that is the nature of the special relationship.
So to answer the title, if Brit intel fabricated the indicators then yes, they did try to destroy the Trump Campaign. Otherwise no.
Is Steele an FBI spy or is he a source? Unclear.
If Steele is a still active Brit spy then he should have been declared as such under existing MOA. Could he be NOC for the Brits? Unlikely given his direct involvement with IC on intel matters.
Did Steele leak the story to Yahoo News? Steele says he briefed several newspapers, only Yahoo published.
The Yahoo article, written by Isikoff September 24, states "The activities of Trump adviser Carter Page, who has extensive business interests in Russia, have been discussed with senior members of Congress during recent briefings about suspected efforts by Moscow to influence the presidential election, the sources said. "
So the number of people read into the STEELE reports is significant.
So the questions should be
- Did Brit intel fabricate the initial indicators?
- Did Steele fabricate his findings?
- Was Steele played by material released by third parties?
- How many other FISA warrants are there?
- Has Gowdy stated that the PAGE warrant was issued illegally?And equally obvious that getting caught meddling in US elections would have catastrophic consequences for all involved, as we may shortly witness. If the British IC did have anything to do with this, it begs the question; what was worth the colossal risk?wisedupearly Ceo , 07 February 2018 at 06:01 PMAddendum: can we all agree that if the STEELE intel was a genuine attempt to ensure Trump's failure in the election then the effort was the most inept operation in a long time?Eric Newhill said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 07 February 2018 at 06:17 PM
The only STEELE memo that had any chance of doing any material damage was the pee-pee tapes. Trump supporters thought it was "cute". As Trump himself said "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Trump said at a campaign rally. He was not joking and who knows his supporters better than Trump.TTG #20LondonBob said in reply to Clueless Joe... , 07 February 2018 at 06:24 PM
Thx for the reply. As you know I like Trump a lot and I don't like all I have seen going on to subvert his presidency (e.g. the MSM 24/7 fake news bashing on him, Soros organized riots). That said, I try to be as objective as possible.
I am simply not seeing the connection between spying on Page and spying on Trump. There has been no evidence released that even suggests it happened. I watched Tucker Carlson and Hannity this week and both are saying that the FBI spied on a POTUS candidate and on a sitting president (Trump in both instances, of course). I had to stop myself, clear my head and think for minute. I don't see it. They spied on Page and most likely anyone he talked to/met with, but that's not Trump nor anyone in Trump's inner circle.
Maybe it will come out that Trump and his inner circle were spied on. Maybe the FISA warrant was construed to permit that. Maybe they just did it regardless of legality. Maybe that's what all these GOP releases are leading up to.
However, at this point, I see a lot of smoke and mirrors on both sides. The GOP is using the Page warrant to damage the FBI (well deserved, apparently) and Mueller's investigation. The dems are using the existence of the warrant on Page to insinuate that Trump campaign needs to be investigated b/c they had a Ruskie mole amongst them and a bunch of other stuff about collusion that Clinton and Steele pulled out of their asses.
In the midst of this is Carter Page, an obviously self-absorbed/self-promoting goofy homosexual that is always trying to get close to power and failing, who never met Trump and who never has yet been shown to have contributed anything to the Trump campaign - and who has an annoying habit of pretending to connections and knowledge that he doesn't really have; and getting himself in hot water in the course of doing so.
Until more is revealed - or someone explains how it could be otherwise - I am beginning to think that the entire focus on Page means nothing more than the exposure of a corrupt FBI playing fast and loose w/ FISA. All of the recently revealed FBI invective toward Trump and talk of "insurance policies" is highly suggestive, but that's it [at this point].
My spider sense says it will be revealed that Trump himself was sureveilled - that and a buck 50 gets me a ride on the cross town bus.Joe I think such things would have been discussed when PM May rushed to see Trump after his election. I have always assumed that was the reason for the rushed visit. Due to his mother Trump is desperate to see the Queen and will do so when the time is right.james said in reply to Barbara Ann ... , 07 February 2018 at 06:27 PM
Plausible but I still think any activities would have been done with the approval of, or more likely at the behest of, Brennan, Clapper et al. After all it is the former British Foreign Secretary who heads up the International Rescue Committee, rather than say John Kerry being the overpaid head of an NGO in London with MI6 links.going after russia is considered being worth the risk... that is what it looks like to me.. just imagine a multi polar world when you are so used to viewing it as a unipolar one.... i see the ''''us-led''' coalition is now bombing the syrian army again, this time under the guise they, or the sdf - were under attack... whether the usa imposes words like democatic on the name tag, or does much more - is not in question.. does the usa have a right to be in syria? not really.. they are said to be going after isis, but that looks as phony as a 2$ bill to me personally..Cvillereader said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 07 February 2018 at 06:37 PM
https://www.rt.com/news/418164-coalition-airstrikes-syrian-forces/I have noticed that you keep posing the same question about Gowdy, as have some prominent twitterers. Since a Gowdy is an attorney and was a federal prosecutor, I wonder whether there are professional restrictions on him in terms of declaring a person's guilt. Do congressional investigations ever pronounce that someone is guilty of a crime? Or is it customary for such investigations to make a referral to the Justice Department?SmoothieX12 -> Jack... , 07 February 2018 at 06:39 PMAll these guys were certain Hillary would win the election. They were convinced their lawlessness would be rewarded and their subterfuge would be conveniently buried. Unfortunately for them the voters in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin decided otherwise.LondonBob said in reply to Jack... , 07 February 2018 at 06:39 PM
Exactly, one of those cases when what we broadly define as democracy actually worked and very effectively at that. You see, it is one thing to give it a lip service, totally another live with the consequences of democracy actually working. Many people in Washington still cannot resign themselves to the fact that people can actually have their own voice--what a novel concept for them.I think it was more reactive, they had all been complicit in a number of illegal activities and they were worried they would all go down if Trump won. They obviously got more and more desperate, digging themselves a deeper and deeper hole.wisedupearly Ceo , 07 February 2018 at 06:42 PMCortes said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 07 February 2018 at 06:43 PMAddendum: can we all agree that if the STEELE intel was a genuine attempt to ensure Trump's failure in the election then the effort was the most inept operation in a long time?
Only two ways in which Trump candidacy could be destroyed once he was nominated. Official: Trump is charged with conspiring with a foreign government to materially damage America. Public: Trump is maligned as being an tool of the Russians.
Official is unlikely as no evidence to date has any chance of being used for an indictment. Not saying that the charges are false just that what was released prior to election was insufficient.
Public: most likely avenue. But the details released were not impressive or determinative to the majority of Trump supporters who I see as being more anti-establishment than anti-Russian. True, you could expect the GOP elite to be disturbed but they were anti-Trump before his nomination and wedded to him after.A court may err due to failings of its judges in interpretation or application of the law, but it doesn't act illegally. The article at The Duran by Alexander Mercouris previously referred to by richardstevenhack exploring how the officers of court (lawyers) in the DOJ/FBI were somewhat economical in making their pitches for the Page warrants may have disadvantaged the judge or judges who, with fuller information, may have reached a different determination, might provide answers to your other questions. Due process should apply to all, not at whim.Publius Tacitus -> The Twisted Genius ... , 07 February 2018 at 08:12 PMThe Steele dossier is central to the public meme that Trump was colluding with the Russians. All of the major news stories on the subject were based on what Steele told them.wisedupearly Ceo -> Cvillereader... , 07 February 2018 at 08:24 PMI keep posting it because if stated it is an extremely powerful indicator. I believe that Gowdy can make a statement as to legality with no constraint other than not exposing national secrets. If he was constrained I would expect him to make reference to said constraint. Before we waste time with rabbit holes of choice we need to agree on what is known.J , 07 February 2018 at 08:39 PM"Did British Intelligence Try to Destroy the Trump Presidency?" Yes. That is why Steele is trying so hard to keep the Russian lawyers from deposing him in a London court. The Russians are on the scent, and Steele and his MI6 handlers know it.Cvillereader said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 07 February 2018 at 08:45 PM
Are British Intelligence 'Still' Trying to Destroy the Trump Presidency? Yes.It has been suggested that Trey Gowdy be appointed as a special prosecutor to look into how the DOJ/FBI handled the Steele dossier. Would not an accusation of guilt by Gowdy disqualify him from that job?jpb said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 07 February 2018 at 08:51 PM
Also, I don't think we understand yet what records the HPSCI has been given access to. Fox News is reporting that Nunes may go the FISC court and ask them to release all records and transcripts related to the Page FISA warrants. If that is the case, then it is too early for any one on the HPSCI to make conclusions about illegality.
I think you are also ignoring what is happening with respect to both Grassley's and Goodlatte's investigations.
It appears that the committees may be working in tandem to destroy the Democrats' narrative. The idea is not to put all your cards on the table at once.Trey Gowdy says Sidney Blumenthal is the 'domestic' source of the information in the Steele Dossier. Gowdy doesn't say the Steele Dossier is illegal, but it appears it was obtained by illegal conspiracy of DJT's political enemies.Rhondda , 07 February 2018 at 09:59 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzkOaHTkDpU (12:00 minutes in)Thank you for this important post, PT. You've really captured some arresting details. The Grassley/Graham document is impressive, isn't it? I have been highly critical of both men in the past but credit where credit is due: good work, specific, particular, devastating. And at a tough time when taking sides makes enemies and draws fire.J , 07 February 2018 at 10:16 PM
This is all rather depressing, seeing how rotten things are. And worse to come, I think. So I wanted to share with the Committee something that made me laugh, albeit in a rather black comedy sort of way.
To that end, here follows some "glowing remarks" about Steele's dossier and sources, from Mark Galeotti, the man that Simpson, in his testimony has called "very learned" and a "distinguished scholar":
When asked what efforts he had made to "corroborate or verify" the dossier's assertions, Simpson seems to have Googled the name Ivanov:
"As I dug into some of the more obscure academic work -- how the Kremlin operates by some of the more distinguished scholars of the subject, I found that Ivanov is, in fact, or was at the time, in fact, the head of a sort of internal kind of White House plumber's operation for the Kremlin and that he seemed to have the kind of duties that were being described in this memo. "
In his August testimony, providing an example as to what effort had been made to "corroborate or verify" the dossier's assertions, Glenn Simpson references Galeotti in re Sechin: "In particular I remember reading a paper by a superb academic expert whose name is Mark Galeotti, G-A-L-E-O-T-T-I, who's done a lot of work on the Kremlin's black operations and written quite widely on the subject and is very learned. So that would have given me comfort that whoever Chris is talking to they know what they're talking about."
He must be talking about this: http://www.ecfr.eu/page/-/ECFR_169_-_PUTINS_HYDRA_INSIDE_THE_RUSSIAN_INTELLIGENCE_SERVICES_1513.pdf
I wouldn't call publications of the European Council on Foreign Relations "obscure." It was on page 2 of my Google search results. Just sayin'. And call me unrepentant foil-hatter, but Galeotti strikes me as about as much scholar as Simpson is journalist.
So Steele named some names and Simpson "did that work" of what appears to have been -- simply looking 'em up on the internet. There he saw some "scholars" and "learned" experts saying some of the same things Steele had said -- and so he believed it was all true. I guess world class journalist Simpson, who once worked for the Moonie Insight Magazine, had never heard of the disinformation tactic of mixing a dash of true with a pound of false. It would be sad -- if I believed he was actually such a babe in the woods.
But hoo boy, wish I could get paid $50k a month to look things up on the internet!
OK. Now for the amusing part. The 'very learned scholar' Mr. Mark Galeotti has since offered his opinion of the Steele dossier and it's rather more a radioactive kind of glowing remarks.
"The trouble with the Trump Dossier is that it's a recognizable product of a specific milieu: If you spend an evening or two in the bars where Moscow's chattering classes hang out, you'll hear an equal complement of political tall tales about Putin and his presidential administration. The kind of gossip that fills the Trump Dossier is common currency in Moscow, even if very little of it has any authority behind it aside from the speaker's own imagination. Any experienced observer learns to filter gossip for the stray useful clues that are sometimes hidden within curlicues of fantasy. The author of the Trump Dossier, though, appears enthusiastically to have transcribed every bit of tittle-tattle that fit the overarching narrative of a grand Kremlin scheme to elevate Donald Trump to the presidency."
Ouch! I found this quite amusing, I hope it adds some levity to your day, as well.PT,Tyler , 07 February 2018 at 10:24 PM
Here is some more The Russians are coming garbage coming out of DHS https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-07/dhs-russia-penetrated-voter-rolls-21-states-no-evidence-alterations And there is a lot of big money behind the Anti -Russia campaign. http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2018/february/07/your-guide-to-top-anti-russia-think-tanks-in-us-who-funds-them/
Basically Hillary bought herself a FISA warrant...Fred -> wisedupearly Ceo ... , 07 February 2018 at 10:27 PMwisedupearly,Walrus , 07 February 2018 at 11:11 PM
From comment 31: "Only two ways in which Trump candidacy could be destroyed once he was nominated... Official; ... Public; Trump is maligned as being an tool of the Russians."
Wrong. The second didn't work and after over a year there's zero evidence of the other. The obvious way for Trump to lose the election was for the voters of the Democratic Party - that's the party whose executives rigged the DNC Primary for Hilary - to nominate someone who could have beaten him.
"can we all agree .... was the most inept operation in a long time?"
No. You repeat this meme twice, comment 24 and 31. It only has the appearance of ineptness because they got caught. The obvious question is how many other times did political appointees/operatives within FBI/CIA/intellegence agencies succeed in doing the same thing? Then follow up and ask whether this was only done in Presidential elections or did they also do this in House and Senate races? My take is that this was done before and Trump is going to appoint Trey Gowdy as a speical prosecutor and we'll all have fun watching as he goes all Ethan Edwards on finding the bad guys.The sudden resignation of the head of GCHQ, Hannigan, coupled with UK PM May's precipitate trip to Washington to meet Trump, leads me to speculate that GCHQ was an enabler of surveillance of the Trump team.Walrus said in reply to Tyler... , 08 February 2018 at 01:08 AM
My guess, based on my belief in the languid behaviour of British Intelligence professionals (which I acknowledge may be utterly unfounded) is that neither GCHQ or MI6 gave much thought to either Steeles machinations (which they may have known about in passing) or an American request for surveillance on a Trump team member, if in fact they even knew he was part of the team. They knew what was going on, but it was club chit chat until Trump won the election, then the enormity of their actions was made plain.
To put that another way, I would prefer to believe in a stuff up rather than a concerted plan by the fiendish British to influence the U.S.Hilary bought a FISA warrant and then trolled for dirt on Trump.Jack said in reply to Rhondda... , 08 February 2018 at 01:09 AMRhonddawisedupearly Ceo , 08 February 2018 at 04:27 AM
Rep. Goodlatte, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has written FISC presiding judge Rosemary Collyer to provide him all the documentation around the Page FISA application and warrant. Let's see what she does. FISC has been taken for a ride by the DOJ and FBI. Ball's in their court.
IMO, we need another Church Committee to have a broad mandate to investigate mass surveillance, secret courts and the entire national security apparatus and if our Constitution has been shredded by the Patriot Act and FISA and the GWOT. Is there anyone like Sen. Frank Church around?Fred, Fred, my post discussed the possible avenues for the destruction of the Trump candidacy as related to the Steele memos.wisedupearly Ceo , 08 February 2018 at 07:21 AM
As I wrote, both possible attacks, official and public, failed for fairly obvious reasons.Graham and Grassley: "Thus, the FISA applications are either materially false in claiming that Mr. Steele said he did not provide dossier information to the press prior to Oct. 2016 or Mr. Steele made materially false statement to the FBI when he claimed he only provided the dossier info to his business partner and the FBI."dogear , 08 February 2018 at 07:22 AM
As Isikoff writes in Yahoo, September 24 2016: "The activities of Trump adviser Carter Page, who has extensive business interests in Russia, have been discussed with senior members of Congress during recent briefings about suspected efforts by Moscow to influence the presidential election, the sources said. "
It should be clear that several if not many people in Washington were privy to the Page meeting Russians. I note also that, as far as I can see, there is nothing in the Isikoff article that is unambiguously attributable to the Steele memos. Maybe the experts can find a clear indicator.
Page himself is headlined in a Reuters article July 8 2016 (referenced by Isikoff) after he gave a pro-Russian lecture to students at the New Economic School in Moscow. The article titled "Trump adviser, on Moscow visit, dodges questions about U.S. policy on Russia" says "Page declined to say whether he was planning to meet anyone from the Kremlin, the Russian government or Foreign Ministry during his visit."Wrong heading, should read...did the British labour party use its connections in British intelligence to try oust trump.English Outsider -> Eric Newhill... , 08 February 2018 at 07:44 AMBabak Makkinejad -> Walrus... , 08 February 2018 at 07:53 AM
Eric Newhill - Though from a far less well-informed point of view than yours I'd concur heartily with your "All of the recently revealed FBI invective toward Trump and talk of "insurance policies" is highly suggestive, but that's it [at this point]."
It's all of it highly suggestive at this point but what it suggests seems to depend entirely on the convictions of the observer.
I'm not sure that's going to change. When one looks at the contacts between UK and US Intelligence BEFORE the Presidential election results material is starting to come out that also could be suggestive either way but could also prove nothing at all. From what I've seen it proves nothing at all.
If it turned out that the UK authorities had been in lockstep with the US authorities throughout before the election result, and had fed them every bit of nonsense they had relating to the US election, then what would that prove? Nothing. I'd hope they are in lockstep when it comes to passing on information from one country that might be of interest to the other. It would look very odd had it turned out later that the UK had been sitting on material that should have been passed across. I've no doubt that half the material the two sides pass across to each other is arrant nonsense - but they're more likely to find out what is nonsense and what is serious if they share it.
No smoking gun there then. All that's happened so far is that a spotlight has been shone in the US on areas where it doesn't usually get shone. That spotlight might find only hordes of intelligence officers running around trying to do the right thing when they find that they've got caught up in something intensely political. It could well show that and no more. The spotlight will inevitably show errors in procedure sometimes. Normal, unless all involved are prodigies. It does show a few people in the two Intelligence Communities who are pretty close to freaks. Disturbing - maybe they could tighten up on selection procedures - but irrelevant in this context. You work with what you've got. What I don't think it does or will show is a top down conspiracy on both sides to get Trump.
And as the comment above from John Minnerath says, it's an "endlessly convoluted can of worms impossible for anyone not completely up to speed on subjects like this to get a grip on", so whatever any investigation shows most of us won't even grasp what that "whatever" is.
I don't think either that Trump will ever escape suspicion from those who want to suspect him. He's come to the Presidency from a suspect world, the world of the New York property and construction business. Hot money looking for a bolthole, international contacts with people who are no better than crooks, lawyers everywhere smoothing out bent deals, politicians and officials on the take - spend a few decades in that world and there are always going to be episodes that can be made to look sufficiently suggestive of criminal activity to keep the never-Trumpers happy for ever.
So what. Sending a man in to drain the swamp who comes from the swamp looks like a good move. Who better to sort out the poachers than one who's turned gamekeeper. And to me he looks straight and the only question is whether he can keep straight in the Washington snake pit. A long shot, maybe, but the only one going and therefore rational. Those who think as I do on that will continue to hope he gets somewhere. Those who don't will continue to find in everything they come across proof that he's a crook. That won't alter.
Not so much a nothingburger then as a make whatever you like of it burger. Can we leave it at that? Almost. I'm sorry to keep harping on about this but there's just one thing. That dossier, and in particular the post-result response to it in the UK.
"CEO" keeps our feet on the ground about that dossier - "The only STEELE memo that had any chance of doing any material damage was the pee-pee tapes. Trump supporters thought it was 'cute'.
"As Trump himself said "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Trump said at a campaign rally. He was not joking and who knows his supporters better than Trump."
Shoddy rather than cute, this long-distance observer thought, but that observation from "CEO" must be accurate. Those of us in the UK too who don't believe the nonsense that gets put out by the media didn't believe this nonsense. I think it harmed Trump in the eyes of those who do believe the nonsense though, is all I'd add.
Please look at this from the perspective of a UK politician or official. The UK IC has been following the rules, passing material over to the US and leaving the US authorities to make what they want of it. They've been allowing the US authorities to make what use they wish of an ex-operative, again happy to leave the US to decide on what that use is.
Then it all blows up in their faces. Suddenly they find that the UK is associated with a very public down-market smear campaign against a US president. Associated by accident, that's accepted, but associated. What do they do? They rush to mend fences. They disavow Steele and they make it clear that it's nothing to do with the UK. Had that happened then there would, from the UK perspective, be no more to be said. It didn't happen. Instead they backed Steele to the hilt, publicly and continuously. It's that, from the UK side, that needs an explanation."A concerted plan by the fiendish British to influence US" will be of no surprise to many old school Iranians.turcopolier , 08 February 2018 at 08:17 AMjackHarry said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 08 February 2018 at 08:35 AM
I testified in Collyer's district court in Washington several times and recollect that she is a she. plMy understanding is different. Page had left the campaign but remained in contact. I also understand that Page had been on the FBI radar much earlier after SVR attempted to recruit him. I am surprised that no one saw fit to warn the Trump campaign that asdociating with Page would put the entire campaign under surveillance. I guess they couldn't, but its very convenient. From what i gather it was an open secret and treated as part of the Trump campaigns general cluelessness.semiconscious said in reply to John Minnerath... , 08 February 2018 at 09:31 AM& the mainstream media likes it, & wants to keep it, that way! :) ...David Habakkuk , 08 February 2018 at 09:57 AMAll,Fred said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 08 February 2018 at 10:49 AM
A number of points.
