This interview is interesting from a few aspects.  First, Carter Page states he was a long-standing source of information for the intelligence apparatus, specifically for the CIA for decades.  Secondly, the framework by Page as outlined, and the underlying motive of the FBI to use him as an unwitting target for the FISA application, is essentially confirmation of our prior reconciled point on why the FBI exploited him.  [Watch]

It never made sense that U.S. Person Carter Page was an FBI witness from 2013 through to March/May 2016 and yet in October 2016, to achieve a FISA warrant, the FBI called him an agent of a foreign government.  [FISA APPLICATION]  It never made sense until with more information about the Mueller investigation we realized the FISA warrant was essentially irrelevant; what the Obama intel apparatus needed for their “insurance policy” was The Dossier.
Fusion GPS was not contracted in April 2016 to research Donald Trump. The intelligence community was already doing unlawful NSA-database surveillance and political spy operations. They already knew everything about the Trump campaign. The Obama intelligence community needed Fusion GPS to give them a plausible justification, an insurance policy of sorts, for pre-existing surveillance and spy operations.
Fusion-GPS fulfilled that contract by delivering the Steele Dossier.
(more…)

Fox News host Maria Bartiromo interviewed Mark Meadows earlier today on her Sunday morning show.  This is quite possibly the most revealing interview so far this year on the Obama ‘Spygate’ and surveillance investigation.  The interview is jam-packed with info.

Clapper and Brennan demanding protection for sources and methods, but at the same time they’re saying people weren’t spied on. … Well, you wouldn’t need to protect sources and methods if people in the Trump administration weren’t spied on.

The segment with Meadows begins at 18:37 [prompted, just hit play] and includes multiple new aspects including: •Weissmann/Mueller report collapsing under scrutiny. •New investigative documents likely mean criminal indictments. •New evidence of a “cover-up” within the FBI. •AG Bill Barr has firm disposition to provide accountability. •Expect significant delay in OIG Horowitz report (ie. Steele interview etc.). •FBI Papadopoulos covert recordings likely to be public. •Overall declassification delayed; likely no release prior to OIG report.
https://youtu.be/qCJa3MDqEaE?t=18m30s
(more…)

In federal court yesterday (Friday, June 7). In a FOIA case ruling (full pdf below)  Judge James Boasberg was deciding public release over two issues related to the memos of former FBI Director James Comey.  Backstory HERE and HERE.

Judge Boasberg was deciding what could be publicly released, meaning current redactions removed, based on two connected events: (#1) The content of the Comey Memos; and (#2) the declarations of lead FBI agent for Robert Mueller’s special counsel, David Archey, in describing those memos.  CNN had filed a lawsuit to gain full access.
[Note: the descriptions of the Comey memos by FBI agent David Archey are known as the “Archey Declarations” – Read Here.]
For those who may not be aware, there are so many memos (dozens) when assembled they seem to make up an actual diary of moment-by-moment events, during the FBI investigation of Donald Trump, as documented by FBI Director James Comey.
(more…)

After a court filing revealed how Andrew Weissmann and Robert Mueller carefully edited the telephone message by John Dowd to Michael Flynn’s attorney, Dowd points out the motives of Weissmann and Mueller was to create a fraudulent report.

Backstory Below
In the Michael Flynn sentencing phase Judge Emmet Sullivan requested the Mueller prosecution team provide records related to the case. [Backstory Here]
Among other evidence, the judge ordered the government to file on the public docket “the transcript of the voicemail recording” from President Trump’s attorney John Dowd to Michael Flynn. The transcript of that voicemail recording was cited in the Mueller report as evidence that team Trump was trying to obstruct justice by shaping witness testimony.
(more…)

When previously questioned by Catherine Herridge about timing for declassification of documents President Trump noted “when they need them“.  Within the response, who “they” were was never clarified; but the later directive to empower executive branch cabinet member AG Bill Barr provided a more clear reference.
In the legislative branch representatives Mark Meadows, Doug Collins and John Ratcliffe are the primary House members who were clearly helping to organize timing and distribution.  Additionally, AG Barr has appointed a prosecutor in John H Durham to review the overall DOJ, FBI and intelligence community activity.  Obviously Durham along with Inspector General Horowitz would benefit from declassification of documents in both of their reviews.

Earlier today John Ratcliffe outlined his view of U.S. Attorney John Durham as a benefactor of the declassification insofar as he would gain information for his review.  Interestingly Ratcliffe noted Durham was essentially a ‘special counsel’ and could use access to documents as a tool toward a grand jury review [ergo DOJ declassification would be needed].
Along with noting the likelihood of Durham’s intent, Ratcliffe seemed to temper expectations of any upcoming publicly visible declassification.
The possibility of Durham exploiting/using documents declassified by his boss, AG Bill Barr, would suggest some of the material may not be made public; indeed that’s the inference from Ratcliffe earlier today as he outlined to Maria Bartiromo.
(more…)

Representative John Ratcliffe is one of the few (only 3 or 4) who has seen all of the known classified documents surrounding the corrupt DOJ and FBI effort.  In this interview Mr. Ratcliffe discusses the ongoing issues within the review of the corrupt DOJ/FBI activity.
Interestingly Ratcliffe uses specific wording in his notation of the appointment of John H Durham; akin to Attorney General Bill Barr appointing a “special counsel”.

