This is not a surprising development; though with breaking news it is prudent to pause before assigning motives.  At first review it appears the FBI cannot hold back the sunlight.

FBI Director Christopher Wray has announced his launching of an internal investigation based on details surfacing from the Michael Flynn case. “FBI Director Christopher Wray today ordered the Bureau’s Inspection Division [INSD] to conduct an after-action review of the Michael Flynn investigation” the bureau said in the statement:

(screen grab from Catherine Herridge)

This is an interesting development considering this same FBI Director previously claimed the office of inspector general found no intentional wrongdoing by people within the FBI; and Wray further asserted there was “no evidence of political bias” after each of three OIG investigations completed in 2018 and 2019.

If the OIG did not find FBI wrongdoing, then what changed?  Why is FBI Director Chris Wray now launching an internal investigation?  The answer appears to be an outsider’s investigation via Missouri U.S. Attorney, Jeff Jensen.

Second part of statement below:

(more…)

You may have recently noticed that Susan Rice has called for the release of the transcript of the conversation between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak:

(Source and Full Statement)

However, what many people do not realize is the motive for Susan Rice to call for the release of this transcript.  This aspect of the intercepted communication is very interesting.

First, there is nothing damaging in the content of the Flynn-Kislyak call.  We know there is nothing damaging in the transcript because the call was made on December 29, 2016; and the FBI investigators who intercepted the call reviewed the call content; and five days later on January 4, 2017, the same Washington DC field office of the FBI wanted to close the investigation of Michael Flynn having “found no derogatory information.”

If there had been something damaging within the call to either the incoming Trump administration, or Michael Flynn himself, the FBI would not be saying they have found nothing derogatory and they were closing the Flynn investigation five days after the call.

Additionally, we also know there was nothing damaging or inappropriate within the call because Robert Mueller’s investigators outlined the content:

(more…)

Michael Flynn defense attorney, Sidney Powell, appears on Lou Dobbs tonight to discuss the ongoing case against a background of daily revelations showing Flynn was the target of the Obama-era FBI.

(more…)

It looks like Sidney Powell has angered Emett Sullivan as the DC judge has now granted all of the requests by prosecuting amicus John Gleeson.

In an order today Judge Sullivan granted Gleeson with the requested schedule to include a July 10th briefing deadline and oral arguments scheduled for July 16th.

Just as the news broke Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell appeared on Lou Dobbs to react.

(more…)

Acting DNI Richard Grenell declassified the hidden paragraph of the Susan Rice memo and it was released earlier today.  Our suspicions about the content of the redacted paragraph being Michael Flynn connected are confirmed.

On January 5, 2017, President Obama and Susan Rice were discussing incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn with FBI Director James Comey. The motive for Susan Rice to write the January 20, 2017, memo to file becomes clear.  Here’s the paragraph:

Within this paragraph we find the motive for writing it (emphasis mine):

“Director Comey affirmed that he is proceeding “by the book” as it relates to law enforcement.” … “Comey said he does have some concerns that incoming NSA Flynn is speaking frequently with Russian Ambassador Kislyak.”  “Comey said that could be an issue as it relates to sharing senssitive information.”  “President Obama asked if Comey was saying that the NSC should not pass sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn.”  “Comey replied “potentially.””  “He added that he has no indication thus far that Flynn has passed classified information to Kislyak, but he noted that “the level of communication is unusual.”

Remember, the position of President Obama and Susan Rice is that they were unaware of any FBI investigation of Flynn (or the Trump campaign); nor did they have any involvement in directing it to take place.

The content of this January 5th meeting makes the first part of their claim challenging to accept.   Thus the need for Susan Rice to cover for it.

(more…)

More than a week after CBS first constructed their editorial narrative they finally released the full interview between Catherine Herridge and AG Bill Barr.  Many people read the transcript; however, thankfully Michael Sheridan excerpts a portion of the video that doesn’t come across in the transcript.

When the attorney general is questioned about “still having confidence” in FBI Director Christopher Wray, a newly articulated hesitancy is visible that doesn’t come across in the transcript. WATCH:

.

Since February 2019 Bill Barr has been a staunch and very public defender of Chris Wray. However, with new revelations about recent FBI efforts to block the release of information as it relates to Michael Flynn, it now appears the AG has less confidence.

This shift is important because as the public have a renewed focused on the question of who illegally leaked Flynn’s communication with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, there has always been a rather curious contrast issue with the known classified intelligence leaking of James Wolfe.  If finding Flynn’s leaker is important then why didn’t the DOJ/FBI take action when they found a classified intelligence leaker in 2018?

(more…)

Matt Taibbi writes a lengthy column calling out his colleagues for abandoning all pretense of civil liberties in an effort to ‘resist’ President Trump.

Within the column Taibbi walks-through the ridiculous Russia collusion story and notes the necessary use of the media pretending not to know what took place within the Obama administration; including what continues today in the prosecution of Flynn.

MATT TAIBBI – […] ” After Edward Snowden’s 2013 revelations about mass data collection, a series of internal investigations began showing officials were breaking rules against spying on specific Americans via this NSA program. Searches were conducted too often and without proper justification, and the results were shared with too many people, including private contractors. By October, 2016, the FISA court was declaring that systematic overuse of so-called “702” searches were a “very serious fourth Amendment issue.”

In later court documents it came out that the FBI conducted 3.1 million such searches in 2017 alone. As the Brennan Center put it, “almost certainly… the total number of U.S. person queries run by the FBI each year is well into the millions.”

(more…)

Stunning and outrageous doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of this move by DC Judge Emett Sullivan in the Flynn case.

Judge Sullivan is requesting retired judge John Gleeson to file an amicus brief outlining why: (a) the charge against Flynn should not be dropped; and (b) frame the argument about how to prosecute Flynn for perjury.

Former Judge John Gleeson (U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of New York) recently penned an op-ed in the Washington post arguing that Flynn should continue to be prosecuted.

(more…)

It appears we are about to find out if one of my long-standing theories about surveillance of Michael Flynn is correct.  Flynn was not “unmasked”, because he was the direct target.

For three years the official media account of how the intelligence community gained the transcript of incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn talking to Ambassador Sergey Kisliyak on December 29th, 2016, surrounded “incidental collection” as a result of contact with an agent of a foreign power.

Meaning the Flynn call was picked up as the U.S. intelligence apparatus was conducting surveillance on Russian Ambassador Kisliyak.

If this version of events were accurate (it’s not), it would fall under FISA-702 collection: the monitoring of a foreign agent (Kislyak) who has contact with a U.S. person (Flynn).

In order to review the identity of the U.S. person, a process called ‘unmasking’, a 702 submission must be made. As NSA Director Rogers said: that submission, the unmasking, leaves a paper/electronic trail.  However, I do not think that is what happened, here’s why:

Back in 2017 Senator Lindsey Graham questioned former DAG Sally Yates and former DNI James Clapper.  Within the questioning, Sally Yates tipped her hand.  There was never an unmasking of Flynn because Flynn was a target; it was not incidental collection. WATCH:

.

Sally Yates doesn’t directly say Flynn was a target, but by now we all know he was a target of the FBI investigation.  As a result of Flynn being the actual target he would be directly identified within the intelligence documents because the investigation would be about him, and not incidental. But there’s more…

(more…)

Representatives Jim Jordan and Andy Biggs tear the bark off the Obamagate scandal; including culpable republicans who participated in the DC coup effort.

Appearing with Lou Dobbs on Fox Business, Jim Jordan rips through the timeline early in the interview to expose how it was impossible for all of the activity to be happening without former President Obama being a participant.  WATCH:

(more…)