1. Not only large elements of the American and British intelligence services, but the 'Borgistas' in both countries, now including large elements of the academic/research apparatus and most of the MSM, really are joined at the hip.
It is thus an open question how far it is useful to speak of British intelligence intervening in the American election, rather than the American section of the 'Borg' and their partners in crime 'across the pond' colluding in an attempt to mount such an intervention with a greater appearance of 'plausible deniability.'
2. A relevant element of such collusion has to do with the creation of the Yeltsin-era Russian oligarchy. On this, a crucial source are interviews given by Christian Michel and Christopher Samuelson, who used to run a company called 'Valmet', to Catherine Belton, then with the 'Moscow Times', later with the 'Financial Times', in the days leading up to the conviction of Mikhail Khodorkovsky in May 2005.
(See http://mikhail_khodorkovsky_society_two.blogspot.co.uk .)
This describes the education in 'Western banking practices' given to him and his Menatep associates by Michel and Samuelson, starting as early as 1989, and also their crucial involvement with Berezovsky.
We are told by Belton that: 'With the help of British government connections, Valmet had already built up a wealthy clientele that included the ruling family of Dubai.' As to large ambitions which Michel and Samuelson had, she tells us: 'Used to dealing with the riches of Arab leaders, they found Menatep, by comparison still relatively small fry. By 1994, however, Menatep had started moving into all kinds of industries, from chemicals to textiles to metallurgy. But for Valmet, which by that time had already partnered up with one of the oldest banks in the United States, Riggs Bank, and for Menatep, the real prize was oil.'
Try Googling 'Riggs Bank' – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a 'comprador' oligarchy who could loot Russia's raw materials resources.
3. On the subject of the competence of MI6, what seems to me a total apposite judgement was provided by the man whom Steele and his associates framed over the death of Litvinenko, Andrei Lugovoi.
In the press conference in May 2007 where he responded to the request for his extradition submitted by the Crown Prosecution Service, he claimed that: 'Litvinenko used to say: They are total retards in the UK, they believe everything we are telling them about Russia.'
(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence ">https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence">http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)
It seems to me quite likely, although obviously not certain, that this did indeed represent the view of many of the 'StratCom' operators around Berezovsky of people like Steele.
Throughout life, I have repeatedly come across a game played on certain kinds of élite Westerners, which, in honour of Kipling, who gave brilliant depictions of it, I call 'fool the stupid Sahib.'
Both people from other societies, and their own, often play this game, and the underlying mentality not infrequently involves a combination of a sense of inferiority and contempt for the gullibility of people who are thought of – commonly with justice – as not knowing how the world really works, and thus being open to manipulation if one tells them what they want to hear.
Some fragments of a mass of evidence that this was precisely what Litvinenko did were presented by me in a previous post.
Irrespective of whether Lugovoi was accurately reporting what Litvinenko said, however, a mass of 'open source' evidence testifies to the extreme credulity with which officials and journalists on both sides of the Atlantic treat claims made by members of the 'StratCom' groups created by the oligarchs whose initial training was done by Valmet. (One good example is provided by the way that Sir Robert Owen and his team took what the surviving members of the Berezovsky group told them on trust. Another is the extraordinary way MSM figures continue to claim made by Khodorkovsky and his associates seriously.)
Accordingly, when I read of anyone treating practically anything that Steele claims as plausible, I try to work out how much of a 'retard' they must be, starting with a baseline of about 50%.
4. In the light of the way that the reliance on the dossier in the FISA applications absent meaningful corroboration is being defended by Comey and others on the basis that Steele was 'considered reliable due to his past work with the Bureau', the question is how many people in the FBI must be considered to have a 'retard' rating somewhere over 90%.
When I discover that John Sipher is a 'former member of the CIA's Clandestine Service', who also worked 'on Russian espionage issues overseas, and in support of FBI counterintelligence investigations domestically,' then his apologetics for Steele seem not only to suggest he may be another 'total retard' – but to point towards how the Anglo-American collaboration actually worked.
(See https://www.politico.eu/article/devin-nunes-donald-trump-the-smearing-of-christopher-steele/ .)
5. Another characteristic of these 'retards' is that they seem unable to get their story straight. In his piece last September defending the dossier, Sipher wrote that 'While in London he worked as the personal handler of the Russian defector Alexander Litvinenko.' Apparently he didn't know that the 'party line' had changed – that when Steele emerged from hiding in May, his mouthpiece, Luke Harding of the 'Guardian', had explained:
'As head of MI6's Russia desk, Steele led the inquiry into Litvinenko's polonium poisoning, quickly concluding that this was a Russian state plot. He did not meet Litvinenko and was not his case officer, friends said.'
(See http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/a_lot_of_the_steele_dossier_has_since_been_corroborated.html ; https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/07/former-mi6-agent-christopher-steele-behind-trump-dossier-returns-to-work .)
6. In his attempts to defend the credibility of the dossier, Sipher also explains that its – supposed – author was President of the Cambridge Union. Here, two profiles of Steele on the 'MailOnline' site are of interest.
In one a contemporary is quoted:
"'When you took part in politics at the Cambridge Union, it was very spiteful and full of people spreading rumours," he said. "Steele fitted right in. He was very ambitious, ruthless and frankly not a very nice guy."
The other tells us that he born in Aden in 1964, and that his father was in the military, before going on to say that contemporaries recall an 'avowedly Left-wing student with CND credentials', while a book on the Union's history says he was a 'confirmed socialist'.
(See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4115070/Chris-Whatsit-brilliant-Cambridge-spy-spent-life-battling-KGB-MI6-agent-wife-s-high-heels-stolen-Kremlin-spooks-revealed-Litvinenko-poisoned-Putin-s-thugs.html ; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4115070/Chris-Whatsit-brilliant-Cambridge-spy-spent-life-battling-KGB-MI6-agent-wife-s-high-heels-stolen-Kremlin-spooks-revealed-Litvinenko-poisoned-Putin-s-thugs.html .)
From my own – undistinguished and mildly irreverent – Cambridge career, I can testify that there was indeed a certain kind of student politician, whom, if I may mix metaphors, fellow-students were perfectly well aware were going to arse-lick their way up some greasy pole or other in later life.
It was a world with which I came back in contact when, after living abroad and a protracted apprenticeship in print journalism, I accidentally found employment with what was then one of the principal television current affairs programmes in Britain. In the early 'Eighties I overlapped with Peter – now Lord – Mandelson, who became one of the principal architects of 'New Labour.'
7. Given that at this time British intelligence agencies were somewhat paranoid about CND, there is a small puzzle as to why on his graduation in 1986 Steele should have been recruited by MI6. In more paranoid moments I wonder whether he did not already have intelligence contacts through his father, and served as a 'stool pigeon' as a student.
But then, people like Sir John Scarlett and Sir Richard Dearlove may simply have concluded that someone with 'form' in smearing rivals at the Union was ideally suited for the kind of organisation they wanted to run.
8. From experience with Mandelson, and others, there are however other relevant things about this type. One is that they commonly love Machiavellian intrigue, and are very good at it, within the worlds they know and understand.
If however they have to try to cope with alien environments, where they do not know the people and where such intrigues are played much more ruthlessly, they are liable to find themselves hopelessly outclassed. (This can happen not simply with the politics of the post-Soviet space and the Middle East, but with some of the murkier undergrowths of local politics in London.)
Another limitation on their understanding is that the last thing they are interested in his how the world outside the bubbles they prefer to inhabit operates, and they commonly have absolutely contempt for 'deplorables', be they Russian, British or American. This can lead to political misjudgements.
9. So it is not really so surprising that, when Berezovsky's 'StratCom' people told them that the Putin 'sistema' really was the 'return of Karla', people like Steele believed everything they said, precisely as Lugovoi brought out.
There is I think every reason to believe that, from first to last, the intrigues in which he has been involved have involved close collusion between them and elements in American intelligence – including the FBI. As a result, a lot of people on both sides of the Atlantic have repeatedly got into complex undercover contests in the post-Soviet space which ran right out of control, creating a desperate need for cover-ups. A similar pattern applies in relation to the activities of such people in the Middle East.wisedupearly,Sid Finster , 08 February 2018 at 10:56 AM
No, you are just making some deflecting comments to try and drive people to the desired narrative of what's in the memo rather than discussing the criminal conduct of Obama holdover appointees and corrupt career federal employees.I don't understand what the big deal is here. British intelligence (or anybody else for that matter - remember Al Gore's soliciting Chinese money?) is welcome to meddle in US elections, as long as it is on behalf of the establishment/Deep State candidate.Sid Finster said in reply to Prem... , 08 February 2018 at 11:05 AMThe intelligence agencies believed the dossier, or at least were willing to suspend disbelief, go along with the deception, because it told them what they wanted to hear. Remember "Curveball", AKA the "defecting Iraqi WMD scientist who told us every lurid thing he knew"? Anyone with the depth of understanding that God gave a housecat could tell that Curveball was not a super-scientist, he was a C student at best, and that he was embellishing his stories. In other words, he was lying shamelessly about things he knew nothing about.Joe100 , 08 February 2018 at 11:13 AM
The investigators lapped it up. Even the German intelligence, less emotionally invested in finding some justification, any justification for a war on Iraq, warned the Americans that Curveball was a fabricator. No matter. Curveball told the CIA and FBI what they wanted to hear, so they took his stories at face value, then passed their "intelligence" up the food chain and out to their loyal stenographers working in the press, none of whom questioned not a word of it at the time.Another question - possibly for TTG: why (as reported) did Nellie Ohr recently get an amateur radio license? This does not sound to me like a plausible later-life hobby to take up -which leads me to wonder if amateur radio traffic is well outside of NSA's "we collect everything" net?Sid Finster said in reply to Jack... , 08 February 2018 at 11:15 AMWhy do you think that this effort has failed?Sid Finster said in reply to james... , 08 February 2018 at 11:17 AM
Of course, factually, russiagate is nonsense, everyone knows that. Russiagate is merely an excuse.
It reminds me of Malcolm Muggeridge's observation of the fate of businessmen and diplomats from the Baltic states travelling in the 1930's Soviet Union. They would be arrested, imprisoned on laughably false pretexts, the NKVD wouldn't even bother to follow their own procedures in doing so.
The embassies of their unfortunates' home countries would file protest after protest, legal objection after objection, all of which were duly ignored. Why? Because the Baltic statelets had no other leverage, no friends to call upon who would make the USSR recognize their rights and those of their citizens.
One might also look at the United States' presence in Syria. We are not invited there, we are not wanted there, we have no mandate to be there. Yes, our presence there is illegal, by any standard of international law.
Yet we refuse to leave. Why? Because noone is able to force us to leave.
This is, quite frankly, the logic of pirates.ISIS is an excuse. The United States is in Syria, looking for any excuse to go to war against the government there.SmoothieX12 -> David Habakkuk ... , 08 February 2018 at 11:28 AMAnother limitation on their understanding is that the last thing they are interested in his how the world outside the bubbles they prefer to inhabit operates, and they commonly have absolutely contempt for 'deplorables', be they Russian, British or American. This can lead to political misjudgements.JOHN SHREFFLER -> turcopolier ... , 08 February 2018 at 11:45 AM
It is not just "can" it very often does. The whole situation with Russia, of which, be it her economy, history, military, culture etc., is not known to those people, is a monstrous empirical evidence of a complete professional inadequacy of most people populating this bubble.
Most of those people are badly educated (I am not talking about worthless formal degrees they hold) and cultured. In dry scientific language it is called a "confirmation bias", in a simple human one it is called being ignorant snobs, that is why this IC-academic-political-media "environment" in case of Russia prefers openly anti-Russian "sources" because those "sources" reiterate to them what they want to hear to start with, thus Chalabi Moment is being continuously reproduced. I
n case of Iraq, as an example, it is a tragedy but at least the world is relatively safe. With Russia, as I stated many times for years--they simply have no idea what they are dealing with. None. It is expected from people who are briefed by "sources" such as Russian fugitive London Oligarchy or ultra-liberal and fringe urban Russian "tusovka". Again, the level of "Russian Studies" in Anglophone world is appalling. In fact, it is clear and present danger since removes or misinterprets crucial information about the only nation in the world which can annihilate the United States completely in such a light that it creates a real danger even for a disastrous military confrontation. I would go on a limb here and say that US military on average is much better aware of Russia and not only in purely military terms. In some sense--it is an exception. But even there, there are some trends (and they are not new) which are very worrisome.The East StratCom Team is a part of the administration of the European union, focused on proactive communication of EU policies and activities in the Eastern neighbourhood (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine) and beyond (Russia itself). The Team was created as a conclusion of the European Council meeting on 19 and 20 March 2015, stressing the need to challenge Russia's ongoing disinformation campaigns."The Twisted Genius -> Joe100... , 08 February 2018 at 12:31 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_StratCom_TeamJoe100,David Habakkuk -> turcopolier ... , 08 February 2018 at 12:32 PM
My older son has been a HAM radio operator for years. He and his fellow HAM operators are getting a good laugh out of this Nellie Ohr conspiracy theory. Radio operators are not only subject to NSA interception, but also FCC interception. The American Radio Relay League (ARRL) is also vigilant in policing its members' activities. If Ohr intended to use radio communications clandestinely, the last thing she would do is become a licensed operator.
Amateur radio is very much a later in life hobby. My son is an outlier in that respect. They support all manner of community activities from weather emergencies to the Marine Corps Marathon. They were involved in a major volunteer effort to support communications in Puerto Rico last year. They're an impressive bunch of nerds.
I had CI folks talk to me because of my son's radio license. Both he and I speak Russian. He has a degree in Russian literature. I had HF antennas under the eaves of my house. We both spent a lot of time researching hacking, especially Russian hacking. His online activities in college led my coworkers into jokingly calling him Erik the Red. Some jackass in CI didn't find this at all funny and called me in with their suspicions. I didn't make any friends among these CI folks with my reaction.In response to #63.Cvillereader said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 08 February 2018 at 12:59 PM
My apologies – it was sloppy of me to use the term.
I was using it interchangeably with 'propaganda.' One reason for this is that I have been looking at the website of the 'Department of War Studies' at King's College London. This has a 'Centre for Strategic Communications', which 'aims to be the leading global centre of expertise on strategic communications.'
(See https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/warstudies/kcsc/experts.aspx .)
An 'Associate Fellow' is my sometime BBC Radio colleague Mark Laity, who, according to his bio on the site, 'is the Chief Strategic Communications at SHAPE, the first post holder, and as such he has been a leading figure in developing StratCom within NATO.' In this capacity, he produces presentations with titles like ' "Bocca della veritas" or "Perception becomes Reality."
(See http://www.natoschool.nato.int/Media/News/2015/20150910_StratCom .)
The same ethos penetrates other parts of the War Studies Department – Eliot Higgins is involved, as also Thomas Rid, who backed up the claims made by Dmitri Alperovitch of 'CrowdStrike', along with the former GCHQ person Matt Tait. (It appears that Rid, who has now moved to SAIS at Johns Hopkins, is a German who has earlier worked at IFRI in Paris, RAND, and in Israel.)
What 'StratCom' means in practical terms is propaganda, usually involving the creation of a 'narrative' – in which the complexities of the world are elided in favour of a simplistic picture of 'good guys' versus 'bad guys.' Commonly it is difficult to know how far the people doing this are deliberately dishonest, how far they have simply succumbed to 'double think' and 'crimestop.'
It has become amply apparent that with MI6, and other intelligence and indeed law enforcement agencies, the activity of attempting to understand the world has become inextricably involved with that of trying to shape it by covert action and 'perception management', or 'StratCom.'
The structures involved, moreover, are inextricably linked with ostensibly non-governmental institutions, like King's College and the Atlantic Council, and related organisations in a range of countries, as Rid's career strongly suggests.
It has also however become amply apparent that these structures create ample opportunities for 'information operations' groups such as those which were associated with the late Boris Berezovsky and the Menatep oligarchs.
So in describing what these people got up to I sloppily used 'StratCom', when I should have said propaganda.As I suspected, there are rules of professional conduct that prohibit attorneys from making public statements that are likely to have a material prejudicial impact on an adjudicative hearing in which they have been involved.Publius Tacitus , 08 February 2018 at 01:02 PM
You are going to have to come up with a new talking point.Great commentary as always Sir Hababkkuk. Also worth noting that the largest block of students at the university of Missouri school of journalism is strategic communications. But they don't consider it propaganda (though it is).Fred said in reply to Cvillereader... , 08 February 2018 at 02:14 PMCvillereader,cato iii , 08 February 2018 at 02:26 PM
What is the American Bar's ethic rule for an Attorney General meeting with the spouse of someone under investigation by the FBI?It's worth pointing out that no one in the administration publicized any of this information during the election. Unlike the Clinton emails case, which they made very public in the days immediately before the election, against policy.Barbara Ann -> David Habakkuk ... , 08 February 2018 at 02:30 PM
Even if you believe there was nothing to the idea of Russian interference, there was enough to make damning insinuations about. If the FBI or the intel community was corrupt and wanted to interfere against Trump, why didn't they?David HabakkukHarry said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 08 February 2018 at 02:51 PM
Re your point 7. I am surprised at the level of robustness you expect of MI6's recruitment due diligence process - especially in respect of a Cambridge alumnus with a leftist background.From my own – undistinguished and mildly irreverent – Cambridge career, I can testify that there was indeed a certain kind of student politician, whom, if I may mix metaphors, fellow-students were perfectly well aware were going to arse-lick their way up some greasy pole or other in later life.Publius Tacitus -> cato iii... , 08 February 2018 at 02:54 PM
I am very familiar with the lessor spotted cantab hack. Particular in its Trinity form.Are you really that obtuse? Government officials were leaking this info from August on and it was in the news. Most of the media ignored it because they did not think Trump had a chancean occasional reader , 08 February 2018 at 03:03 PMThe LaRouche people have always said it was London.Joe100 said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 08 February 2018 at 03:09 PM
I agree considering the center of the Trans-Atlantic financial empire is London and the currency of said empire is the petro-dollar which Russia, along with others, is slowing undermining.
In other words, they have motive.
TTG - Thanks! I got my general HAM license back about 1959 (while living in Quantico and spending alot of time at the base "HAM shack") but let it lapse once I hit college. Interesting to know that NSA monitors ham radio.Jack , 08 February 2018 at 03:09 PM
Nice to have your calming insight on the conspiracy theories.All
What is Mueller up to these days? Haven't heard much from him other than to delay Flynn's sentencing.
I'm also curious why Cater Page hasn't been charged with anything despite all the surveillance. Was he a Russian spy as Comey believed?
Feb 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Eric Newhill -> The Twisted Genius ... , 07 February 2018 at 06:17 PMTTG #20Rhondda -> The Twisted Genius ... , 07 February 2018 at 10:47 PM
Thx for the reply. As you know I like Trump a lot and I don't like all I have seen going on to subvert his presidency (e.g. the MSM 24/7 fake news bashing on him, Soros organized riots). That said, I try to be as objective as possible.
I am simply not seeing the connection between spying on Page and spying on Trump. There has been no evidence released that even suggests it happened. I watched Tucker Carlson and Hannity this week and both are saying that the FBI spied on a POTUS candidate and on a sitting president (Trump in both instances, of course). I had to stop myself, clear my head and think for minute. I don't see it. They spied on Page and most likely anyone he talked to/met with, but that's not Trump nor anyone in Trump's inner circle.
Maybe it will come out that Trump and his inner circle were spied on. Maybe the FISA warrant was construed to permit that. Maybe they just did it regardless of legality. Maybe that's what all these GOP releases are leading up to.
However, at this point, I see a lot of smoke and mirrors on both sides. The GOP is using the Page warrant to damage the FBI (well deserved, apparently) and Mueller's investigation. The dems are using the existence of the warrant on Page to insinuate that Trump campaign needs to be investigated b/c they had a Ruskie mole amongst them and a bunch of other stuff about collusion that Clinton and Steele pulled out of their asses.
In the midst of this is Carter Page, an obviously self-absorbed/self-promoting goofy homosexual that is always trying to get close to power and failing, who never met Trump and who never has yet been shown to have contributed anything to the Trump campaign - and who has an annoying habit of pretending to connections and knowledge that he doesn't really have; and getting himself in hot water in the course of doing so.
Until more is revealed - or someone explains how it could be otherwise - I am beginning to think that the entire focus on Page means nothing more than the exposure of a corrupt FBI playing fast and loose w/ FISA. All of the recently revealed FBI invective toward Trump and talk of "insurance policies" is highly suggestive, but that's it [at this point].
My spider sense says it will be revealed that Trump himself was sureveilled - that and a buck 50 gets me a ride on the cross town bus." (Page) looked like a dangle with his trips to Moscow. He's either a clueless idiot or an operator worthy of the title, ace of spies. The questions about his true status are legitimate and worth pursuing." I've been thinking about what the PL calls "Carter Page's status" -- and I now wonder if maybe Russia was not the target of 'the dangle' after all. What if the target was the FBI? Based on the chain of events that culminated in Clapper and Ash Carter calling for Adm Rogers to be fired, we might deduce that the NSA and/or military side of the intel/cyber house had discovered a multi-pronged operation of 'domestic spying for political gain using the organs of the national security state' collusion between FBI-DOJ / other non-mil IC / British assets / ObamaAdmin+Brennan+Clinton. Page is ex Navy Intel. It it possible he is still Navy intel? Undercover for the FBI, deeper undercover for the DIA, or similar?