(more…)

Not enough people understand the role of the Lawfare group in the corruption and political weaponization of the DOJ, FBI and larger intelligence community.
What Media Matters is to corrupt left-wing media, the Lawfare group is to the corrupt DOJ and FBI.
All of the headline names around the seditious conspiracy against Donald Trump assemble within the network of the Lawfare group.
Three days after the October 21st, 2016, FISA warrant was obtained, Benjamin Wittes outlined the insurance policy approach.
FBI Director James Comey, FBI Legal Counsel James Baker, Comey memo recepient Daniel Richman, Deputy AG Sally Yates, Comey friend Benjamin Wittes, FBI lead agent Peter Strzok, FBI counsel Lisa Page, Mueller lead Andrew Weissmann and the Mueller team of lawyers, all of them -and more- are connected to the Lawfare group; and this network provides the sounding board for all of the weaponized approaches, including the various new legal theories as outlined within the Weissmann-Mueller Report.
The Lawfare continuum is very simple.  The corrupt 2015 Clinton exoneration; which became the corrupt 2016 DOJ/FBI Trump investigation; which became the corrupt 2017 DOJ/FBI Mueller probe; is currently the 2019 “impeachment” plan.  Weissmann and Mueller delivering their report evolved the plan from corrupt legal theory into corrupt political targeting.  Every phase within the continuum holds the same goal.
The current “impeachment strategy” is planned-out within the Lawfare group.
(more…)

In the Michael Flynn sentencing phase Judge Emmet Sullivan requested the Mueller prosecution team provide records related to the case. [Backstory Here]
Among other evidence, the judge ordered the government to file on the public docket “the transcript of the voicemail recording” from President Trump’s attorney John Dowd to Michael Flynn.  The transcript of that voicemail recording was cited in the Mueller report as evidence that team Trump was trying to obstruct justice by shaping witness testimony. 
Today, the Mueller team released the transcript of the call (full pdf below). However, as originally noticed by RosieMemos the released transcript clearly shows the Mueller team  selectively edited the transcript to weaponized their portrayal of the contact. 
Compare the actual transcript [Source] to the Mueller Report [source]:

[Mueller Report, Volume II, pg 121]

Notice how Mueller leaves out (via edits) the context of the call, and the important qualifier: “without you having to give up any confidential information.”   Clearly Dowd does not want to interfere in Flynn’s cooperation with the special counsel, which is opposite to the twisted claim presented by Weissmann and Mueller’s report.
After attorney Techno Fog shared the new information with Mr. Dowd, Trump’s former attorney provided the following reply:

(more…)

This is rather stunning.  In letters from Representative Doug Collins to Inspector General Horowitz and AG Bill Barr, Collins identifies Deputy Asst. Director Peter Strzok as the official who leaked grand jury information to the media and yet the DOJ refused to prosecute.  Incredible.

WASHINGTON — Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, today sent letters to the attorney general [HERE]  and inspector general [HERE] regarding the Office of the Inspector General’s investigation summary into misconduct by a former FBI deputy assistant director. The letter to the inspector general raises questions about the identity of the deputy assistant director in question, and the letter to the attorney general inquires about the status of criminal referrals made by the inspector general to the Justice Department. (link)

(more…)

U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr gave a 48 minute interview to CBS on a variety of issues related to recent events. The interview is packed with insight about the ongoing DOJ investigations of prior DOJ and FBI conduct in the 2016 election.
Rather than post the edited excerpts of the interview as broadcast, the full audio and transcript is below. Very interesting. [Hit orange play arrow to begin]:
[soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/629487828″ params=”color=#ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&show_teaser=true” width=”100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]
.
[Transcript] JAN CRAWFORD: Mr. Attorney General, thank you very much for sitting down with us. So, obviously we saw the special counsel yesterday make that statement, he analyzed 11 instances where there were possible obstruction and then said that he really couldn’t make a decision- conclusion on whether or not the president had in fact committed obstruction because of the existing OLC opinion in the legal counsel’s office. Do you agree with that interpretation that that legal opinion prevented him from making a conclusion?
WILLIAM BARR: I am not sure he said it prevented him. I think what he said was he took that into account plus a number of other prudential judgments about fairness and other things and decided that the best course was not for him to reach a decision. I personally felt he could’ve reached a decision but–
(more…)