It should be noted that The Daily Caller has an article in which Page "denies" being an undercover employee for the FBI:
"I'm not very familiar with the whole UCE concept," he initially told The Daily Caller News Foundation when asked if he had heard the rumors that he was an undercover FBI agent. " would assume that I'd have been briefed if I were somehow in it." Told that the undercover agent planted recording devices in order to surveil, Page said, "well that settles that."..."Never did anything of that variety."
Bit of a slippery "denial" imho, assuming The Daily Caller's quotes and context are accurate. I didn't see any other sources for the denial.
Last night I read Page's testimony (which, along with his attached letter, is amusingly florid -- I urge you all to read it.) In those documents he says he has called repeatedly for the release of the FISA warrants on him. I saw this morning that the NYT has filed FOIA requests for the release of those same warrants.
patrick lang , 07 February 2018 at 04:02 PMall What was Carter Page's status in all this? He is reported to have been cooperating with the FBI against the SVR, and yet the FBI obtained a FISA warrant against him? If it was a title 1 warrant, they could use that as justification for surveilling anyone in contact with him? plJoe100 , 07 February 2018 at 04:02 PMIt definitely was a title 1 warrant and that presumably opened up anyone he was communicating with to surveillance. Kid of convenient for Trump campaign access...Eric Newhill -> patrick lang... , 07 February 2018 at 04:33 PM
And as noted earlier, he appeared to still be supporting the SVR case through March of 2016 and then in October 2016 a title 1 FISA warrant is approved - so from "spy catcher" to foreign spy in six months??Sir,blue peacock -> patrick lang... , 07 February 2018 at 04:48 PM
I don't know how all this works in terms of who they could be surveilling under the warrant. My only observation is that C. Page was not in direct contact w/ Trump at any time. Trump says that and Page says that. I have to believe it's true or they would have nabbed Page for lying by now.
Could the warrant permit spying on Trump himself by extension? legally? Or perhaps they illegally spied on Trump directly and then figured that would get lost in all the wildness and then transition once trump was impeached?
That page was never in contact w/ Trump and that the warrant was issued and continued after Page left his very periphery position in the Trump campaign is a mystery to me, unless FISA does allow extremely broad application of the spying to even periphery contacts (or the other thing I mentioned).
Or, beyond the illegality of the application for the warrant and beyond the fact that it used the same dossier that was aimed at Trump - there is no real connection to Trump himself and both sides are playing up Page's unfortunate situation to promote or attack trump.
Or there are other warrants, yet disclosed, based on the Steele material.
or I'm missing something obviousCol. Lang,Fred , 07 February 2018 at 04:51 PMHe is reported to have been cooperating with the FBI against the SVR, and yet the FBI obtained a FISA warrant against him ? If it was a title 1 warrant, they could use that as justification for surveilling anyone in contact with him
The FISA application was for a Title 1 warrant which was granted by FISC, as noted in the Nunes memo. This is why the role of Carter Page is important to know.
I have been speculating in my exchanges with TTG, that Carter Page was an FBI "accomplice", to provide retroactive cover for the surveillance of Trump and his campaign without any warrants. This is probably why there were FISA violations which were discovered by Admiral Rogers.
The timelines become very interesting. The FISA violations were discovered by NSA sometime around March/April 2016. Admiral Rogers orders a compliance review. He goes to FISC in October 2016 to report the outcome of his compliance review. The Title 1 FISA warrant on Carter Page was in October 2016.
Page was a volunteer at the Trump campaign. If he was a known Russian spy, as a FISA Title 1 warrant would imply, why didn't the FBI inform the Trump campaign?So who signed the warrent, the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI; and who approved it: AG Lynch, Deputy AG Sally (hero of the resistance) Yates, or the guy who stepped down on October 15th, 2016, as Assistnat AG for National Security John Carlin
If it was hiim what day did he sign that and how long does it take to get the application to the court, since it looks a lot like he signed the thing then resigned to cover his ass. Where o where is Mr. Carlin now, since he doesnt (or no longer) has any page in Wikipedia? The internet wants to know. I bet the House and Senate want to know too.
Feb 08, 2018 | consortiumnews.com
backwardsevolution , February 5, 2018 at 4:31 pm
Sean Hannity on Fox is doing a stellar job of exposing the Department of Justice, FBI, and all of the other characters re the Steele dossier and Russiagate. Every night more information is revealed; it's like a spy novel. None of the other outlets are even talking about this stuff. Crickets. If you want the latest on criminality, go there. Meanwhile, Zero Hedge says:
"Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley's push to force the DOJ to open a criminal investigation into ex-British spy and 'Trump dossier' author Christopher Steele is being met with resistance from the bureau, the latest sign that it doesn't want information about its relationship with Steele to be shared with the public."
The Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC had paid Steele for his dossier. But the FBI also hired Steele, and just before they paid out $50,000.00 to Steele for his work, they discovered he lied, didn't pay him, but still continued to spy on Trump and his team. With Steele's dossier now discredited in the eyes of the FBI, they should have stopped their spying, but they didn't. Russiagate has been based on this Steele dossier, and yet there was "no there there", and the DOJ and the FBI knew it.
Zero Hedge goes on:
" Furthermore, a section on a second memo by Steele says he received information from the State Department, which in turn got it from a foreign source who was in touch with 'a friend of the Clintons.'
'It is troubling enough that the Clinton Campaign funded Mr. Steele's work, but that these Clinton associates were contemporaneously feeding Mr. Steele allegations raises additional concerns about his credibility,' Grassley and Graham wrote in their criminal referral."
So Steele was receiving information from the State Department and a friend of the Clinton's? How impartial is that?
Feb 08, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Roman Reigns February 6, 2018 at 9:31 amI make no briefs for Trump, but I feel I must ask this question: If Don Jr. meeting with a Russian national to get opposition research on the Clinton campaign is a crime, how is that substantively different than what the Clinton campaign and the DNC did in paying Christopher Steele for this dossier on Trump?MM , says: February 6, 2018 at 10:42 amThought experiment:
Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency in a very close race after RNC servers are hacked and damaging information concerning her opponent is released, by actors believed to be working for the PRC, and it is later revealed that her campaign was secretly surveilled by the DOJ under a GOP administration, using a dubious dossier detailing Bill Clinton's close connections and dealings with Chinese government officials before and during the campaign. In order to obtain a FISA warrant, the dossier was the primary source submitted to the court, and it is discovered after extensive litigation to have been compiled by a former Hong Kong based Australian spy who was secretly paid by the RNC for his opposition research, who also leaked information to the press to generate interest, who was quite strongly opposed to the reality of a President Clinton, and who also lied to the FBI and was eventually cut loose as a source of information.
Can you imagine how the editorial press, elected Democrats, Clinton supporters, etc. would be reacting today to such a serious of events?
Feb 08, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Henry Barth February 7, 2018 at 5:28 amCarter Page was an FBI Under-Cover Employee in 2013, and remained the primary FBI witness through May of 2016.
If Carter Page was working as an UCE (FBI undercover employee), responsible for the bust of a high level Russian agent in 2013 -and remained a UCE- throughout the court caseUP TO May of 2016, how is it possible that on October 21st 2016 Carter Page is put under a FISA Title 1 surveillance warrant as an alleged Russian agent?
Conclusion: He wasn't. The DOJ National Security Division and the FBI Counterintelligence Division flat-out LIED.
Feb 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
3-fingered_chemist Feb 7, 2018 9:20 AM PermalinkJ2nh -> 3-fingered_chemist Feb 7, 2018 9:24 AM Permalink
Wow, the fact that they are talking about talking points to Comey to brief Obama is the big cookie. Obama's legacy is destroyed completely.
That implements Comey and Obama as traitors. Why does Comey keep tweeting shit? Dude should be lawyering up and perhaps thinking about getting out of the country.
Hey, Dems? Do we have a Constitutional Crisis yet? LOL at these fuckers.Fishthatlived -> 3-fingered_chemist Feb 7, 2018 9:25 AM Permalink
The best defense is a strong offense. For Comey this worked for a while but I think those days are over. If he was smart he would lawyer up and shut the fuck up.
Clinton emails found on September 28 and Comey didn't know until October 28, who believes that load of crap.
Burn them all.rent slave Feb 7, 2018 9:26 AM Permalink
'I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. ... I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation.'
ObamaBastiat -> rent slave Feb 7, 2018 11:53 AM Permalink
As soon as I heard in 2007 that the NY Times couldn't find anyone at Columbia who knew Obama,I knew something was up.Columbia seems to be the default college for frauds with Van Doren,"Dr."Bob Harris,and Meadow Soprano.
. . .yeah and I recall the professor of Political Science who said: never saw him and I knew EVERY student who studied Poli-sci. It is impossible that I would not have known him. -- or words to that effect.
Feb 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
66Mustanggirl Feb 7, 2018 9:27 AM Permalinkinsanelysane Feb 7, 2018 9:28 AM Permalink
Once again, I point to David Corn's article in Mother Jones, conspicuously hitting the MSM News cycle 8 DAYS before the election, in which he is clearly sitting with Christopher Steele in a one-on-one interview, being fed the ingredients that was making up the recipe for the "insurance policy" being cooked up by HRC, the DNC, FBI, DOJ et al.
With nuclear bombshell passages such as this:
"Reid's missive set off a burst of speculation on Twitter and elsewhere. What was he referring to regarding the Republican presidential nominee? At the end of August, Reid had written to Comey and demanded an investigation of the "connections between the Russian government and Donald Trump's presidential campaign," and in that letter he indirectly referred to Carter Page , an American businessman cited by Trump as one of his foreign policy advisers, who had financial ties to Russia and had recently visited Moscow. Last month, Yahoo News reported that US intelligence officials were probing the links between Page and senior Russian officials. (Page has called accusations against him "garbage." ) On Monday, NBC News reported that the FBI has mounted a preliminary inquiry into the foreign business ties of Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chief. But Reid's recent note hinted at more than the Page or Manafort affairs. And a former senior intelligence officer for a Western country who specialized in Russian counterintelligence tells Mother Jones that in recent months he provided the bureau with memos, based on his recent interactions with Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump -- and that the FBI requested more information from him."
Can SOMEONE please explain to me why both David Corn AND Harry Reid's decrepit ass aren't being hauled before these Congressional committees investigating this cesspool??
An oldie but goodie
Feb 06, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Will Christopher Steele Be Charged in the UK as a Spy? by Publius Tacitus [UPDATE]
Do you want to know why the FBI continued to insist that the Nunes' memo not be declassified and released to the public? The answer is right there on page 2, (see 1b) in the discussion about what was excluded from the application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court:
The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of-and paid by-the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.
I believe that the part in bold is what the FBI wanted out of the memo because it exposes the uncomfortable fact that Christopher Steele was (and had been for some time) a paid asset of the FBI. That is huge news. In other words, Steele was not a mere consultant or sub-contractor for the FBI. He was being paid to provide information/intelligence to the FBI. There are two classes of FBI "informants." One is serving as a "criminal informant" and the other is as an "intelligence asset." Information from "criminal informants" can be used in a U.S. judicial proceeding and the informant called as a witness. Getting money under that circumstance can be problematic because the source's credibility can be impeached by defense counsel, who can argue that the testimony is purloined.
You do not have to worry about that with an "intelligence asset." In that case the priority is protecting the identity of the source. The fact that Steele had been on the FBI payroll for a while sheds new light on Glen Simpson's testimony (which was leaked by Senator Feinstein) to the U.S. Senate. Simpson testified that Steele told him in late September 2016 that the FBI wanted to meet him in Rome to discuss the dossier. That struck me initially as quite odd. If Steele was just acting as an average "foreign" citizen who was trying to help the FBI then he could easily have met with the Bureau in London. That city hosts the largest number of FBI agents in the world outside of the U.S. But Steele was asked to go meet in Rome. That's what you do when you are meeting an intelligence asset that the Brits do not know about.
That is the problem.
The United States and Great Britain have had a long standing "understanding" or informal agreement to not recruit each others intelligence and law enforcement personnel as intelligence assets. I chatted yesterday with an old intelligence hand (a U.S. person) who was approached by British MI 6 during a TDY to London. My friend rejected the come on and reported the approach to the CIA Chief of Station (aka COS). The COS was angry with the Brits. They were not supposed to do that, nor are we. But sometimes a target is so attractive that very high level permissions to break the agreements are given.
The real irony here is that the Schiff memo is likely to compound the problem for Steele because it is likely to highlight Steele's prior activities on behalf of the Bureau that predate the 2016 election cycle (remember, Steele was hired by Fusion GPS in June 2016). This is the issue that had FBI Director Wray's panties in a knot. When you sign up a foreign source you vow to protect them. When you expose such a source you make it more difficult to recruit new sources.
There may be another twist to this. Was Steele actually operating as an FBI intel asset with the secret knowledge of the Brits? In other words, was he a double agent or an agent of influence? One way to tell will be watching the reaction of the U.K. authorities now that they know that Steele was a paid FBI informant. Imagine the outrage here if one of the former CIA or FBI talking heads that are appearing on punditry circuit was exposed as someone getting paid by the Russian version of the FBI or CIA. It would be ugly.
The media (and the trolls on this blog) are working feverishly to ignored the uncomfortable truths exposed by the so-called Nunes memo. But facts are stubborn things and more facts will be exposed.
UPDATE --Based on some confused comments by our friend The Twisted Genius aka TTG, I need to provide more of the Nunes memo to establish that Steele in fact was a source. According to that memo:
. . .Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations-an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jones article by David Corn.
If this was a simple matter of Steele, having no official relationship with the FBI, simply reaching out to an old friend to pass on information, then TTG would be right to assert that Steele was not a source. But that is clearly not the case. The FBI can only suspend and terminate a source relationship if that person is a source. Very simple.
Let's take a quick look at the article by Corn that got Steele terminated. The Corn piece was part of an orchestrated media campaign (we know that from Simpson's testimony that was leaked by Diane Feinstein) in order to put pressure on the FBI and James Comey, who had just announced that new Clinton emails had been found on Anthony Weiner's laptop. Corn wrote:
- On Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid upped the ante. He sent Comey a fiery letter saying the FBI chief may have broken the law and pointed to a potentially greater controversy: "In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government The public has a right to know this information.". . .
- But Reid's recent note hinted at more than the Page or Manafort affairs. And a former senior intelligence officer for a Western country who specialized in Russian counterintelligence tells Mother Jones that in recent months he provided the bureau with memos, based on his recent interactions with Russian sources, contending the Russian government has for years tried to co-opt and assist Trump -- and that the FBI requested more information from him . . . .
- [A] senior US government official not involved in this case but familiar with the former spy tells Mother Jones that he has been a credible source with a proven record of providing reliable, sensitive, and important information to the US government.
- In June, the former Western intelligence officer -- who spent almost two decades on Russian intelligence matters and who now works with a US firm that gathers information on Russia for corporate clients -- was assigned the task of researching Trump's dealings in Russia and elsewhere, according to the former spy and his associates in this American firm. . . .
- "It started off as a fairly general inquiry," says the former spook, who asks not to be identified. But when he dug into Trump, he notes, he came across troubling information indicating connections between Trump and the Russian government. According to his sources, he says, "there was an established exchange of information between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin of mutual benefit." . . .
- This was, the former spy remarks, "an extraordinary situation." He regularly consults with US government agencies on Russian matters, and near the start of July on his own initiative -- without the permission of the US company that hired him -- he sent a report he had written for that firm to a contact at the FBI, according to the former intelligence officer and his American associates, who asked not to be identified. . . .
- The former intelligence officer says the response from the FBI was "shock and horror." The FBI, after receiving the first memo, did not immediately request additional material, according to the former intelligence officer and his American associates. Yet in August, they say, the FBI asked him for all information in his possession and for him to explain how the material had been gathered and to identify his sources. The former spy forwarded to the bureau several memos -- some of which referred to members of Trump's inner circle. After that point, he continued to share information with the FBI.
There you have it. The story was right in front of us. What is reported in the Nunes memo is consistent with David Corn's article and with what Glen Simpson testified under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Posted at 04:43 PM in Publius Tacitus , Russiagate | Permalink
blue peacock , 05 February 2018 at 05:39 PMPT, TTG, et alEric Newhill said in reply to steve... , 05 February 2018 at 05:52 PM
Could Carter Page too have been a FBI accomplice?
It wouldn't be too far fetched if he was sent to be a volunteer in the Trump campaign to gain retroactive authorization on the surveillance of the campaign. Maybe that's why they had to resort to the Fusion GPS dossier in their FISA Title I warrant application.
The DOJ/FBI seem to be rather desperate to hide something. That's the only explanation I can see for their stalling and obstruction tactics here. This notion of creating a precedent for disclosure seems like a red herring to me.Steve,Keith Harbaugh , 05 February 2018 at 06:07 PM
The allegation is actually worse than just payments from Clinton to Steele. It is also that the Clinton campaign was feeding Steele information on Trump and members of his team.
Presumably, if Clinton had made the allegations against Trump, it wouldn't have been taken seriously. However, having the allegations routed through Steele and then appearing as intelligence gathered by his impeccable personage would cause the allegations to be taken seriously and to be used for warrants and so on and so forth.
Clinton paying Steele is very bad. Clinton feeding Steele information to be included in his "dossier" is much worse. The FBI failing to disclose either during the warrant application is catastrophic for democracy.
Is it true? I bet it is. This doesn't feel like empty grandstanding by the Rs and Trump. It doesn't feel like a desperately flailing counter attack either. It does feel like the Ds and the borg are on their heals at this point.
We will know soon enough when underlying detail is released. OTOH, maybe we never will. Depends on the Rs' strategy. They may seek to up the pressure to the point where their enemies see the rope awaiting their necks; at which point they deal. Some Ds and borgs step down/retire, some are sacrificed to satisfy the public's need for justice to be done, others may stay around, but must concede things of value to the Rs (content of and passing of bills amongst those things?). Then again, maybe the entire swamp just gets drained in the course of a righteous crusade.
I find the resistance to the concept of a coup attempt to be interesting. It's like they think demons that drove Cassius and Brutus got locked in hell, permanently, 2,000 years ago.PT, I would be interested in how you would rebut, if you should care to, this:Sylvia 1 , 05 February 2018 at 06:13 PM
"The Smearing of Christopher Steele"
By JOHN SIPHER, Politico Magazine , 2018-02-05
BTW, Sipher describes himself as
"a career intelligence officer who worked on Russian espionage issues overseas,
and in support of FBI counterintelligence investigations domestically".
Of course, that does not mean that he does not have political biases.This is from an interview in Politico with Victoria Nuland. It seems Mr. Steele was accustomed to dropping by the State Department--and did so in the Summer of 2016 with news of "Russian interference" Since he was already a paid asset of the FBI wouldn't hey have also known of his "work" by then. This may be relevant to the issue of what caused the FBI to open a counter intelligence investigation in July 2016--Mr. Steele/Fusion GPS or a drunken Papadopolus?wisedupearly Ceo , 05 February 2018 at 06:24 PM
"In the interview, Nuland said she was familiar with Steele's work through regular reports he had passed on to her office over the previous several years dealing with political maneuverings in Russia and Ukraine. When presented by an intermediary with the startling information about "linkages" between Trump and Russia that summer, "what I did was say that this is about U.S. politics," Nuland recounted, "and not the business of the State Department, and certainly not the business of a career employee who is subject to the Hatch Act, which requires that you stay out of politics. So, my advice to those who were interfacing with him was that he should get this information to the FBI, and that they could evaluate whether they thought it was credible.""
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/05/global-politico-victoria-nuland-obama-216937IF Steele has been spying on the Brits on behalf of the FBI then he's gone. If he was working his old contacts for non-Brit intel after retiring is that a crime? Hopefully Steele would not approach active assets. Not sure how the spook world sees it.wisedupearly Ceo , 05 February 2018 at 06:59 PM
To make the dossier watertight Steele would have to select believable contacts that could have supplied the information supposedly fed to him by Clinton. Or to put it the other way round, Clinton would have to know what contacts Steele had to generate the "dirt" to match the contacts. Feasible? Likely?
Still waiting for Gowdy to state that the warrant was issued illegally.House Intel Committee has sent the Democratic response to the Memo to the President for his approval for release. Interesting times.Publius Tacitus -> The Twisted Genius ... , 05 February 2018 at 07:57 PMYou need to re-read the source documents. Steele told Simpson in late June that he was going to report to the FBI. Simpson subsequently claimed that Steele met with the FBI in JULY not AUGUST. But, again, you are ignoring what the cleared memo, which the FBI read, states--STEELE WAS A SOURCE WHO WAS SUSPENDED AND THEN TERMINATED.james said in reply to blue peacock... , 05 February 2018 at 08:12 PMthanks pt... good post...Fred -> Keith Harbaugh... , 05 February 2018 at 08:22 PM
blue peacock - this question on page as fbi accomplice has been asked before... i think ttg made some comments on it as well.. as i see it, it seems like he would be worthless, but maybe the fbi would see it differently...
and as wisedupearly mentions.. i don't know if it is a crime for an ex m16 guy to work for the fbi.. was steele retired or not?Keith,different clue said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 05 February 2018 at 08:52 PM
The Democrats on the committee knew the content of the Nunes memo before it was released. Nancy Pelosi said it must be withheld as a matter of national security. Now she says it is a constitutional crisis. Reading the piece you linked to just raises the question of just whom at the FBI Mr. "Cipher" was helping with "counterintelligence investigations"?
I have to wonder just what Mrs. Robert Kagan, aka Victoria Nuland, is so afraid that she had Susan Glasser - the former Editor of Foreign Affairs and "longtime foreign correspondent and editor for the Washington Post... ..... spent four years as co-chief of the Post's Moscow bureau" - do this CYA puff piece now.
Now while it isn't illegal for an American Citizen who has no security clearance and isn't authorized access to government secrets, and isn't employed by the government, to talk to Russians, I distinctly recall reading in the NYT that talking to Russians , especially in Moscow, is the worst possible thing and apparently all the FBI needs to get a FISA warrant. Because maybe the SVR RF (the successor of the First Chief Directorate of the KGB) might "approach" you. Now wouldn't recruiting someone with access to top State Department officials like Victoria Nuland and with close connections (i.e. married to) someone with direct access to the White House be an irresistible recruitment target to the SVR? Curious minds might ask "did the SVR ever approach Mrs. Glasser or her husband, "New York Times White House correspondent Peter Baker."?"
I wonder if FBI Director Comey or the FBI head of counter intelligence, Peter Strzok, ever bothered to get a FISA warrant to surveil those two. It's not like anyone in Russia would ever want to plant information in the NYT or Foreign Affairs magazine; or pass suggestions on to State Department officials through that channel. Maybe the FBI just targets people running for political office. Which would create, as Nancy Pelosi so correctly points out, a Constitutional Crisis.
Here's the link to the politico article's author:
https://foreignpolicy.com/author/susan-b-glasser/Eric Newhill,wisedupearly Ceo -> james... , 05 February 2018 at 09:34 PM
( reply to comment 5)
If all these Clintonites and Borgists inside and outside of government are indeed the bad actors this interpretation of events considers them to be, then it would be better for us if they were all found and punished and all their structures and so forth torn out and burned.
If they are allowed to save themselves in return for "deals" of fleeting material or legislative benefit, that would be just another "Ford pardons Nixon" event, leaving those kind of people unpunished and unrepentant and ready to train new cadres of young proteges to try it all over again in the fullness of time.Seems like March 2009 is when Steele retired and went private.Eric Newhill , 05 February 2018 at 09:49 PMIncidentally, the Schiff memo should really be an "interesting" study in madness. Here is Schiff taking the TTG theory about Russians sowing chaos to an extreme -- apparently the Russians are behind the second amendment. They want us all to shoot each other. My god. This man is a member of the intelligence committee?Anna -> The Twisted Genius ... , 05 February 2018 at 10:02 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM3whD7y83c"John Sipher's article of today goes deeper into that." You should read the comments section of the Sipher's article to "appreciate" admirers of the article and their religious belief in Obama-Clinton righteousness and Trump's perfidy. The admirers are not interested in facts of the investigation because the facts, particulalry in Steele's case, have a pro-Putin bias.J , 05 February 2018 at 10:21 PMThe screw up and move up syndrome is alive and well. Brennan the DCI screw up is set to make more bucks as a screw up. Brennan has been hired by NBC as an analyst.wisedupearly Ceo , 05 February 2018 at 10:26 PMCould the experts provide some clarity. There are some people who believe that the dossier must be accepted or rejected in toto. The poisoned tree concept. If one item in the dossier is salacious and unverified then all items must be rejected. Would the FBI subject the dossier as an entity or a FISA court would agree with that argument?Publius Tacitus -> wisedupearly Ceo ... , 05 February 2018 at 10:32 PMComey testified in June 2017 that the Dossier was "salacious and unverified." If they actually had corroborated some of the dossier then Comey never would have testified this way under oath. It is fruit of the poisonous tree.The Twisted Genius , 05 February 2018 at 10:47 PMPublius Tacitus,Bandit said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 05 February 2018 at 10:54 PM
You're right about the meeting in July rather than August. I was doing that from memory.
You quoted the memo as saying "The application does not mention... or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information." What is the reason the application did not mention that? And why does it not say he was actually paid? Perhaps because both statements are not facts. Given that the FBI did talk to him and take his dossier, I agree that Steele was some kind of source/informant from July to October. I don't know the FBI terminology. I also don't doubt the FBI cut their ties with him after he blabbed to the press.
The Nunes memo is a document with a political purpose, not a source document. If it was oversight, the HPSCI would be raking the FBI over the coals in hearings right now. I don't see the FBI review of the memo as a vouching for its accuracy, just a vouching that it doesn't contain anything that would cause grievous damage to their ongoing cases, sources and methods. It was more of a standard FBI Glomar response. I also don't think the Schiff response memo will be much different. None of this is a Constitutional crisis. Trey Gowdy's recent comments were refreshingly knowledgeable, reasonable and calming. I hope he continues. He may be the best chance to right the HPSCI ship.jpb -> wisedupearly Ceo ... , 05 February 2018 at 11:08 PM"Then again, maybe the entire swamp just gets drained in the course of a righteous crusade."
Nice thought, but both parties have too much skin in the game to want to bring the whole house down. These scrimmages are just theater to be settled by the corporate or elitist profiteers in whatever way leaves the swamp intact."Still waiting for Gowdy to state that the warrant was issued illegally."RC , 05 February 2018 at 11:16 PM
Contempt of court is defined as follows: "It manifests itself in willful disregard of or disrespect for the authority of a court of law, which is often behavior that is illegal because it does not obey or respect the rules of a law court. ... A judge may impose sanctions such as a fine or jail for someone found guilty of contempt of court." Wikipedia
The GOP memo is largely written by Tray Gowdy, according to Alexander Mercouris in a piece at The Duran. You can read the GOP memo and Mercouris's analysis of the GOP memo, which may relieve your wait for Gowdy to step down the legal jargon from his brief advocating for the conclusion the FISA warrant perpetrated a 'fraud on the court'.The Conservative Treehouse had a revelation today about another FBI undercover agent.plantman , 05 February 2018 at 11:40 PM
Turns out the Carter Page, who the FBI certified as a Russian Spy to the FISA court in October 2016, was an undercover FBI agent used to trap and act as state witness in a trial against a real spy between 2013 and May 2016.
You better believe the FISA court was not told that Carter Page was a trusted FBI undercover operative -- until he became a VEHICLE to spy on the whole Trump Campaign, in October 2016 and three subsequent times at 90-day intervals.wisedupearly Ceo -> Publius Tacitus ... , 05 February 2018 at 11:41 PM
I'm really stuck. Here's the deal: Comey and Co used the dossier to gat the FISA judge to approve a warrant for spying on Page.
But why Page? Page was just a small fish who had already left the campaign. Besides, even if they got dirt on Page, it probably wouldn't be sufficient to nail Trump (which is what they really wanted). My guess is that Page just provides the first clue in a much bigger criminal investigation that will uncover massive surveillance on people closer to Trump. That, at least, would make sense. If they were just spying on Page, it doesn't make any sense.
Were Samantha Power and Susan Rice using their connections with the NSA (and "unmasking") to get secret electronic info on other Trump campaign members without even getting a FISA warrant? How big is this thing and how widespread? Clapper MUST have a hand in this, and maybe Brennan too.
your thoughts?Steele memo # 2016/94 titled "RUSSIA: SECRET KREMLIN MEETINGS ATTENDED BY TRUMP ADVISOR, CARTER PAGE IN MOSCOW (JULY 2016)wisedupearly Ceo -> jpb... , 06 February 2018 at 12:03 AM
Summary has 3 points.
PAGE has secret meetings in Moscow
SECHIN raises lifting of Western Sanctions
DIVEYKIN discusses release of kompromat of Hillary Clinton.
Not sure why this memo is deemed salacious. How much supporting evidence would the FBI need for the FSIA court to issue the warrant on just this memo?Gowdy has said in a tweet about the warrant that he was "deeply disturbed" that is it. Mercouris should talk to Nunes. Nunes has said that Gowdy "summarized" source material and that he, Nunes, had the memo written by his aides. NYT claims that the key aide is Kashyap Patel, been an aid for less than 1 year. No prior intel experience. Contempt of court applies only to to participants in proceedings before a sitting judge? Not sure of your mention here. So await your reply.jpb -> wisedupearly Ceo ... , 06 February 2018 at 12:38 AMThe FBI obtained a warrant omitting the fact the Steele Dossier had a paid political origin. This omission was pertinent in assessing the creditably of the source of information used to establish 'probable cause' to issue the search warrant(FISA warrant). Is this omission 'contempt of court'?Eric Newhill said in reply to wisedupearly Ceo ... , 06 February 2018 at 12:42 AM
Please read the GOP memo and Mercouris's analysis of the memo for other omissions and misrepresentations before the FISA court. I do not know if Mercouris's assertion that Trey Gowdy is the primary author is correct, but he make's the case the GOP memo is a legal document and not a political document. Trey Gowdy is a trial lawyer who likely authored the legal document attacking the FISA warrant.
Hopefully we will soon see the FISA warrant application!W.U.E. #28The Twisted Genius -> wisedupearly Ceo ... , 06 February 2018 at 12:45 AM
Maybe b/c it was known that the meeting never happened b/c they were watching him (and via others methods and sources)? Maybe something as simple as Sechin was somewhere else at the time. Also, the part about Sechin offering Page something like $19 billion to help close the deal was kind of over the top wasn't it? Would you believe that? And there's the problem that Page wasn't really a Trump advisor. He never met Trump and never communicated with him by other means. He was a very fringe volunteer on the campaign in a group that met a couple of times hoping to get an in and build a resume.
How would a nobody like Page help get sanctions lifted?
Steele's work is pretty poor, IMO. You'd think he would have assembled better, more believable, stories. The golden showers thing is another example. The story is silly on its face.wisedupearly Ceo,jpb -> wisedupearly Ceo ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:01 AM
The only salacious stuff in the Steele dossier (actually a series of raw reports, as you know), is the pee pee tape report. I happened to be watching Twitter the night the report came out and that was the only thing talked about for 24 hours. Everything else was lost in the snickering. Given the Stormy Daniels story and the ensuing payoff and cover up, even the pee pee tape doesn't sound as crazy as it first did.
A number of the individual reports by Steele were corroborated in full or part over time like the report you pointed out. If you accept the DNI ICA on Russian interference in the election a lot Steele's stuff has panned out. Of course if you deny the concept of Russian interference, those reports of Steele are just part of the vast left wing conspiracy.
An interesting item that was recently revealed concerned Natalia Veselnitskaya, the "adoption lawyer" who met Trump jr, Manafort and others at Trump Tower in June 2016. She was identified in Swiss court as an SVR officer who recruited a high level Swiss law enforcement officer. I'd love to hear the tapes of that Trump Tower meeting in light of this.Apologies to PT for drifting off topic.....blue peacock said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:17 AM
"The FISA Court Memorandum and Order was released prior to the House Intelligence Committee report and has been completely ignored by the utterly corrupt press prostitutes. The FISA Court Memorandum and Order, relying on the confessions of the FBI and DOJ, verifies the House Intelligence Committee report that the FBI and DOJ illegally obtained spy warrants for partisan politial purposes."
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/05/will-conspiracy-trump-american-democracy-go-unpunished/TTGblue peacock said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:51 AM
I understand what you're saying and would agree that would normally be how its done. Wearing a wire. But...I am speculating that Carter Page was used to get a FISA warrant specifically to gain retroactive authorization of earlier surveillance on some members of the Trump team. My speculation is that surveillance on Team Trump began earlier without any warrants leading to FISA violations that Admiral Rogers discovered in April 2016. Carter Page was the perfect accomplice to cover their surveillance tracks by getting the FISA Title I warrant in October 2016 on him and consequently every one he was in contact with.
My contention that "setting a precedent" is a red herring is because the IC routinely disclose sources and methods when it serves their interest. For example I believe recalling Col. Lang writing that the IC disclosed we had decrypted secure communications of the Russian ambassador, apparently to nail Gen. Flynn. So, hiding behind precedence is precisely to prevent disclosure of malfeasance. It is like Clapper denying under oath that there is no mass surveillance. IMO, disclosing the FISA application may implicate Comey, Yates, Rosenstein, et al. and that's the only reason why they are stalling. Just like the hysteria from Comey and Brennan prior to the release of the Nunes memo. And why they redact so much from the Grassley memo. There are no sources and methods in any of these memos.
IMO, they better insure IG Horowitz's report be like the Owens investigation in the UK that David Habakkuk has written about. Or else, if it turns out to be a doozy, the pressure from the Republicans in Congress will become very intense for the appointment of a second special counsel.TTG #24Tom , 06 February 2018 at 02:08 AMThe Nunes memo is a document with a political purpose, not a source document. If it was oversight, the HPSCI would be raking the FBI over the coals in hearings right now.
The Nunes memo was never a source document and if you listen to the many interviews of Reps. Jordan, Gaetz & Meadows they never claim that it was a source doc. They have characterized it as a summary of the evidence around the specific topic of FISA abuse. This was their way around the classification and obstruction by the DOJ/FBI. Yes, it is political because it is going to be political pressure that takes it to the next step of either disclosure of the source documents or the appointment of another special counsel. Wray, Rosenstein, McCabe have already testified several times. Peter Strzok, Bill Priestap, Bruce Ohr, et al are all on deck. It has taken Nunes, Grassley and Goodlatte over a year in the face of all the obstruction to get this far. The Nunes memo was designed to play a very specific role. Bring forth allegations into the public square of malfeasance and a potential conspiracy. Schiff's memo will counter that by stating the Republicans are attacking our law enforcement & IC. This type of response, IMO, is exactly what the Republicans want. This then leads to the next step. This is just the beginning of discovery.None of this is a Constitutional crisis.
It can become one, if in the process of discovery they find sufficient evidence of a conspiracy, or if the IG report notes that there was a concerted effort to undermine Trump. The DOJ & FBI are doing their darndest to prevent discovery.@TTG and Publius Tacitus Thanks to both of you. You are doing a great service to the public. I tend to go with Tacitus though. The reason being that nobody who has any knowledge of Russia could but come to the conclusion that the Steele dossier is utter nonsense. Therefore any use of the dossier could only have been taken in bad faith. Or else the Borg is really totally stupid.Tel , 06 February 2018 at 04:12 AMTel -> plantman... , 06 February 2018 at 04:19 AM"There are two classes of FBI "informants." One is serving as a "criminal informant" and the other is as an "intelligence asset."Looks like now we have a third category where a guy perfectly known to be a partisan hack gets paid a token payment by the FBI to give the appearance of being a real "intelligence asset" thus decorating the pantomime set in preparation for the FISA court where they can befuddle the good Judge.
In other words, the FBI guys were well aware that Steele was no real "asset", just wanted it to look that way.
And you go make a law in good faith, believing that people will do the right thing and obey said law... but instead they go to extraordinary lengths to find a way to get around it, then you need a new law to fix that problem. Tsk tsk.Eric Newhill , 06 February 2018 at 09:06 AM"But why Page?"Because the trick of intelligence gathering is to accidentally-on-purpose scoop up quite a bit more than you intended and then send it to AG Lynch so the key people can be "unmasked" before some completely unknown and unknowable "leak" parcels it up with unmasked names and speaks to the press, on condition of anonymity because they solemnly promised never to speak to the press.
You are thinking in terms of a legitimate investigation, which this was never intended to be.wisedup,Joe100 , 06 February 2018 at 10:04 AM
I posted a comment a little past my "good until" hour last night. I erroneously stated how much Page was allegedly offered, Sechin, to end sanctions. Still, it was an eye raising amount of $. I think it strained credibility.
Why Page? I think it's all about perception management; putting a fig leaf on the coup for the public's sake. Goes like this. Trump was getting bashed for allegedly knowing nothing about foreign policy and not having a team. This was especially damaging compared to Clinton, who had been Sec State. Trump has his people quickly look everywhere for people and organize as many "advisors" as possible (more perception management). Then he fires back at critiques that he has all kinds of advisors. Page had a PhD, Naval Academy grad. That looked good. Page Makes the team Trump list. The FBI has been circling, waiting for something to seize upon to damage Trump on Clinton's behalf. Bingo! Calls are made and Steele is directed to include inflammatory "intel" on Page and Page +Trump in his reports. He does. It is possible that FBI did not fully realize at the time that Page and Trump never talk. Poor Page. Everyone uses him and no one takes him seriously.I am getting really confused here. According to then NYT (via a "former intelligence officer") Carter Page was the FBI Undercover Employee (UCE-1) in the Buryakov case (2013) and that (apparently according to court records) he continued to support the case through March 2016.Eric Newhill said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 06 February 2018 at 10:06 AM
So how does this (if accurate and ten description of UCE-1 certainly fits Page) relate to an October 2016 FISA warrant on him??
For details see: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/05/in-march-2016-carter-page-was-an-fbi-employee-in-october-2016-fbi-told-fisa-court-hes-a-spy/#more-145498
TTG,Charles said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 06 February 2018 at 10:06 AM
In bringing up Stormy Daniels I think you did us all a favor by reminding that it is incorrect to think about this as a legitimate investigation where facts and procedures matter. It isn't. It is, IMO, much more of a perception operation engaged in by Obama/Clinton loyal bureaucrats and partners in the mainstream media.
Examining each tree causes us to forget about the forest. The forest - the legend - is that we have elected a crooked buffoon conman that colluded w/ Russians to win an election for the purpose of making himself wealthier and to sell out America to our most deadly adversary. The proof of this is the Steele dossier and that the impeccable FBI has him under investigation!!!
Maybe the FBI gets to scoop something up w/ their spying, but it's not as important as we think it would be (as in a real investigation).
To keep the fires burning hot, Stormy Daniels and other salacious material is trotted out on a regular schedule. The salacious material, if you notice, self-reinforces. Steele is true b/c Daniels is true and vice versa etc., etc. ad nauseum. Clapper and Brennan make regular appearances denouncing Trump as do other Unquestionables.
That's all this is, IMO. Keeping the heat on Trump until he quits or until public opinion is sufficiently aroused that he can be impeached on something...anything.It is well known that Catherine The Great wrote the second amendment, Thomas Jefferson was an agent of Czarist Russia as the second amendment clearly shows.turcopolier , 06 February 2018 at 10:30 AMjoe100Dr. Puck said in reply to plantman... , 06 February 2018 at 10:50 AM
One explanation might be that the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. Another might be that the FBI wanted the warrant and that CP was a convenient vehicle. plWhy would massive surveillance need to be uncovered?Dr. Puck said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 06 February 2018 at 10:52 AM
The Trump administration has its appointees at the top of, and, running the DOJ & IC. What do you suppose happens when the boss asks his employee a straightforward question about prior activities?thank you TTG for helping with the difference between validated fact and everything else short of that standard.Sid Finster , 06 February 2018 at 12:02 PM
...bonus appreciation for pithiness, "if you deny the concept of Russian interference, those reports of Steele are just part of the vast left wing conspiracy"Regardless of any law that he may have violated, Steele will not be charged in the US or the UK as long as he was doing what the Deep State wishes.Sid Finster said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 06 February 2018 at 12:08 PMHonestly, I don't think it matters. Steele and Strzok could give sworn public testimony that they invented Russiagate out of whole cloth and fabricated all of the so-called "evidence" and those who want to believe in Russiagate will, stagger, spin frantically, and go right back to believing.Sid Finster said in reply to Tel... , 06 February 2018 at 12:19 PM
I talk about "cognitive dissonance" a lot and believe me, I wish I knew what it takes to make people wake the [FAMILY BLOG] up, but there are entire religions based on cognitive dissonance.Power attracts sociopaths the way catnip attracts cats, or cocaine attracts addicts. To put it another way: if power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, absolute power also attracts the kind of people who have no business having power. People will try to get around any law, even a law made in the best and most nobly-intentioned faith. This includes those responsible for enforcing the law.Cvillereader said in reply to turcopolier ... , 06 February 2018 at 12:28 PMI would not exclude the possibility that Page, as well as Manafort and Papadopoulos, were plants.turcopolier , 06 February 2018 at 12:36 PM
The previous FBI case that Page was involved with did not end until May 2016, which I think is after he became involved with the Trump campaign.
Manafort and Papadopoulos both have connections to shady figures in Ukraine.
And now we are beginning to hear that Victoria Nuland May have steered Steele toward the FBI.
I have no doubt that Obama's State Department might have been concerned about damaging information held by Putin on its activities.Dr. PuckFlavius , 06 February 2018 at 12:44 PM
They may lie to cover their own previous participation in such activities. plSteele's credibility and reliability are peripheral to appraising the quality of the PC in the affidavit. The critical question has to do with whether Steele's alleged Russian sources were credible and reliable. It would be mind boggling if the Agents handling Steele did not demand to know the identities of his sources so that the information could be characterized for the purposes of the affidavit. Regardless of who was paying Steele, and how many times he was being paid for the same info, and how and to whom he was distributing the info, the quality of his information can not be properly assessed until it is known from whom it came, how it came to be known, and the circumstances under which it was acquired. Unless that was known, it never should have been considered to be actionable.SmoothieX12 -> The Twisted Genius ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:14 PM
This raises the interesting question of whether our Gov't has any obligation of confidentiality with respect to Steele's alleged sources - off the top of my head, I would think not.
With respect to the Carter Page info, deficient probable cause can be multiplied endlessly by events and by sources and it still doesn't come to pass the threshold of probable cause. In fact, I would look on throwing in the kitchen sink as a sign of something disingenuous going on.
I can think of no valid reason why the FBI and the DoJ would not want to charge Steele with lying to the FBI if it can be demonstrated that he lied to them, particularly in so important a matter. With regard to investigating the provenance of his alleged sources to sustain the charge, there will surely be some severe practical difficulties. Steele is likely relying on those. Possibly they might consider Steele to be a material witness in a wider prosecutorial framework.
It is all very much a mess.She was identified in Swiss court as an SVR officer who recruited a high level Swiss law enforcement officer.RK -> The Twisted Genius ... , 06 February 2018 at 01:15 PM
Identified by who? From what is known about her -- a typical murky raider lawyer with pretty well-off hubby. Do you use "recruitment" instead of bribing or corrupting? While not mutually exclusive, one has to really question motivations.Re: "If Page was an FBI accomplice, there would have been no need for a FISA warrant. Page would have just worn a wire or the digital equivalent of a wire. I covered that in a comment in my last post."Anna -> Eric Newhill... , 06 February 2018 at 01:39 PM
In which case, why all these, why all these Title I vs Title VII vs whatever?!
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/06/carter-page-interview-with-laura-ingraham/Schiff is comical? -- Yes. "http://theduran.com/adam-schiff-exposed-putin-puppet-2013-rt-interview-video/ "Adam Schiff exposed as Putin puppet in 2013 RT interview" (Video)pj , 06 February 2018 at 01:52 PM
Who would think that Adam Schiff is a progeny of the main financier of the Bolshevik revolution, Jakob Schiff: http://www.wildboar.net/multilingual/easterneuropean/russian/literature/articles/whofinanced/whofinancedleninandtrotsky.html
"One of the greatest myths of contemporary history is that the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was a popular uprising of the downtrodden masses against the hated ruling class of the Tsars. As we shall see, however, the planning, the leadership and especially the financing came entirely from outside Russia, mostly from financiers in Germany, Britain and the United States. ... This amazing story begins with the war between Russia and Japan in 1904. Jacob Schiff, who was head of the New York investment firm Kuhn, Loeb and Company, had raised the capital for large war loans to Japan. It was due to this funding that the Japanese were able to launch a stunning attack against the Russians at Port Arthur and the following year to virtually decimate the Russian fleet. In 1905 the Mikado awarded Jacob Schiff a medal, the Second Order of the Treasure of Japan, in recognition of his important role in that campaign... On March 23, 1917 a mass meeting was held at Carnegie Hall to celebrate the abdication of Nicolas II, which meant the overthrow of Tsarist rule in Russia. Thousands of socialists, Marxists, nihilists nand anarchists attended to cheer the event. The following day there was published on page two of the New York Times a telegram from Jacob Schiff, which had been read to this audience. He expressed regrets, that he could not attend and then described the successful Russian revolution as "...what we had hoped and striven for these long years". In the February 3, 1949 issue of the New York Journal, American Schiff's grandson, John, was quoted by columnist Cholly Knickerbocker as saying that his grandfather had given about $20 million for the triumph of Communism in Russia."-- What a family!There's an old lawyer joke that comes to mind as I listen to the D's responses to the Nunes memo. "When the facts are against you, pound the law. If the law is against you, pound the facts. If both are against you, pound the table."Eric Newhill said in reply to Sid Finster... , 06 February 2018 at 01:58 PMSid,SmoothieX12 -> Flavius... , 06 February 2018 at 02:00 PM
IMO, It matters that Adam Schiff's sister is married to George Soros' son and that Soros was a major donor to Schiff's campaign.
The big players begin to look like pawns.Thomas , 06 February 2018 at 02:26 PMRegardless of who was paying Steele, and how many times he was being paid for the same info, and how and to whom he was distributing the info, the quality of his information can not be properly assessed until it is known from whom it came, how it came to be known, and the circumstances under which it was acquired. Unless that was known, it never should have been considered to be actionable.
Situational and tactical awareness 101. You got that right. Information is not a knowledge -- two are totally different things. I do, however, have one objection--NO, it is NOT regardless who were paying Steele, in fact--it is a crucial matter and that is what Nunes Memo was about and did--it anchored the issue where it should be anchored and around which this whole affair will continue to revolve, as it should -- preprogrammed fallacy, in fact politics-driven bogus of an "intelligence". The very notion that surveillance was initiated based on the outright fabrication is the real scandal. That is why Dens were going apoplectic. It is damn difficult now to sink the issue in procedural and legalistic BS once the Memo is nailed to the doors of a "cathedral". As for Steele, I hope he is now well-guarded from possible slip on a banana skin and accidentally falling, seven times in a row, on a knife he was carrying, accidentally, of course. But then again, 10-15 shots from 9-mm to own head is also a very popular homicide method.Jack -> The Twisted Genius ... , 06 February 2018 at 02:26 PM"I have no doubt that Obama's State Department might have been concerned about damaging information held by Putin on its activities."
Yep, when you are in charge of the state administration there is all sorts of information available to you, such as radar and communication records for a country along your border or all the info gained thanks to a lazy federal official's lack of concern for security over convenience.TTGrobt willmann , 06 February 2018 at 03:33 PM
In your comment #34 you note the DNI claim of Russian interference in the election. That is not the issue here. The issue here is the narrative sold by Clapper, Brennan, Hillary Clinton and the media that Trump colluded with the Russian government to steal the presidential election . And the related issue of surveillance of the Trump campaign.
That and the firing of Comey is the core basis for the appointment of Mueller. Comey claimed he was fired for investigating the Trump collusion, which lead to ginned up hysteria.
Why is everyone conflating Russian interference in the election with the allegations of Trump's collusion with the Russian government? They are two different matters. The question that needs to be answered is if the latter allegations and the subsequent FBI investigation of Trump and his campaign were based on legitimate evidence or for partisan political purposes?
It seems to me that you too are conflating these two matters. What exactly is your position on the collusion allegations and the law enforcement and IC narrative on that matter? Why are the DOJ and FBI obstructing the Congressional investigation into the activities of the FBI, DOJ and the IC relating to their investigation of Trump and his campaign? The Nunes memo and the evidence it is based on is about the FBI and DOJ investigation of the Trump campaign. It has nothing to do with if Russia interfered in our election. In fact other than the DNI report there has been no evidence presented by the IC validating the claim of Russian interference.
If we have to have a more sane discussion and not talk past each other, IMO, we must separate the two issues of Russian interference from Trump's collusion allegation and the resultant IC/law enforcement investigation.Well, the House Intel Committee memo, Republican version, says on page 2, lines 7-8:Richardstevenhack -> jpb... , 06 February 2018 at 03:46 PM
"Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign [etc.]..."
That is pretty clear: "Steele was a longtime FBI source ...." How long, one might wonder?
Carter Page does appear to be a little odd. He enthusiastically shows up for multiple television interviews grinning quite a bit and seemingly without a care in the world.
The memo has obviously been edited down. The first neon sign I saw was on page 1: "The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC". A FISA order must be renewed every 90 days. Four times 90 is 360 days. Day one was 21 October 2016, the memo tells us. Donald Trump was elected president on 8 November 2016. He was sworn in on 20 January 2017. Carter Page was under surveillance until October 2017, a little over three months ago. On what grounds? Who was he talking to or communicating with, other than the hosts of television shows?
The memo creates the impression that the Steele paper was used in each of the four FISA applications, but that is not completely clear.
Furthermore, the memo clearly says that James Comey signed three FISA applications in question and Andrew McCabe signed one. But when it comes to the Justice Department lawyers, the language gets vague: Sally Yates, Dana Boente, and Rod Rosenstein "each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ". Why not say the exact number each one signed? Is the memo talking only about the four Carter Page applications or other additional applications with respect to the DOJ lawyers?Second the recommendation to read Mercouris' piece which I referred to in an earlier thread. It's a masterpiece which is very precise in analyzing the exact legal words of the GOP memo.Richardstevenhack -> The Twisted Genius ... , 06 February 2018 at 03:53 PM
Today Alexander has posted a more speculative analysis of the Lindsay/Grassley referral letter which asks the DoJ if Steele should be hit with possible criminal charges.
Grassley's, Lindsey Graham's referral on Steele: did US media, Clinton campaign provide content for Trump Dossier?
The referral letter - which is heavily redacted and thus set out in full in Alexander's piece - suggests that not only did Steele use unverifiable information allegedly from Russia, but ALSO very likely received additional unverified information along the course of the production of his reports which may - may not - have originated from associates of the Clintons. Alexander points to the Cory Shearer "second dossier" as a likely example.
Steele may also have received and included in his reports unsolicitied information from media sources.
Mercouris points out that all this - if proven - would render the Steele dossier even less credible than it is. And it would tar both the media and the Clinton campaign as having contributed to the "constitutional crisis" it seems to be shaping up to."If you accept the DNI ICA on Russian interference in the election a lot Steele's stuff has panned out."blue peacock said in reply to Jack... , 06 February 2018 at 04:35 PM
Of course, if one accepts the DNI ICA after Scott Ritter ripped it a new one, one is obviously willing to believe anything Clapper, Brennan and the rest of these serial liars tell one.
Denying the concept of a "vast Russian conspiracy to use Pokemon to influence the election" is just common sense.
See, I can write snark, too.JackSmoothieX12 -> Richardstevenhack ... , 06 February 2018 at 04:54 PM
You make an important distinction that is being lost in these discussions.
It is well known that Russia runs intelligence operations in the US, just like the US does in Russia. I assume Col. Lang, TTG and Publius Tacitus ran spooks & intelligence operations in the Soviet bloc. And probably Putin did the same in the NATO bloc. This has been going on for decades and is nothing new.
What is new is the hysteria surrounding the loss of the election by Hillary Clinton and the attempt to explain the loss to Trump's collusion with the Russian government. This narrative as you point out was sold hard by Clapper, Brennan, et al and the complicit media who were convinced of Hilary's win.
This controversy is about very specific questions around the investigation of Trump and his campaign for their alleged collusion with the Russian government. And additionally, there are specific questions about the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's mishandling of classified information. That is the crux. How were these two separate investigations by the same people at the FBI & DOJ run?
The Congressional Republicans want to learn more about these two investigations. The DOJ, FBI, the IC, the Democrats and the media want to sweep the truth of these two investigations under the rug. What many Americans want to know is, was there a conspiracy against a national presidential candidate and a legitimately elected POTUS by a previous administration from a rival party? What role if any did partisan bias play in these two investigations?
I agree with you that we ought to have two separate discussions. One, did the Russians interfere in our election and if so, how did they do it and what impact did it have? Two, was there a conspiracy against presidential candidate Trump and a President-elect Trump by the Obama administration? If so, who participated in it and how did they do it?Cvillereader said in reply to robt willmann... , 06 February 2018 at 05:08 PMMercouris points out that all this - if proven - would render the Steele dossier even less credible than it is.
I would go on a limb here and even state that Steele's "contacts" or "network", rezidentura or whatever in Russia where he was stationed in 1990-92 are almost predictable and they are worthless by now. So, whenever the term "sources" in Russian "government" are used I kinda have a feeling that those are the same "sources" who constitute main foreign contributors to American (and British) "Russian Studies" field -- rather a wasteland of propaganda cliches and memes. There is also a really interesting Ukrainian angle in all that. But you see, even Lindsey Graham could be sometimes of some utility, not that it is his integrity speaking.;-)There is definitely something off about Carter Page's demeanor. His life story, as has been reported, also seems bereft of a lot of details. We know that he has a master's degree from Georgetown, an MBA from NYU, and a PhD from University of London. He reportedly worked for Merrill Lynch in Moscow, and then started his own consulting firm. The press hasn't been able to find one person that either remembers him, or has anything positive to say about him. And there are no reports of a family of any type.Barbara Ann -> Jack... , 06 February 2018 at 05:12 PM
All of this seems out of place for someone who did very well at the Naval Academy, and was s member of the CFR. In an interview last week, Nunes said that Page should never have been the subject of a FISA warrant, and had not held a job for several years. How exactly has Page supported himself, including his extensive obtaining multiple advanced degrees?
He almost sounds like a caricature of the gray man.JackVietnamVet , 06 February 2018 at 05:30 PM
This cannot be said enough. The 'Russian interference' narrative was a non story right from the beginning. The 'Trump collusion' narrative on the other hand is the mother of all stories; both for those who take it at face value and in a different sense, for those of us who question its origin and motivations. Conflation of the two must not be tolerated.AllDianaLC said in reply to Walrus... , 06 February 2018 at 06:00 PM
I second the thanks for the public service that PT & TTG are providing by sharing their expertise. I admit I am confused. I've decided that is the intention. The GOP memo documents that the FISA court is a highly unjust Star Chamber. The same congressmen who declassified this memo passed the FISA extension just weeks before knowing this. No wonder the author Trey Gowdy is not seeking re-election. If there had been any factual basis to Russiagate, it would have been released by now, a year later. This supports the contention that there is an intelligence community/media counter coup underway against Donald Trump. The Memo joins the list of proofs that the rule of law is dead in America.Hmmmm.....with this group of Democrats, especially their last candidate for POTUS, I think you might be thinking "shades of Vince Foster." I know, I know....he killed himself.Keith Harbaugh said in reply to Fred... , 06 February 2018 at 06:42 PMRegarding Susan B. Glasser, I think it is worth noting that she seems to be a real Putin-hater, as indicated in this book review: "Putin's Russia, guided by its totalitarian past, has no future" review by Susan B. Glasser of Masha Gessen's The Future Is History: How Totalitarianism Reclaimed Russia.wisedupearly Ceo , 06 February 2018 at 07:01 PM
Washington Post Book World , 2017-10-24
Further, although some will no doubt think this should not be mentioned, I think it is worth noting that Ms. Glasser is Jewish. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but it is worth noting how many of the Russophobes in America seem to be of that ethnicity. More than one would expect by random chance.So many rabbit holes and apparently all that guides which hole is taken is personal bias. Has GOWDY stated that the warrant was issued illegally? Would the one memo 2016/94 be sufficient to issue a warrant? I am assuming that at least some part of that memo could be verified. Remember that the submission is not to find PAGE guilty of some crime and jail him.NancyK said in reply to Eric Newhill... , 06 February 2018 at 07:31 PM
One point. STEELE is a known MI5 officer. He has a track record. He is reporting what his contacts told him. If he is lying, if the "information/disinformation" in even just one of the memos was provided by a third party and STEELE does not know the sources claimed in the memo, then all of the dossier must be dropped. If one of STEELE's sources lied to him, does that render the remaining items suspect? I think not.
This is not like the CURVEBALL scandal where all key "proof" for WMD was derived from the testimony of one source, STEELE claims that there were many sources.
Would not want to be the FBI's contact with STEELE, or indeed anyone in the intel community. Its damned if you do act and damned if you don't act.Your shocked that Schiff is a member of the intelligence community, I'm shocked that Trump is the president. We live in shoving times.
Feb 06, 2018 | original.antiwar.comthe memo " and its meaning. A simple reading reveals that allegations of skullduggery peeking by the Obama administration during the presidential campaign were entirely accurate: the memo just filled us in on the details. And while the debate has largely been over whether the proper legal procedures were followed by the FBI and administration officials in spying on Carter Page – someone only marginally connected to the Trump campaign – the real question is: why were they sneaking around Page at all?
Oh, he claimed to be an "informal advisor" to the Russian government: he had business interests in Russia and met with Russian officials. Furthermore, and most importantly, he opposed the anti-Russian hysteria that permeates official Washington, and he often said – in public speeches as well as privately – that US sanctions against Russia are a mistake.
But so what? Since when is it illegal to hold these views?
Page was never a "Russian agent," and the FBI never proved that he was or is. Instead, they submitted that phony BuzzFeed "dossier" to the FISA court as "evidence" justifying their hot pursuit of him on more than one occasion. They did so without telling the judge who paid for the dossier (it was the Clinton campaign, as Trump claimed when this first came out) and they withheld other important details about its provenance – including that it was written by Christopher Steele, a "former" British intelligence agent who openly expressed a passionate desire to see Trump defeated. Nor had they verified the information in the dossier related to Page, because they " didn't have time ," as former DNI chief James Clapper has said on numerous occasions.
Page was targeted and the information gleaned from listening in on his phone conversations, reading his email, and god knows what other sneaky intrusions, was leaked to the media in a concerted campaign to influence the outcome of the election. So, yes, there was "collusion" – except it wasn't a pact between Putin and Trump but rather an alliance between Hillary's campaign and the national security bureaucracy to get her elected. In effect, the top leadership of the FBI became an adjunct of the Clinton campaign – and, after Trump won, they executed a plan to frame him for "collusion" and oust him.
When Intelligence Committee chair Devin Nunes announced he was going public with it, the Democrats and their Republican Never-Trump allies said it meant the national security of the United States would be put in mortal danger. They trotted out the old "sources and methods" argument, which, it turned out, did not apply to the memo – because it just laid out the bare facts, and revealed neither sources nor methods. (Unless one is talking about the political methodology of the FBI scam, which involved sneaking, peaking, and then leaking).
The Deep State-Democrat fallback position is that Carter Page is really beside the point, because the real genesis of the Russia-gate probe was the investigation into 28-year-old George Papadopoulos, an "energy consultant" even more marginal to the Trump campaign than Page.
According to the New York Times , after being introduced to a number of Russian contacts by a Professor Joseph Mifsud – supposedly a "Maltese academic" who has since completely disappeared – the mysterious pedagogue told Papadopoulos that the Russians had "thousands" of incriminating emails that would damage Mrs. Clinton's campaign. Although there's no evidence Papadopoulos communicated this information to the Trump campaign, the young would-be mover-and-shaker got drunk one night in a London pub and supposedly told an Australian diplomat about the emails: it's not known whether the Australian had a role in getting him in a talkative mood, but we are told the two met due to the efforts of an Israeli diplomat in London.
If this sounds like a setup to you, then you win the door prize: your very own copy of What Happened , now going for fifty cents at the remainder table.
The Russia-gate conspiracy theorists believe that the Trump campaign somehow had a hand in either procuring or publishing the Clinton/Podesta emails – even though no one has ever produced any evidence of this. Aside from this important lack, there are some big problems with the conspiracist thesis. To begin with, if the Trump people knew about the DNC/Podesta emails in advance, why didn't they utilize this vital information before WikiLeaks published them? And what purpose would it serve the Russians to let the Trump camp in on the operation, and risk exposure in the process? If they wanted to help Trump, all they had to do was make sure the emails were published. The collusion theory makes no sense – but, then again, Russia-gate has never made much sense.
While the most fanatical anti-Trump types simply denied everything in the memo, the Beltway "libertarians" who hate Trump's guts -- and the honest liberals like Glenn Greenwald who also hate Trump's guts but who have a conscience and won't go along with the Russia-gate hoax – were reduced to finger-wagging in response to the memo's release. Why, they asked, did these very same people, like Rep. Nunes, vote to expand the Deep State's power to spy on Americans right before the memo came out?
The question answers itself. As Rep. Thomas Massie put it : "Who made the decision to withhold evidence of FISA abuse until after Congress voted to renew FISA program?" More than a few votes would no doubt have been cast differently, and perhaps the outcome would've been different. Certainly the debate would've been more extensive, and much more interesting.
What's exciting, to me at least, is the promise by Nunes that this is just the start of the revelations. Next up: the key role played by the State Department in the plot to destroy our republic and hand power over to unelected Deep State bureaucrats. And this means the important – perhaps decisive – part played by foreign actors in all this will be exposed to the light of day. If you thought there was howling about the first Nunes memo, wait until you hear the screams of pain coming from the foreign lobbyists and their "American" sock puppets over Part Two of the Nunes narrative. The real story of who is subverting our republic – and colluding with foreigners to accomplish that goal – is about to come out.
I can hardly wait!
This isn't about Trump. You may hate him. You may love him. That's irrelevant. What matters is that a powerful group of Washington insiders is trying to exercise its assumed veto power over who gets to inhabit the White House – and that is impermissible as long as the republic endures.
NOTES IN THE MARGIN
You can check out my Twitter feed by going here . But please note that my tweets are sometimes deliberately provocative, often made in jest, and largely consist of me thinking out loud.
I've written a couple of books, which you might want to peruse. Here is the link for buying the second edition of my 1993 book, Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement , with an Introduction by Prof. George W. Carey , a Foreword by Patrick J. Buchanan, and critical essays by Scott Richert and David Gordon ( ISI Books , 2008).
You can buy An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard (Prometheus Books, 2000), my biography of the great libertarian thinker, here .Read more by Justin Raimondo
Author: Justin Raimondo
- The State of the Union: A Year in Trump's America – January 31st, 2018
- Kick Turkey Out of NATO – January 28th, 2018
- Korea, the Winter Olympics, and the Spirit of Queen Min – January 26th, 2018
- Russsia-Gate Implodes – January 22nd, 2018
- Our Potemkin Village – January 16th, 2018
Justin Raimondo is the editorial director of Antiwar.com, and a senior fellow at the Randolph Bourne Institute. He is a contributing editor at The American Conservative , and writes a monthly column for Chronicles . He is the author of Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement [Center for Libertarian Studies, 1993; Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2000], and An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard [Prometheus Books, 2000]. View all posts by Justin Raimondo
Feb 06, 2018 | www.breitbart.com
In August 22 testimony released last month, Fusion GPS Co-Founder Glenn R. Simpson stated that Steele's outreach to the FBI was "something that Chris took on on his own." Simpson stated that as far as he knew Fusion GPS did not fund Steele's July 2016 trip to Rome to meet with the FBI. He said he believes that the trip expenses may have been reimbursed by the FBI.
... ... ...As Breitbart News documented , Comey's dossier briefing to Trump was subsequently leaked to the news media, setting in motion a flurry of news media attention on the dossier, including the release of the document to the public. The briefing also may have provided the veneer of respectability to a document circulated within the news media but widely considered too unverified to publicize.
On January 10, 2017, CNN was first to report the leaked information that the controversial contents of the dossier were presented during classified briefings on classified documents presented one week earlier to Obama and Trump
All that changed when the dossier contents were presented to Obama and Trump during the classified briefings. In other words, Comey's briefings themselves and the subsequent leak to CNN about those briefings by "multiple US officials with direct knowledge," seem to have given the news media the opening to report on the dossier's existence as well as allude to some of the document's unproven claims.
Just after CNN's January 10 report on Comey's classified briefings about the dossier, BuzzFeed famously published the dossier's full unverified contents. When it published the dossier text, BuzzFeed reported that the contents had circulated "for months" and were known to journalists.
Feb 06, 2018 | www.unz.com
The Alarmist , February 6, 2018 at 12:47 pm GMTAndrei Martyanov , Website February 6, 2018 at 1:59 pm GMT
"I could identify nothing in the memo that was even plausibly damaging to national security ."
Well, it did expose Steele as a source of intel and going to former agents of foreign intelligence services as a method, but if our national security is hanging on sources and methods like these, then we're as good as self-referentially screwed we just don't know it, because it is a deep-state secret.
Here's one for you: An agent of a foreign intelligence service attempted to influence the US election in Hillary Clinton's favour, and her campaign colluded with him to that end by making payments for his services via a cutout to hide the fact that campaign funds were used to that end. The collusion might not be a crime, as would also be the case with Trump and Russia, but the laundering of money is.Anonymous Disclaimer , February 6, 2018 at 2:05 pm GMT
The raison d'etre for the Congressional and Special Counsel Robert Mueller investigations appears to be lacking. Perhaps it is all sound and fury signifying nothing, but Russia might in reality have done little beyond the usual probing and nosing around that intelligence agencies routinely do.
It is using the Cold War 1.0 Playbook to start CW 2.0. The problem: CW 1.0 Playbook is full of gaping omissions and horrendous mistakes -- so, it is basically incorporating old illusions into the new ones with results which are already visible. The picture is not pretty and worst is yet to come.The FBI has been working for the owner ruler class ever since its inception. Recently they've achieved great success in creating ISIS patsies out of wayward slaves. "We stopped terror!"US of ciA , February 6, 2018 at 3:19 pm GMT
Nothing tops their relationship with the violent property class that Giraldi took an oath to protect- co-habitation with mortgage bankers to indemnify their crimes and make sure the proles don't rip off the mafia. It's fun to see the elite fight over their cops, laughter all the way to the insidious CIA. More keystrokes morons!It is inverideed intriguing to consider what is missing from the document.Don Bacon , February 6, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT
The fixation on FBI and DoJ is comical. Whose side were they on? On Hillary's side. Hillary Clinton, that is, wife of CIA secret agent Bill, recruited by no lesser luminary than Cord Meyer. Hillary, who cut her teeth hiding crucial documents for the Watergate investigation, which Russ Baker showed was a CIA purge of Nixon (see whowhatwhy.com). FBI recruited Steele in Rome as an intelligence asset, permitting CIA to conceal his involvement with 50 U.S.C. § 3024(i) and eyes-only foreign liaison arrangements.
Hillary was CIA's anointed figurehead, like Obama, Bush, Clinton, and Bush before her. CIA got caught trying to stuff her down the electorate's throat, and now they are furiously kicking up 'partisan' dust.Wally , February 6, 2018 at 5:44 pm GMTan unvetted Steele report of questionable provenance
. ..Like the facts that Steele was a paid FBI informant and was also on the Democrat payroll?@Chet RomanFB , February 6, 2018 at 6:47 pm GMT
Interesting take on the memo by antiwar.com's Justin Raimondo: FISA-Gate: The Plot To Destroy Our Republic http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2018/02/04/fisa-gate-plot-destroy-republic/
"What's exciting, to me at least, is the promise by Nunes that this is just the start of the revelations. Next up: the key role played by the State Department in the plot to destroy our republic and hand power over to unelected Deep State bureaucrats. And this means the important – perhaps decisive – part played by foreign actors in all this will be exposed to the light of day. If you thought there was howling about the first Nunes memo, wait until you hear the screams of pain coming from the foreign lobbyists and their "American" sock puppets over Part Two of the Nunes narrative. The real story of who is subverting our republic – and colluding with foreigners to accomplish that goal – is about to come out.
I can hardly wait!
"This isn't about Trump. You may hate him. You may love him. That's irrelevant. What matters is that a powerful group of Washington insiders is trying to exercise its assumed veto power over who gets to inhabit the White House – and that is impermissible as long as the republic endures."@Michael KennyAnonymous Disclaimer , February 6, 2018 at 7:25 pm GMT
...Mueller is a notorious deep state criminal and so is Comey
' The entire Mueller investigation is a scam created by the deep state to overthrow the US government and is the deep state's ultimate plot to re-take the country. Former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton called the deep state's actions against President Trump the first Coup D'état in US History'
Why and how on earth would or could Trump somehow 'collude' with Russia while running for president ?
That question answers itself because it is preposterous on its face
The real story is the Ukraine style coup that is being attempted here against an elected president
We've seen enough lately of bits of truth coming out that are impossible to cover up forever that tells us everything we need to know about this fake Russiagate scam and the criminals behind itAmerica has terrible unemployment, some of the worst income inequality in the world, the biggest prison system in the world (the state of Georgia has 15% felons living there), and conducts wars on a perpetual basis against helpless poor countries. Only evil people support this sort of society. We call them the voting class and the intelligentsia.
The working poor never would rise up in the USA because they know the cops would gun them down in the streets. You won't find a more beaten down group of people than the poor in America...
Feb 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Tess Ting Feb 3, 2018 12:08 PM PermalinkBarkingCat Feb 3, 2018 12:26 PM Permalink
Steele's work for the England Football Association gets mentioned in The Sunday Times evidence to the British Parliament's 2022 World Cup Bidding Process inquiry - document WCB0006. It should be public, but looks to have almost vanished. The last copy on the internet is here: https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/15880.pdf
Steele is the ex-MI6 source, but they also used another agency Hakluyt after Steele, perhaps as a backstop. "A lot of it was just outlandish stuff you hear on the circuit" "although the information was 'fascinating' it was just intelligence" "the information was 'incendiary' but that there was nothing in it that the bid thought would be 'legally credible'" The same Sechin link came out for the EFA as for Page/Trump. Anyone want to ask the EFA what Steele gave to them?
This Steele guy looks like a slighly less inbred version of Tony Blair.
Do their hatch these fucks in some laboratory? Maybe lavatory.
Feb 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
mc888 -> nmewn Feb 3, 2018 12:00 PM Permalink
Sessions is not recused from a Ukraine investigation.
An investigation of the State Dept should bring the focus around to issues of substance.
- Obama repeal of Smith-Mundt to allow State Dept propaganda in the domestic US
- Obama coup of Ukraine
- Obama / McCain support of Nazis in Ukraine
- Adam Schiff relationship with Ukrainian arms dealer Igor Pasternak
- DNC collusion with Ukrainian IT "Security" company Crowdstrike tied to the Atlantic Council to push false narrative of DNC hack and malware to influence US election
- DNC consultant Andrea Chalupa, unregistered foreign agent whose entire family is tied to Ukrainian Intelligence
Further research revealed that Andrea Chalupa and her two siblings are actively involved with other sources of digital terrorism, disinformation and spamming, like TrolleyBust com, stopfake org, and informnapalm.
Ms. Chalupa kept cooperating with the Khodorovky owned magazine "The Interpreter."
Now, it's a part of RFE/RL run by the government funded Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) whose director, Dr. Leon Aron also a director of Russian Studies at the American Enterprise Institute.
Feb 04, 2018 | theconservativetreehouse.com
This outline is the story of how the FBI Counterintelligence Division and DOJ National Security Division were weaponized. This outline is the full story of what House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes is currently working to expose. This outline exposes the biggest political scandal in U.S. history. This outline is also the story of how one man's action likely saved our constitutional republic.
His name is Admiral Mike Rogers.
I'm calling the back-story to the 2016 FISA 702(16)(17) political corruption by the Obama administration "Operation Condor". Those of you familiar with the film " Three Days of The Condor " will note how the real life storyline almost mirrors the Hollywood film. For the real life version, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers plays the role of "Condor".
Feb 03, 2018 | www.zerohedge.comWhile it is unclear what role the State Department may have in surveillance abuses, the Washington Examiner's Byron York noted last month that former MI6 spy, Christopher Steele, was "well-connected with the Obama State Department," according to the book Collusion: Secret meetings, dirty money, and how Russia helped Donald Trump win" written by The Guardian correspondent Luke Harding and published last November.
Harding notes that Steele's work during the World Cup soccer corruption investigation earned the trust of both the FBI and the State Department:
The [soccer] episode burnished Steele's reputation inside the U.S. intelligence community and the FBI. Here was a pro, a well-connected Brit, who understood Russian espionage and its subterranean tricks. Steele was regarded as credible. Between 2014 and 2016, Steele authored more than a hundred reports on Russia and Ukraine. These were written for a private client but shared widely within the State Department and sent up to Secretary of State John Kerry and to Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland , who was in charge of the U.S. response to the Ukraine crisis.
Many of Steele's secret sources were the same sources who would supply information on Trump. One former State Department envoy during the Obama administration said he read dozens of Steele's reports on Russia. The envoy said that on Russia, Steele was "as good as the CIA or anyone." Steele's professional reputation inside U.S. agencies would prove important the next time he discovered alarming material, and lit the fuse again.
Aside from the infamous 35-page "Trump-Russia" dossier Steele assembled for opposition research firm Fusion GPS (a report which was funded in part by Hillary Clinton and the DNC), Congressional investigators have been looking into whether Steele compiled other reports about Trump - and in particular, whether those other reports made their way to the State Department, according to The Examiner .
... they are looking into whether those reports made their way to the State Department . They're also seeking to learn what individual State Department officials did in relation to Steele, and whether there were any contacts between the State Department and the FBI or Justice Department concerning the anti-Trump material .
It will be interesting to see how the State Department - and in particular Secretary of State Rex Tillerson - responds to "phase two."
David Wooten, Feb 3, 2018 9:04 PM Permalink
" Between 2014 and 2016, Steele authored more than a hundred reports on Russia and Ukraine. These were written for a private client but shared widely within the State Department and sent up to Secretary of State John Kerry and to Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland , who was in charge of the U.S. response to the Ukraine crisis... "
Excellent - except that Nuland wasn't responding to the Ukraine crisis. She started the whole thing. Thousands killed. Lock her up, lock her up, lock her up!
Dropthebomb, Feb 3, 2018 10:17 AM Permalinkbh2, Feb 3, 2018 10:25 AM Permalink
Sounds like Steele was used in the Ukrainian take down, anything he's been tied to must be assumed as false or misleading."Between 2014 and 2016, Steele authored more than a hundred reports on Russia and Ukraine. These were written for a private client but shared widely within the State Department and sent up to Secretary of State John Kerry and to Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland..." And how much of THIS "material" was ever successfully corroborated?
Was Steele just a successful fiction writer with a very specialized audience for his "works"?
Feb 03, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Habakkuk on 'longtime' sources:
Steele, Shvets, Levinson, Litvinenko and the 'Billion Dollar Don.'
In the light of the suggestion in the Nunes memo that Steele was 'a longtime FBI source' it seems worth sketching out some background, which may also make it easier to see some possible reasons why he 'was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.'
There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. It also seems clear that influential journalists, such as Glenn Simpson was before founding Fusion GPS, along with his wife Mary Jacoby, have been strongly involved in this.
This agenda has involved hopes for 'régime change' in Russia, whether as the result of an oligarchic coup, a popular revolt, or some combination of both. Also central have been hopes for a further 'rollback' of Russia influence in the post-Soviet space, both in areas now independent, such as Ukraine, and also ones still part of the Russian Federation, notably Chechnya.
And, crucially, it involved exploiting the retreat of Russian power from the Middle East for 'régime change' projects which it was hoped would provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area.
Important support for these strategies was provided by the 'StratCom' network centred around the late Boris Berezovsky, which clearly collaborated closely with MI6. As was apparent from the witness list at Sir Robert Owen's Inquiry into the death of Alexander Litvinenko, which produced a report based essentially on a recycling of claims made by the network's members, key players were on your side of the Atlantic – notably Alex Goldfarb, Yuri Shvets, and Yuri Felshtinsky.
The question of what links these had, or did not have, with elements in U.S. intelligence agencies is thus a critical one.
In making some sense of it, the fact that one key figure we know to have been involved in this network was missing at the Inquiry – the former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared on the Iranian island of Kish in March 2007 – is important.
Unfortunately, I only recently came across a book on Levinson published in 2016 by the 'New York Times' journalist Barry Meier, which is now hopefully winging its way across the Atlantic. From the accounts of the book I have seen, such as one by Jeff Stein in 'Newsweek', it seems likely that its author did not look at any of the evidence presented at Owen's Inquiry.
(See http://www.newsweek.com/2016/05/20/what-really-happened-robert-levinson-cia-iran-454803.html .)
Had he done so, Meier might have discovered that his subject had been, as it were, 'top supporting actor' in the first fumbling attempt by Christopher Steele et al to produce a plausible-sounding scenario as to the background to Litvinenko's death. A Radio 4 programme on 16 December 2006, presented by the veteran BBC presenter Tom Mangold, had been wholly devoted to an account by Shvets, backed up by Levinson. Both of these were, like Litvinenko, supposed to be impartial 'due diligence' operatives.
The notion that any of them might have connections with Western intelligence agencies was not considered. The – publicly available – evidence of the involvement of Shvets, whose surname means 'cobbler' or 'shoemaker' in Ukrainian, in the processing of the tapes of conversations involving the former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma supposedly recorded by Major Melnychenko, which had played a crucial role in the 2004-5 'Orange Revolution' was not mentioned.
Still less was it mentioned that claims that the – very dangerous – late Soviet Kolchuga system, which made it possible the kind of identification of incoming aircraft which radar had traditionally done, without sending out signals which made the destruction of the facilities doing it possible, had been sold by Kuchma to Iraq had proven spurious.
What Shvets had done had been to take – genuine – audio in which Kuchma had discussed a possible sale, and edit it to suggest a sale had been completed.
(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)
As a former television current affairs producer, I can talk to you of the marvels which London audio editors can produce, very happily. Unfortunately, the days when not all BBC and 'Guardian' journalists were corrupt stenographers for corrupt and incompetent spooks, as Mangold and his like have been for Steele and Levinson, are long gone.
All this has become particularly relevant now, given that Simpson has placed the notorious Jewish Ukrainian mobster Semyon Mogilevich and the 'Solntsevskaya Bratva' mafia group centre stage in his accounts not simply of Trump and Manafort, but also of William Browder. For most of the 'Nineties, Levinson had been a, if not the, lead FBI investigator on Mogilevich.
(On this, see the 1999 BBC 'Panorama' programme 'The Billion Dollar Don', also presented by Tom Mangold, which has extensive interviews both with Mogilevich and Levinson at
In the months leading up to Levinson's disappearance, a key priority for the advocates of the strategy I have described was to prevent it being totally derailed by the patently catastrophic outcome of the Iraqi adventure.
Compounding the problem was the fact that this had created the 'Shia Crescent', which in turn exacerbated the potential 'existential threat' to Israel posed by the steadily increasing range, accuracy and numbers of missiles available to Hizbullah in hardened positions north of the Litani.
These, obviously, provided both a 'deterrent' for that organisation and Iran, and also a radical threat to the whole notion that somehow Israel could ever be a 'safe haven' for Jews, against the supposedly ineradicable disposition of the 'goyim' sooner or later to, as it were, revert to type. The dreadful thought that Israel might not be necessary had to be resisted at all costs.
What followed from the disaster unleashed by the – Anglo-American – 'own goal' in toppling Saddam was, ironically, a need on the part of key players to 'double down.' Above all, it was necessary for many of those involved to counter suggestions from the Russian side that going around smashing up 'régimes' that one might not like sometimes blew up in one's face.
Even more threatening were suggestions from the Russian side that it was foolish to think one could use jihadists without risking 'blowback', and that there might be an overwhelming common interest in combating Islamic extremism.
Another priority was to counter the pushback in the American 'intelligence community' and military, which was to produce the drastic downgrading of the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear programme in the November 2007 NIE and then the resignation of Admiral William Fallon as head of 'Centcom' the following March.
So in 2005 Shvets came to London. He and his audio editors had another 'bite at the cherry' of the Melnychenko tapes, so that material that did in fact establish that both the SBU and FSB had collaborated with Mogilevich could be employed to make it seem that Putin had a close personal relationship with the mobster .
All kinds of supposedly respectable American and British academics, like Professors Karen Dawisha and Robert Service, have fallen for this, hook, line and sinker. It gives a new meaning to the term 'useful idiot.'
(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)
In a letter sent in December that year by Litvinenko to the 'Mitrokhin Commission', for which his Italian associate Mario Scaramella was a consultant, this was used in an attempt to demonstrate that Mogilevich, while acting as an agent for the FSB and under Putin's personal 'krysha', had attempted to supply a 'mini atomic bomb' – aka 'suitcase nuke' – to Al Qaeda. Shortly after the letter was sent Scaramella departed on a trip to Washington, where he appears to have got access to Aldrich Ames.
(See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160613090333/https://www.litvinenkoinquiry.org/evidence .)
At precisely this time, as Meier explains, Levinson was in the process of being recruited by a lady called Anne Jablonski who then worked as a CIA analyst. It appears that she was furious at the failure of the operational side at the Agency to produce evidence which would have established that Iran did indeed have an ongoing nuclear programme, and she may well have hoped would implicate Russia in supplying materials.
There are grounds to suspect that one of the things that Berezovsky and Shvets were doing was fabricating such 'evidence.' Whether Levinson was involved in such attempts, or genuinely looking for evidence he was convinced must be there, I cannot say. It appears that he fell for a rather elementary entrapment operation – which could well have been organised with the collaboration of Russian intelligence. (People do get fed up with being framed, particular if 'régime change' is the goal.)
It also seems likely that, quite possibly in a different but related entrapment operation, related to propaganda wars in which claims and counter claims about a polonium-beryllium 'initiator' as the crucial missing part which might make a 'suitcase nuke' functional, Litvinenko accidentally ingested fatal quantities of polonium. A good deal of evidence suggests that this may have been at Berezovsky's offices on the night before he was supposedly assassinated.
It was, obviously, important for Steele et al to ensure that nobody looked at the 'StratCom' wars about 'suitcase nukes.' Here, a figure who has played a key role in such wars in relation to Syria plays an interesting minor one in the story.
Some time following the destruction of the case for an immediate war by the November 2007 NIE, a chemical weapons specialist called Dan Kaszeta, who had worked in the White House for twelve years, moved to London.
In 2011, in addition to founding a consultancy called 'Strongpoint Security', he began a writing career with articles in 'CBRNe World.' Later, he would become the conduit through which the notorious 'hexamine hypothesis', supposedly clinching proof that the Syrian government was responsible for the sarin incidents at Khan Sheikhoun, Ghouta, Saraqeb, and Khan Al-Asal, was disseminated.
Having been forced by the threat of a case being opened against them under human rights law into resuming the inquest into Litvinenko's death, in August 2012 the British authorities appointed Sir Robert Owen to conduct it. (There are many honest judges in Britain, but obviously, if one sets out to find someone who will 'cover up' for the incompetence and corruption of people like Steele, as Lord Hutton did before him, you can find them.)
That same month, a piece appeared in 'CBRNe World' with the the strapline: 'Dan Kaszeta looks into the ultimate press story: Suitcase nukes', and the main title 'Carry on or checked bags?' Among the grounds he gives for playing down the scare:
'Some components rely on materials with shelf life. Tritium, for example, is used in many nuclear weapon designs and has a twelve year half-life. Polonium, used in neutron initiators in some earlier types of weapon designs, has a very short halflife. US documents state that every nuclear weapon has "limited life components" that require periodic replacement (do an internet search for nuclear limited life components and you can read for weeks).'
(For this and other articles by Kaszeta, as also his bio, see http://strongpointsecurity.co.uk ')
What Kaszeta has actually described are the reasons why polonium is a perfect 'StratCom' instrument. In terms of scientific plausibility, in fact there were no 'suitcase nukes', and in any case 'initiators' using polonium had been abandoned very early on, in favour of ones which lasted longer.
For 'StratCom' scenarios, as experience with the 'hexamine hypothesis' has proved, scientific plausibility can be irrelevant.
What polonium provides is a means of suggesting that Al Qaeda have in fact got hold of a nuclear device which they could easily smuggle into, say, Rome or New York, or indeed Moscow, but there is a crucial missing component which the FSB is trying to provide to them. By the same token, of course, that missing component could be depicted as one that Berezovsky and Litvinenko are conspiring to suppl to the Chechen insurgents.
In addition, the sole known source of global supply is the Avangard plant at Sarov in Russia, so the substance is naturally suited for 'StratCom' directed against that country, which its intelligence services would – rather naturally – try to make 'boomerang.'
According to Glenn Simpson, Christopher Steele is a 'boy scout.' This seems to me quite wrong – but, even if it were true, would you want to unleash a 'boy scout' into these kinds of intrigue?
As it is not clear why Kaszeta introduced his – accurate but irrelevant – point about polonium into an article which was concerned with scientific plausibility, one is left with an interesting question as to whether he cut his teeth on 'StratCom' attempting to ensure that nobody seriously interested in CBRN science followed an obvious lead.
In relation to the question of whether current FBI personnel had been involved in the kind of 'StratCom' exercises, I have been describing, a critical issue is the involvement of Shvets and Levinson in the Alexander Khonanykhine affair back in the 'Nineties, and the latter's use of claims about the Solntsevskaya to prevent the key figure's extradition. But that is a matter for another day.
A corollary of all this is that we cannot – yet at least – be absolutely confident that the account in the Nunes memo, according to which Steele was suspended and then dismissed as an FBI source for what the organisation is reported to define as 'the most serious of violations' – the unauthorised disclosure of a relationship with the organisation – is necessarily wholly accurate.
Who did and did not authorise which disclosures to the media, up to and including the extraordinary decision to have the full dossier, including claims about Aleksej Gubarev and the Alfa oligarchs, in flagrant disregard of the obvious risks of defamation suits, and who may be trying to pass the buck to others, remains I think less than totally clear.
Posted at 03:42 PM in As The Borg Turns , Habakkuk , Russia , Russiagate | Permalink
james , 03 February 2018 at 04:33 PMthanks david... fascinating overview and conjecture..JohnB , 03 February 2018 at 05:17 PM
it seems to me the usa and uk have been tied at the hip for a very long time... when it comes to foreign affairs policy and wars - the one will always vouch for the other without hesitation... it tells me the relationship is really deep..David,turcopolier , 03 February 2018 at 06:02 PM
Thank you very. As ever you have illuminated a few more things for me. Kaszeta's involvement is interesting. He is someone I am in the middle of researching in relation to Higgins and Bellingcat.jamesBabak Makkinejad -> turcopolier ... , 03 February 2018 at 06:10 PM
It is the closest of all international intelligence relationships. It started in WW2. Before that the Brits were though of as a potential enemy. plI think the English are using you, they are unsentimental empirical people that only do these that benefit the Number One. The chief beneficiary of the Coup in Iran was England and not US.catherine , 03 February 2018 at 06:22 PMThat Newsweek piece about Levinson is very superficial to me.Ishmael Zechariah , 03 February 2018 at 06:54 PM
# Who suggested to who 'first' the Iran caper...Anne Jablonski to Levinson or Levinson to Jablonski? It was reported earlier by Meier that in December 2005, when Levinson was pitching Jablonski on projects he might take on when his CIA contract was approved he sent her a lengthy memo about Dawud's potential as an informant.
# Ira Silverman, the Iran hating NBC guy, pitched a Iraq caper to Levinson with Dawud Salahuddin, as his Iran contact and Levinson went to Jablonski with it.
# And what was with Boris Birshstein, a Russian organized crime figure who had fled to Israel and Oleg Deripaska, the "aluminum czar" of Russia whose organized crime contacts have kept him from entering the United States jumping in to help find Levinson? The FBI allowed Deripaska in for two visits in 2009 in exchange for his alleged help in locating Levinson but obviously nothing came of it.
I think there were more little agents/agendas in this than Levinson and Jablonski and US CIA.DH,kooshy said in reply to Ishmael Zechariah... , 03 February 2018 at 08:21 PM
As usual a wonderful analysis. I admire your insight, integrity and courage. I wish you could write more on why the Borg is so much against Trump, even though they have Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference for them.
I and my friends consider it a given that most, if not all, anlo-zionist moves in the ME are to "provide a definitive solution to the – inherently intractable – security problems of a Jewish settler state in the area." It is an open secret that the izzies are the reason why a few Russians, some Turks, lots of Kurds and countless Arabs are dying in the Syrian battlefields. Another open secret: the takfiris and kurds have been, and are, supported by the West. That the "masters of the universe™" have been conceiving and doubling down on such disastrous policies give lie to their much-vaunted "intelligence".
Ishmael ZechariahIZkooshy , 03 February 2018 at 08:43 PM
My guess is, that he is unpredictable, instantaneous and therefore can't be consistent and reliable, useful idiot needs to be predictable."There is reason to suspect that some former and very likely current employees of the FBI have been colluding with elements in other American and British intelligence agencies, in particular the CIA and MI6, in support of an extremely ambitious foreign policy agenda for a very long time. "different clue , 03 February 2018 at 08:49 PM
David as usual fascinating work connecting the dots. One question that comes to my mind is about the above point you are making. Is it your understanding or believe that these IC individuals on both side of Atlantic, are pursuing/forcing their (on behalf of the Borg) foreign policy agenda outside of their respected seating governments? If not, why is it that incoming administration cannot stop them? So far I can't see any strategic changes on US foreign policy toward ME or Russia, at tactical level yes but not fundamentally.Ishmael Zechariah,
( reply to comment 6),
I am not David Habakkuk, obviously. But I will venture a little opinion anyway. It is not enough that the Borgists get their policy preferences. If it were, then Kushner, Adelson and Co. running interference would be enough for them.
It is the VERY FACT of Trump EVEN GETTING ELECTED at ALL which outrages and terrifies them so much. They are used to seeing themselves as successful manipulators and engineers of every major event. They were engineering the whole electoral battlespace to get Clinton elected. The mere fact of Trump's victory in the teeth of their Electoral Engineering for Clinton is an act of defiance which they will not tolerate.
And if they fail to bring Trump down at all, they will stand revealed as being defeatable. And this is their big fear. That if people see they have defeated the Borg once on keeping Trump in the teeth of Borg's efforts, that people might try to defeat and smash down the Borg on another issue. And then another. And then another after that.
So that is why the Borg cares so much. They view the Trump election as an insurgency, and they view themselves as waging a counterinsurgency, which they dare not lose.
Jan 29, 2018 | www.breitbart.com
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein approved an application to extend surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page shortly after taking office last spring, according to the New York Times .
That is one of the revelations in a memo compiled by House Intelligence Committee staffers that is set to be released within weeks, according to "three people familiar with it" who spoke to the Times .
The memo is expected to detail abuses by senior FBI officials in their investigation of the Trump campaign, which began the summer of 2016.
The House Intelligence Committee could vote to release the memo as early as Monday. It would give President Trump five days to object; otherwise, the memo will be released.
Democrats, as well as the Justice Department, have warned that releasing the memo to the public would be "extraordinarily reckless," although the leaks of the memo to the Times makes those claims dubious.
Democrats have also claimed that the memo, which summarizes classified information held by the Justice Department, is misleading and paints a "distorted" picture, and they have prepared their own counter memo they want to release.
The people who spoke to the Times argued that Rosenstein's renewal of a spy warrant on Carter Page, Trump's former campaign foreign policy adviser, "shows that the Justice Department under President Trump saw reason to believe that the associate, Carter Page, was acting as a Russian agent."
The memo, however, is expected to detail how the surveillance warrant was initially obtained inappropriately using the Trump dossier -- a political document funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
It is expected to show that FBI and DOJ officials did not explain to the secret court granting spy warrants that the dossier was politically fueled opposition research. To obtain the warrant, the officials needed to show "probable cause" that Page was acting as an agent of Russia.
Page joined the campaign in March 2016, around the time the team was under pressure to release names of foreign policy advisers.
The former investment banker and Navy officer took a personal trip to Moscow to deliver a speech at a graduation ceremony in July 2016, which fueled nascent allegations that Trump was somehow colluding with Russia. Page left the campaign in September.
The Trump dossier claimed he met with two high-level Russian officials on that trip, despite no evidence of it and Page's testimony under oath that he never met with them. Page has sued BuzzFeed for publishing the dossier.
The FBI had been tracking Page, who was previously based in Moscow, since 2013, but was never charged with any wrongdoing. The FBI reportedly received the surveillance warrant on him in fall of 2016, but Page had left the campaign by then.
Rosenstein, after he was confirmed as the deputy attorney general in late April 2017, approved renewing the surveillance warrant, according to the Times . When Trump fired then-FBI Director James Comey in May, Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller to lead a special counsel.
Rosenstein has been in charge of the Russia investigation since Attorney General Jeff Session recused himself.
Jan 29, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
GOP Congressional investigators have written six letters to individuals or entities involved or thought to be involved in the funding, creation or distribution of the salacious and unverified "Trump-Russia dossier" believed to have been inappropriately used by the FBI, DOJ and Obama Administration in an effort to undermine Donald Trump as both a candidate and President of the United States.
Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SCS) wrote six Judiciary Committee letters requesting information from: John Podesta, Donna Brazille, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Robbie Mook, the DNC, and Hillary For America Chief Strategist Joel Benenson.
A brief refresher of facts and allegations:
- The DNC and Hillary Clinton's PAC was revealed by The Washington Post to have paid opposition research firm Fusion GPS for the creation of a dossier that would be harmful to then-candidate Donald Trump.
- Fusion commissioned former UK spy Christopher Steele to assemble the dossier - which is comprised of a series of memos relying largely on Russian government sources to make allegations against Donald Trump and his associates.
- According to court filings, Fusion also worked with disgraced DOJ official Bruce Ohr, and hired his CIA-linked wife, Nellie Ohr , to assist in the smear campaign against Trump . Bruce Ohr was demoted from his senior DOJ position after it was revealed that he met with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson as well as Christopher Steele - then tried to cover it up.
- Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta, denied under oath to the Senate Intelligence Committee that he knew about the dossier's funding, while Clinton's former spokesman, Brian Fallon, told CNN that Hillary likely had no idea who paid for it either.
- Current and past leaders of the DNC, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) also denied knowledge of the document's funding.
- Podesta met with Fusion co-founder Glenn Simpson the day after the Trump-Russia dossier was published by Buzzfeed News.
The Senate Judiciary Committee letters read in part:
In October 2017, the Washington Post reported that Hillary for America and the Democratic National Committee had funded, via Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele's creation of a series of memos relying largely on Russian government sources to make allegations against Donald Trump and his associates . A letter from the law firm Perkins Coie acknowledged that, " [t]o assist in its representation of the DNC and Hillary for America, Perkins Coie engaged Fusion GPS in April of2016" and that "the engagement concluded prior to the November 2016 Presidential election
the Committee has been investigating the FBI' s relationship with Christopher Steele during this time his work was funded by Hillary for America and the DNC. The scope of our review includes the extent to which the FBI may have relied on information relayed by Mr. Steele in seeking judicial authorization for surveillance of individuals associated with Mr. Trump. It also includes whether any applications that may have been made for permission for such surveillance fully and accurately disclosed:
(1) the source of Fusion GPS's and Mr. Steele's funding;
(2) the degree to which his claims were or were not verified;
(3) the motivations of Mr. Steele, his clients, and his sources; and
( 4) representations about their contacts with the press.
The letter then goes on to list twelve questions - the last being a request for all communications between a list of 40 individuals or entities - including Christopher Steele, Bruce Ohr, Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, Glenn Simpson and former CIA Director John Brennan.
The six recipients of letters have two weeks to comply with the following requests (note; "Hillary for America" is replaced by "the DNC" depending on who the letter is addressed to):
1. Prior to the Washington Post 's article in October of 2017, were you anyone else at Hillary for America aware of Mr. Steele's efforts on behalf of the Clinton campaign to compile and distribute allegations about Mr. Trump and the Russian government? If so, when and how did you first learn of his activities on the campaign's behalf? Please provide all related documents.
2. Did you or anyone else at Hillary for America receive copies of any of the memoranda comprising Mr. Steele's dossier prior to its publication by Buzzfeed in January of 2017? If so, how and when? Please provide all related documents.
3. Regardless of whether you or your associates received copies of the actual memoranda, did you or anyone else at Hillary for America otherwise receive information contained in the dossier prior to Buzzfeed publishing the dossier in January of 2017? If so, how and when? Please provide all related documents.
4. Did you or anyone else at Hillary for America receive other memoranda written or forwarded by Mr. Steele regarding Mr. Trump and his associates that were not published as part of the Buzzfeed dossier? If so, how and when? Please provide all related documents.
5. Did you or anyone else at Hillary for America distribute outside of the organization any o f the dossier memoranda, information contained therein, or other information obtained by Mr. Steele? If so, please list who distributed the information, what was distributed, and to whom it was distributed. Please provide all related documents.
6. Did you or anyone else at Hillary for America communicate with any government officials - whether in the executive, legislative or judicial branches - regarding the dossier memoranda, information contained therein, or other information obtained by Mr. Steele? If so, please list the parties involved in the communication, the content of the communication, and the date and means of the communication. Please provide all related documents. References such as "anyone at Hillary for America" include all of Hillary for America's officers, employees, contractors, subcontractors, advisors, volunteers, and, of course, Secretary Clinton herself. Mr. Podesta January 25, 2018
7. Did you or anyone else at Hillary for America instruct, request, suggest, or imply that any individuals should pass along information to Mr. Steele or his intermediaries? Please provide all related documents.
8. Did you or anyone else at Hillary for America communicate with members of the press regarding the dossier memoranda , information contained therein, or other information obtained by Mr. Steele? If so, please list the parties involved in the communication, the content of the communication, and the date and means of the communication. Please provide all related documents.
9. Did you or anyone else at Hillary for America inform Secretary Clinton of Mr. Steele's efforts , whether by name or not, or of the allegations he was spreading? If so, who and when? Please provide all related documents.
10. Were you or anyone else at Hillary for America aware of Mr. Steele's contacts with the FBI or other government agencies prior to the 2016 election? If so, who? When and how did you or they become aware? Please provide all related documents.
11. Did you or anyone else at Hillary for America encourage, whether directly or through intermediaries, Mr. Steele to initiate or continue contacts with the FBI or other government agencies? If so, who and when? Please provide all related documents.
12. For the period from March 2016 through January 2017, please provide all communications to, from, copying, or relating to: Fusion GPS ; Bean LLC; Glenn Simpson ; Mary Jacoby; Peter Fritsch ; Tom Catan; Jason Felch; Neil King; David Michaels; Taylor Sears; Patrick Corcoran; Laura Sego; Jay Bagwell; Erica Castro; Nellie Ohr ; Rinat Akhmetshin; Ed Lieberman; Edward Baumgartner; Orbis Business Intelligence Limited; Orbis Business International Limited; Walsingham Training Limited; Walsingham Partners Limited; Christopher Steele ; Christopher Burrows; Sir Andrew Wood, Paul Hauser; 4 Oleg Deripaska; Cody Shearer; Sidney Blumenthal ; Jon Winer; 5 Kathleen Kavalec; Victoria Nuland; Daniel Jones; 6 Bruce Ohr; Peter Strzok; Andrew McCabe; James Baker; 7 Sally Yates; Loretta Lynch; John Brennan.
fleur de lis -> SickDollar Jan 27, 2018 12:26 PM PermalinkThe_Juggernaut -> fleur de lis Jan 27, 2018 1:04 PM Permalink
There is more than enough information now for the FBI to pounce -- if they wanted to -- which they don't.
Two weeks is a long time for Clinton & Co. to hold crisis conferences and come up with stories that they will all agree upon.
Rest assured they are rehearsing every day for the biggest, Oscar award winning performances that America has ever seen.
The MSM will be the movie reviewers and will be biased in favor of their most very favorite actors and actresses.
It will be the best performance the DC Swamp ever produced.
It will be interesting to watch our slave masters keeping a straight face whilst spinning tales under oath, and obfuscating, filibustering, and changing the subject at will.
Expect a lot of "what is is," a lot of Russian spy stories, a lot of dementia-level memory loss, all while they are picking up fabulous .gov paychecks and bennies.
Do not expect any of them to spend a day in jail -- maybe a few fines but they can easily pay those since they will be somehow someway billed back to the taxpayer anyway.
In a really perverse way, we are paying for a movie.
Oh, the fabulousness of it all.
We have the obnoxious, sleazy, over paid lead performers(Clinton & Co., and the DNC); we have the supporting actors ( FBI ); we have the theatre (Congress); we have the admission fee (taxes); and we have the silver screen -- the TV and internet.
Opening night is in two weeks!
stizazz -> The_Juggernaut Jan 27, 2018 2:21 PM Permalink
Why are they taking so long... maybe they're trying to drag this into the midterm campaign season?shitshitshit -> balanced Jan 27, 2018 6:50 PM Permalink
Dragging is what politicians do. Besides, they have to protect their hold on powerSethPoor -> BigJim Jan 27, 2018 8:00 PM Permalink
At last we now know why Hillary put so much efforts and other people's money in her failed book after she's been deposed. That's going to be the official narrative of this fiasco.
So all these guys have to learn how to read and then report the page numbers that apply within 2 weeks.
Life can be so hard...tyrone -> fleur de lis Jan 27, 2018 7:12 PM Permalink
Another name to add to the list should be Comeys brother, who happens to be the accountant for the Clinton foundation. And yes, Muellers summer home in the Hamptons happens to be guaranteed by the Clinton foundationRakksan -> fleur de lis Jan 28, 2018 3:48 AM Permalink
"....There is more than enough information now for the FBI to pounce -- if they wanted to -- which they don't...."
No hurry... let the guilty ones sweat awhile. Meantime, they do these sorts of information gathering forays, knowing all of their wrongdoing beforehand, looking for the fool who decides to lie or stonewall. Then the fibby will bring those in, squeeze them, show them the evidence, refresh them of the law, the penalty and watch them crumble, perhaps offer them leniency in return for information. THEN.. watch them cough up NAMES/PLACES of all the rest they know are complicit, in an effort to save their own skins.archie bird -> fleur de lis Jan 28, 2018 7:28 AM Permalink
If the FBI pounced, would you trust them?Big Creek Rising -> SickDollar Jan 27, 2018 12:41 PM Permalink
Brilliant. You're right. THis is nothing more than a dog and pony show for the taxpayers. Along with this whole 'Q' distraction, it is quite entertaining.
The 'strongly worded letter' is just that. A STRONGLY WORDED LETTER we've seen this WHOLE plot before.
It has no teeth.
The bad actors are probably laughing their asses off. The only thing the congressional committee can do is 'invite' the bad actors to make testimony under oath. Which they'll promptly refuse. Done and DONE.
I'm guessing this whole show will continue up until re-election time so Trumpy can get re-elected. But then again(both sides), steal elections anyways(on those easily-hackable-and-proven-so, electronic voting machines that are outdated) I don't know why they even need 'us' anymore.Occams_Razor_Trader -> swmnguy Jan 28, 2018 8:43 AM Permalink
Question 13. When was the last time you saw Seth Rich (alive or dead). Please describe date, time, location and provide any supporting documents.ConanTheContrarian1 -> MagicHandPuppet Jan 27, 2018 1:44 PM Permalink
The CIA was used by the Ohrs to manufacture the dossier, Fusion GPS was a subcontractor, and allowed to do a query search of classified information, to GENERATE and CREATE the dossier! Filtering it back to the UK so it looks like it came from a legitimate source.
That's the big story and weaponizing the CIA against a political opponent and continuing as the opponent transitions to President elect?? That there is sedition AND High Treason.brianshell -> ConanTheContrarian1 Jan 27, 2018 3:03 PM Permalink
On the other hand, probably more than half of Americans aren't paying attention. Giving two weeks is more convincing to those who aren't awake.wee-weed up -> MagicHandPuppet Jan 27, 2018 1:47 PM Permalink
After hearing the liberal on the street interviews, where "the end justifies the means" is the prevailing meme, the other half of the public doesn't really care about justice if it interferes with their agenda. It would seem that generations of our youth have been taught communist propaganda in our schools.
At least having the Deep Globe players on their heels gives Trump and the truth seekers time to repair some of the damage that forty years of corruption has wrought. Be sure to repair the education system that has taken their orders from the communist United Nations agenda 21 doctrine.Terminaldude -> wee-weed up Jan 27, 2018 3:24 PM Permalink
A secret FISA warrant should have been issued on all of them before the letters were delivered. Then during the two weeks they have to "get their stories straight" get it all recorded and then let the fireworks (shock & awe) begin. Then they WOULD go to jail. But CONgress is not that smart.divingengineer -> TruthHammer Jan 27, 2018 12:20 PM Permalink
Oh they are that smart, they just pretend not to be. Most of them are compromised and are scared shitless. The Republican F-for Brains are the most scared, because they are in power and "SHOULD" be working to get the truth out. It implicates them though, is the problem.
Most people watching snippets on TV have no clue and believe what CNN and MSNBC etc. are puking out day after day.Fail2Deliver -> Troll Magnet Jan 27, 2018 9:41 PM Permalink
TruthHammer has it nailed.
The Senate Committee already has all that information. Additionally, they will give them the chance to lie, or contradict one another, as they sit back and see who they select to be thrown under the bus.
I suspect it will be Brazil, I think she knows it too. It's not been a good year for crooked black politicians.Chupacabra-322 -> BokkeDavola Jan 27, 2018 10:43 AM Permalink
I am very suspicious of a known, outspoken Republican Trump hater, Senator Lindsay Graham, inserting himself into an investigation where valuable information about potential Democratic corruption against Trump will be reviewed by him.
Seems he is setting himself up to be a middle man for the Dems rather than investigating any crimes that may land his friends in jailchunga -> J S Bach Jan 27, 2018 11:57 AM Permalink
This is Criminal Treason & Seditious acts as well as Political Espionage involving the highest Compartmentalized Levels of the NSA, GCHQ, CIA, FBI, DOJ, IRS and perhaps other Agencies it's Agents & Officials including the Office of the CEO "President"at the time Barrack H. Obama.
This entire Criminal Deep State Intelligence Operation was data mining formuling the first of its kind Parallel Construction Case consisting of a Criminal Deep State CIA, FBI, DOJ Scripted False Narrative / PsyOp With the objective ousting a sitting President via a soft coup.
The Criminal, illegal domestic surveillance of US citizens without a warrant or probable cause is only one symptom of many of how corrupt our government is at all levels. Voters don't matter. The deep state is not elected. Money talks in Washington and the revolving door spins like a top. Criminality & Corruption is so rampant, it is neither illegal or "hidden in plain sight" anymore.
Criminal Congressmen can profit on insider information (no thanks to the Stock Act and Harry Reid who put a stop to it). Special interests not only put their puppets in power and select their candidates before the election but write their own laws verbatim and hand them over to their puppets WHO DON'T EVEN READ THE TEXT THEY ARE PASSING!
This is not conspiracy folks. This is the country you live in. The only reason Trump is pissed about it is because it AFFECTED HIM! If you think he cares about you, then you haven't been paying attention.
Everyone except those who are supportive of a police state, and neo-feudalism are in for a rough time. That is, of course, if this once great nation doesn't get turned into a pile of ash for starting WWIII - likely in 2018.
Realize this didn't happen overnight and it didn't happen without the people's consent. Folks didn't have a problem with special interests taking over our government despite repeat warnings from Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan and others. Folks believed what the MSM spoon fed them. People didn't bother to question or hold their leaders accountable. They allowed their rights to be systematically stripped away with new legislation that made the constitution effectively obsolete. This goes back to at least Wilson, the formation of the FED, the Counsel On Foreign Relations, Rockefeller, the Rothchild's, JP Morgan, .etc. What wwe are experiencing now is the maturity of a Criminal corrupt government who no longer exists for the people it claims to represent and instead sees them as an obstacle (as Rex Tillerson so eloquently put it).
All evil needs is for good people to remain silent. The American people have remained collectively silent (divided, and distracted) for generations. I do not see them uniting any time soon.
Insane times indeed...NeedtoSecede -> J S Bach Jan 27, 2018 2:35 PM Permalink
For the 100th time...these people don't care about subpoenas from the frauds in congress. Honest Hill'rey's IT guy Bryan Pagliano got two of them, last year. He ignored them both.
I'm not making this up; here's the letter Chaffetz sent to Irrelevant General Stiff Sessions requesting enforcement.
That fucking weasel Sessions did cock about it. Chaffetz announced he's not running again. At this point I'm kinda rootin' for Mueller and I hope he's throws Stiff Sessions in prison. I really do.ReZn8r -> J S Bach Jan 27, 2018 4:04 PM Permalink
I agree JSB. I am so tired of the "In The Crosshairs" headlines too. I don't give a fuck about crosshairs. Until someone has the balls to apply steady pressure to the trigger to send the projectile to the target, crosshairs have never killed anyone. Press the trigger FFS if you have them in the crosshairs...
And if it is Grassley, Gowdy, Nunes and all the other bluster queen shitstains in Congress behind the scope, The Witch and her crew have little to fear.
Rule of law is dead, this is Full Retard Banana Republic stuff right here...
Yep, the Senate is just trying to look important and needed. All they are doing is stirring this shit pot up for no reason other than to say ' American Citizens look at us' we care.
The complete Senate is DIRTY just like the bastards they will be talking to. Every fucking one of these people will lie, take the 5th, pull a Lois 'dicksuker' Lerner,and some will even refuse to show up. Everything the Senate is going to do will be a detriment to getting the '4 page Memo' release.
Jan 27, 2018 | theconservativetreehouse.com
WASHINGTON – As part of their ongoing oversight efforts to ensure that the FBI's law enforcement activities are free of improper political influence, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) yesterday sent six letters seeking information and documents regarding Christopher Steele's work on behalf of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary for America. The letters seek information and documents relating to those political organizations' knowledge of and involvement in Mr. Steele's work and his reported interactions with the FBI while he was working on behalf of these political organizations.
The letters were sent to:The Democratic National Committee (DNC) Hillary for America (HFA) Former DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Former DNC Chair Donna Brazile HFA Chair John Podesta HFA Chief Strategist Joel Benenson An example of the requested information:
♦ For the period from March 2016 through January 2017, please provide all communications to, from, copying, or relating to: Fusion GPS; Bean LLC; Glenn Simpson; Mary Jacoby; Peter Fritsch; Tom Catan; Jason Felch; Neil King; David Michaels; Taylor Sears; Patrick Corcoran; Laura Sego; Jay Bagwell; Erica Castro; Nellie Ohr; Rinat Akhmetshin; Ed Lieberman; Edward Baumgartner; Orbis Business Intelligence Limited; Orbis Business International Limited; Walsingham Training Limited; Walsingham Partners Limited; Christopher Steele; Christopher Burrows; Sir Andrew Wood, Paul Hauser;4 Oleg Deripaska; Cody Shearer; Sidney Blumenthal; Jon Winer;5 Kathleen Kavalec; Victoria Nuland; Daniel Jones;6 Bruce Ohr; Peter Strzok; Andrew McCabe; James Baker; 7 Sally Yates; Loretta Lynch; John Brennan.
... ... ...
It would appear that Senate Judiciary Chairman Senator Chuck Grassley is sending out advanced notice of who he is looking into as part of the Steele Dossier construct and how it was used by the DOJ/FBI.
fabrabbit , January 27, 2018 at 12:10 amDW Schultz's lawyers will be busy at the copy machine. She's going to want that $1000 she made fun of.Carrie2 , January 27, 2018 at 11:13 amfabrabbit, do you really think all of these will report back? No way! They are running away like rabbits or working overtime to hide as much as they can. Truth and karma is taking over and there is no escape for them as eventually they are caught and we want them hanged for treason of the worst kind.jstefano1 , January 27, 2018 at 12:24 pmThe addressee of this letter is not actually John Podesta. The addressees are the named targets in the body of the letter. The question being presented is, "Who wants to get in line to show us what you've got for us as a witness for the 'prosecution?'" Another way to put it is, "Who wants to be the John Dean of this scandal?"LibertyONE , January 27, 2018 at 12:12 amI'll bet that IF Sen. Grassley receives ANY response(s) they will be in the form of " thanks BUT no thanks". Unless he is willing to issue subpoenas to these ind's to testify under oath IN PUBLIC he's going to get jack sh*t!JoAnn Leichliter , January 27, 2018 at 9:02 amSubpoenas will follow noncompliance.jhynds , January 27, 2018 at 10:16 amAnd the Shredding / bleach-bit will have taken place. I'm ready for warrants and forced entry.ladypenquin , January 27, 2018 at 9:27 amLiberty, he is willing. Each day has brought him moving another piece on his chess board. Have seen no letting up.OldSaltUSNR , January 27, 2018 at 12:58 pm
This letter has the effect of a significant number of people having to look over their shoulder, and no matter how protected they may be in their circle of "friends," everyone who knows them is going to be thinking about this.
Their children may or may not hear anything from schoolmates, considering the private schools they attend, but somewhere someone will send them a social media message.
People will talk, something that even these libs might be concerned about.Subpoenas, without a prosecutor and empanelled grand jury, leads to a loop going nowhere. NONE of these people will respond with any constructive information, unless they are looking at an indictment. IF they respond under oath, and/or under subpoena, it'll be to plead the 5th. After that, if evidence exists to indict and they are under criminal liability, the dam will burst, someone will sing, and then a choir will develop, as rats try to escape their fate.scott467 , January 27, 2018 at 3:32 pm
There aren't many G. Gordon Liddy's on the Democrat side who will willingly go to prison for Obama or Clinton."There aren't many G. Gordon Liddy's on the Democrat side who will willingly go to prison for Obama or Clinton."sc1200 , January 27, 2018 at 3:45 pm
If there is even a single one who would go to prison for these heinous criminals and traitors, who would it be? There is no honor among thieves. Even less among traitors. Who is going to throw their life away, so Hussein or Sick Hillary can laugh at what suckers they are?
Besides that, it would only consign such a person to a longer prison term. Even if there was someone foolish enough to fall on their sword to protect Hussein or Clinton, it wouldn't protect them at all, because NSA already has enough evidence to convict everyone involved a hundred times over.
That is the beauty of their arrogance and brazen disregard of the rule of law; they did these crimes over a period of EIGHT YEARS, so the evidence is EVERYWHERE. It's all over the Internet, all over their personal servers, all over foreign intelligence agency files (who 'hacked' them), and the NSA has every last byte, of everything these criminals did, for the entirety of the Hussein treasonocracy.
If anyone cooperates, MAYBE there will be some form of leniency for a few lower level traitors. But that cooperation is not necessary, and even if they ALL tried to protect Hussein and Clinton, it wouldn't change a thing.
They're all going down anyway. Cooperation or no cooperation.There are plenty of Jim and Susan mcDougal's on the Democrat side. They are fellow travellers for the cause and going to jail is a badge of honor for them. They know they will be taken care of when they get out.David Spence (@spence28516) , January 27, 2018 at 3:16 pmGrassley already knows the answers and has the documents. He is giving them the rope to hang themselves by lying about the contacts and denying the existence of documents in the custody of the OIG. "Never ask a suspect a question to which you don't know the answer."MTK , January 27, 2018 at 5:35 pmIf a crime is committed in secret and held in secret. Does not knowing, make it any less a crime? To which they say, "Prove It." Ok To which, "We all cheer!!"webgirlpdx , January 27, 2018 at 12:15 am
If Grassley is asking for it, he does not need it. That is how daming the evidence behind the memo is. #ReleaseTheMemoWill any of them have the guts to communicate with each other ..or will it be smoke signalsChe Pup , January 27, 2018 at 12:16 amDoes anyone else remember, back in May 17 that one off leak of a deep web encrypted chat between 13 parties in a chat room? Makes kind of interesting reading all these months later. http://allnewspipeline.com/Smoking_Gun_Deep_State_Private_Chat.phpAmericaFirst , January 27, 2018 at 12:59 amWow! I'm sure I never saw that. Five people commented, but the carrier said 13 people were logged into the conversation. Would like to think that the OIG or House Intelligence Agency has been made aware in the intervening 8 months.Mike , January 27, 2018 at 1:27 am
Michael Flynn really ought to withdraw his guilty plea before sentencing, he was definitely targeted.
Like Liked by 4 peopleV posted this 1-17-18, 5:20 pm. I am not a computer geek, no offense, so I don't know if it is real. But it sure is interesting.beach lover , January 27, 2018 at 8:07 am
Like Liked by 1 personWow. This also could explain a reason RR (Rosenstein) is going along with them. Very Interesting.. and agree. Flynn was set up. This proves it.Thomas , January 27, 2018 at 12:10 pm
Like Liked by 1 personWould seem to align with the FBI "failing to preserve" texts in the period leading up to Mueller's appointment. No telling what Strzok and Page were saying to each other.Matthew LeBlanc , January 27, 2018 at 12:36 am
Like LikeYates, Lynch, Brennan named in letter. I go to sleep a little better tonight. Much better than those sh*th@les will be.Alison , January 27, 2018 at 12:47 am
Like Liked by 6 peopleAnd if WE have questions about why certain names were left off, I bet THEY are freaked about names not listed, wondering if anyone has been spilling their gutsbeach lover , January 27, 2018 at 8:11 am
Like Liked by 5 peopleI thought the same thing. They have to wonder how Grassley is getting all this information when they went to such great lengths to cover all the dirty tracks. It also proves, that Grassley, Nunes et al.. are much further into uncovering the facts than what we are hearing in the news. The MSM is still caught up on Trump firing Mueller, and FNC is talking memo and the lovebirds.anotherworriedmom , January 27, 2018 at 9:34 am
The powers that be are into Chapter 4 while we are still reading the introduction.
Like LikeDidn't IG Horowitz just finish delivering the 1.2 million docs? Makes you wonder if the list of names came from the documents.Hotlanta Mike , January 27, 2018 at 11:30 am MTK , January 27, 2018 at 5:49 pm
Like LikeRead the last paragraph, the only unsurprising omission of names from the list.Southpaw , January 27, 2018 at 12:42 am
Former President Obama.
Like LikeSmall group is going to fill an auditorium if this keeps up.H.R. , January 27, 2018 at 4:21 pm
Like Liked by 4 peopleThe Capital One Arena, where the Georgetown Hoyas play basketball, seats 20,600. That should take care of all of the 'small group' that was involved.Kay Cedilla , January 27, 2018 at 12:44 am
Like LikeFinally the men are running things according to law and maturity. The last child president did everything the New York Times said to do and wore short pants.MaineCoon , January 27, 2018 at 12:47 am
Like Liked by 4 peopleNone of the 6 record request letters designated an expected date for producing the requested documents, information, etc. IMO this might not be voluntarily produced. They basically would be producing what's comparable to discovery in a lawsuit. They will be pondering their defense. Not sure if they will force a suit or cough it up. The DNC never did cough up their server to the FBI after their "Russian hacking". Course, maybe Szrok never asked for it*cough*.ALEX , January 27, 2018 at 12:56 am
It will be produced – one way or the other -- ut not anytime soon, imo. At this point it's adversarial.
Poor Donna. She's going to have to play nice in her old stomping ground – or maybe not.
Turn of the screw.
Like Liked by 4 peopleIt says respond by February 8th on Page twoInquisitorLost , January 27, 2018 at 2:21 am
Like Liked by 7 peopleSo give a week of post memo release developments to occur before they one by one watch each other to see who might be playing too nice.fabrabbit , January 27, 2018 at 2:37 am
Like Liked by 2 peopleThose paralegals will be working around the clock to meet this deadline!4harrisonblog , January 27, 2018 at 11:52 am
Like Liked by 1 personMy DIL is the senior paralegal at her firm. They do the work the attorney tells the story.Roger Duroid , January 27, 2018 at 6:25 am
Like LikeOr we will write a sternly worder tweet.twohawk , January 27, 2018 at 5:54 pm
Like Liked by 1 personI thought I read they had 8 days?Streak 264 , January 27, 2018 at 12:56 am
Like LikeSaudis still purging corruption and taking money from the corrupt: The WSJ (No paywall)Hopper Creek (@HopperCreek) , January 27, 2018 at 1:55 am
Hope this is what Trump is working on. Didn't Trump go to Saudi before the purge started?
If so maybe Trump got them to do it.
Like Liked by 2 peopleHe told them publicly at the mid east summit to " Ger Rid of them; Get rid of them " referring to terrorist enablers.TFred , January 27, 2018 at 1:10 am
Like Liked by 3 peopleSeems like the age old tactic of tossing a smoke grenade into a hole to see how many rats run out.nimrodman , January 27, 2018 at 1:11 am
Like Liked by 6 peopleI was gonna ask "What's magic about the March 2016 start date?" so I took a look at the timeline spreadsheet someone here provided. There was a lot going on and I'm not knowledgeable enough to zero in on any one thing. January 2017 ending date includes PresTrump's inauguration, of course.D. Manny , January 27, 2018 at 2:57 pm
Let's see if this posts:
2016-02-25 Peter-Strzok-Lisa Page texting event DOJ
2016-03-01 FGPS approaches Perkins Coie DOJ
2016-03-03 Sabina Menschel donates to Hillary for America PAC.
2016-03-04 Carson drops out of race
2016-03-04 Peter Strzok texts Lisa Page, calling Trump idiot, whose nomination would be good for Hillary DC
2016-03-06 George Papadopoulos joins Trump campaign DOJ
2016-03-15 Rubio drops out of race
2016-03-15 Between this date and 9/15/16, Papadopoulos tries 6 times to arrange meetings between Trump campaign and Russians, all are rejected
2016-03-15 Mike Rogers orders an audit of 702 About Queries
2016-03-18 Peter Strzok-Lisa Page texting event
2016-03-19 John Podesta receives a phishing email asking him to change his password
2016-03-21 Carter Page hired as adviser?
2016-04-05 Peter Strzok interviews Huma Abedin DC
2016-04-07 Obama gives Fox interview declaring Hillary's handling of e-mails as carelessness.
Like Liked by 2 peopleThis is what you should zero in onPeoria Jones , January 27, 2018 at 1:15 am
2016-03-01 FGPS approaches Perkins Coie DOJ
Like Liked by 2 peopleIt's a bit late "to ensure that the FBI's law enforcement activities are free of improper political influence."saywhat64 , January 27, 2018 at 1:29 am
But welcome to the party, and don't harsh our buzz.
Like Liked by 1 personThis letter sounds like what Mueller and his team should have sent out in the form of a subpoena if they were doing a real investigation as per their appointmentbeach lover , January 27, 2018 at 8:55 am
Like Liked by 1 personwell yeah.. the key word is IF they WANTED to do a real investigation. RR set the path for his charge although no one ever asked why it was always only against Trump collusion and never Hillary. That as far as I am aware has never been looked at by Mueller and his team. Which seems a little strange what all we know now, why that has never answered by those in the DOJ.madelinesminion , January 27, 2018 at 1:36 am
Like Liked by 3 peopleSundance I don't know how you can keep up with all this information, thank you!S. Armaticus , January 27, 2018 at 2:12 am
Like Liked by 6 peopleOleg Deripaska; Sidney Blumenthal; Victoria Nuland;Mickey Wasp , January 27, 2018 at 7:20 am
IOW, funding, support, operations.
Victoria no doubt cut her teeth in the Ukraine on this sort of thing
Like Liked by 1 personVictoria Nuland is a lifelong swamp rat neo-con and married to Robert Kagan. Talk about a duo of the lets destroy everything Nuland started with B Clinton Admin under Strobe Talbot (highly involved in Yugoslavia takedown) and rolled over to be a 'chief advisor to VP Dick Cheney (couldn't wait to bomb Iraq). Then onto Hillary's state dept and was the real 'point person' in the color revolution in the Ukraine and dis-info on Russia And, this is a biggie – Nuland was originator of "The Video" talking points on Benghazi.CTHLurker , January 27, 2018 at 2:16 am
She'll shed her skin for any administration, as long as she can reek havoc and her and her husband, along with military industrial investors profit greatly You take this b*tch this down all problems (wars and covet ops) in Europe and North Africa are exposed.
Like Liked by 6 peopleHoly sh*t, Oleg Deripaska is a close Putin associate and Russian oligarch. If they have reason to believe the Clinton camp / democrats were in touch with him, the "Russia collusion" story pivots on a dime.Golden Advice , January 27, 2018 at 9:07 am
Edited by Admin
Like Liked by 3 people"Edited by Admin "JoAnn Leichliter , January 27, 2018 at 9:16 am
Like Liked by 1 personDeripaska is BFFs with Andy McCabe. There is quite the history there. According to field investigators (FBI), every time Deripaska's name came up in an investigation, McCabe intruded upon the investigation–a very unusual action by a higher-up. You put two and two together and see what comes up.V , January 27, 2018 at 11:58 am
Like Liked by 4 peopleThat's right.Nyc007 , January 27, 2018 at 2:31 am
Very interesting letter and list of names.
Especially McCabe and Deripaska being on the same list.
12-17-17 Article reports that Andrew McCabe is friends with and had unauthorized mtgs w Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska – same one connected to Manafort. CIA and FBI good guys say McCabe's MO is like convicted Russian spy in the FBI, Hanssen.
McCabe Bruce Ohr connection also shown in the article.
And IIRC Manafort worked with Fusion GPS.
Like Liked by 1 personMy sixth sense is that this is for show, ala Trey Gowdy. Prove me wrong and talk me off the cliff.covfefe999 , January 27, 2018 at 9:12 am
Like LikeMiracles happen.4harrisonblog , January 27, 2018 at 11:59 am
Like Liked by 1 personJust listen to your sixth sense and learn from it after it is all over with.D. Manny , January 27, 2018 at 2:55 pm
Like LikeLet's follow your logic through to its final completion. If you believe that law and order no longer exists in the US, that means the US no longer exists and that we have become a dictatorship.thinkthinkthink , January 27, 2018 at 4:19 pm
So now that you realize exactly what you mean by your statement, what are you going to do about that?
Like Liked by 1 person10,000 likes D. Manny.deqwik2 , January 27, 2018 at 3:38 am
Like LikeDaniel J. Jones former staffer for Diane Feinstein.
"The Penn Quarter Group (The PQG) is led by Daniel J. Jones. Daniel has extensive experience advising senior business executives and U.S. government officials. He has spent more than a decade leading, managing, and participating in complex investigations for the U.S. Senate and the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, including leading deployments and fact-finding missions to more than a dozen foreign countries. As a staff member of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Daniel led, managed, and served as the chief author of several prominent investigations, including the largest investigative review in U.S. Senate history,