quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

STOP IT

Yeah, I can't even watch Hannity anymore.
Even though he's on the right track, it's like he's hyperventilating all the time. It gets old.

Besides many of you here, I draw strength from John Solomon. He continues to dig up more goodies.

Next to President Trump, John in in the top few true saviors of this country.

When I get tired of hearing the click baiters and get frustrated, John will show up on Hannity with some real solid reporting. I turn Hannity off otherwise. John deserves an award when this is all done.

it's just fucking scary that Brennan was ever in charge of CIA

Brennan talking to Nicole Wallace (MSNBC):

" I'm supposedly going to be interviewed by Mr. Durham as part of this non-investigation.."

"I don't understand the predication of this worldwide effort to try to uncover dirt... that would discredit that investigation in 2016"

the video is at

https://twitter.com/DeadlineWH

presently about the 3rd video from the top

Brennan says Donald Trump is hoping for Russia help again to win the election in 2020

Brennan says he doesn't understand what the Durham investigation is about. They are trying to see what we might have done to prevent the 2016 Russian interference.

NO NO NO

They are attempting to determine if John Brennan was at the center of a massive attempt
to keep Donald Trump from being elected. The real interference in the 2016 election was FBI/CIA based.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

here is more on the Brennan interview

https://www.powerlineblog.com/...brennan-persists.php

w a direct link to the video

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

I can only hope that Mr. Durham will tear Brennan a new asshole during the questioning, and discover a lot of evil Brennan has done to the Pres., and others.

“Democrats were outraged at how Trump handled the Mueller probe. Now they’re acting the same way.
……
There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking foreign heads of state or intelligence officials to cooperate with an official Justice Department investigation. As George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley explains, “It is not uncommon for an attorney general, or even a president, to ask foreign leaders to assist with ongoing investigations. Such calls can shortcut bureaucratic red tape, particularly if the evidence is held, as in this case, by national security or justice officials.” …”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/w...rr/%3foutputType=amp

https://www.washingtonexaminer...-news-as-contributor

Journalist John Solomon has joined Fox News as a contributor


Fox News confirmed the recent hire.

^^^^ Very good. Fox needs all the good people they can get right now.

And the Murdoch brothers need a babysitter.

I just happened to catch on Hannity as I was walking through the ship's mess that Barr and Durham may have discovered an email chain including Comey and Brennan in which they discuss not having any corroboration for the fake dossier. Basically this is the exculpatory evidence that the Republicans have been talking about that was denied to I guess the FISA court. Sarah Carter apparently heard the same from her sources. I guess we'll hopefully soon find out how much truth is actually there.

DEMs are hyper that the "whistleblower"'s identity remain secret.

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...omplaint-sources-say

Sources further have told Fox News that Atkinson revealed the whistleblower volunteered he or she was a registered Democrat and had a prior working relationship with a prominent Democratic politician

xxxxxxxxxxxxx


maybe the DEMs are really worried about the working relationship and the "prominent DEM politician"

That could be very interesting who that is

Balze,

regarding your post above about corroboration of the dossier, I went back to Comey's congressional testimony on 7 Dec 2018.

Here are some cut and pastes from that testimony.

Keep in mind this case is arguably the most important of Comey's career, given that the President of the U.S. is described as under Russian control and Comey was/is pushing for impeachment.

Can you comprehend an FBI DIR being so ill informed as below ? or so evasive to avoid future prosecution ?

Q: How long did Christopher Steele have a relationship with the FBI ?

Comey: I don’t know


Q: When did you learn that he was working for Fusion GPS?

Comey: I don’t know that I ever knew that – certainly while I worked at the FBI. … I didn’t know that while I was FBI.

Mueller never heard of Fusion GPS either


Q: Who did you think he was working for ?

Comey: I thought he was retained as part of a Republican-financed effort -- retained by Republicans adverse to Mr. Trump during the primary season, and then his work was underwritten after that by Democrats opposed to Mr. Trump

Comey always says REPs first paid for Steele. They did not

Q: When did you learn that Fusion GPS was hired by Perkins Coie?

Comey: I never learned that, certainly not while I was Director.


Comey doesn't know it because he could then get burned in lies in the FISA warrant


Q: when did you learn the DNC had hired Perkins Coie?

Comey: I never learned that. Again, while I was Director. I think I've read it in the media, but, yeah, even today, I don't know whether it's true.

in the summer of 2016, a Perkins Coie lawyer provided FBI General Counsel (Baker) with a set of lies about Russian Alfa Bank and communication with the Trump campaign


Q: While you were the Director, you never knew that the DNC hired a law firm that hired an oppo research firm that hired Christopher Steele?

Comey: No, I don't think so. I don't have any recollection of being told that or reading that or learning that while I was Director.


Q: Is it relevant to you who was paying Chris Steele?

Comey: Yes, in the sense that I thought it was important to understand that it was politically motivated effort, first by Republicans, then by Democrats

same lie again

Q: The word "obligation" stemmed from the fact that this is a counterintelligence investigation into a political campaign. I think you testified -- and I hope you agree -- the source who was paying for that information would be relevant.

Comey: First of all, I have to disagree with your assertion that it was a counterintelligence investigation into a political campaign. I've said that earlier, that it wasn't. It was four counterintelligence files on four Americans

(Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Geo Papadopoulos, Michael Cohen ? or Michael Flynn ?)


Q: Was Christopher Steele also working with or for the Bureau while he was working for Fusion GPS?

Comey. I don't know.


from the public FBI vault of documents, Steele was an FBI Confidential Human Source with an FBI handler


Q: How did the Bureau investigate whatever information Steele provided?

Comey: I don't know in particular. I know that the Counterintelligence Division was investigating various aspects of the reports he had supplied, and that investigation was ongoing when I was fired.


Comey testified he signed a FISA warrant on Carter Page in Oct 2016

Q: Do you recall that the FISA application would have been titled -- or was titled "verified application"?

Comey: No, I don't recall that

convenient if there was no verification


Q: Don't all FISA applications state that they are verified applications?

Comey: I don't know. I don't -- sitting here today, I can't remember the word "verified."

Comey knows the FISA warrant was not legit


Q: So I want to relate to you some of the testimony that we've already received. FBI Deputy Director Andy McCabe testified before Congress that the FBI could provide no points of verification to verify the Steele information other than the fact that Carter Page had traveled to Russia in July of 2016 . Were you aware of that when you signed the application on October 21st of 2016?

Comey: I don't remember any of that right now


link to the testimony:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/do...iew-house-committees

“The federal prosecutor running the Justice Department's review of the origins of the Russia investigation has expanded the inquiry that critics have panned as an effort to discredit special counsel Robert Mueller's work.

After months of investigating, U.S. Attorney John Durham has broadened his team to include additional agents and resources as the timeline they are examining has extended, according to Fox News…”

https://www.washingtonexaminer...-into-events-in-2017

A minor point w all that is going on,

but Daily Caller did a FOIA about the FBI person who accepted tickets from CNN and lied about it.

The person was Michael Kortan (former FBI Assistant Director for Public Affairs)

https://www.scribd.com/documen...rt-on-Michael-Kortan

"During the course of the investigation, Kortan retired in Feb 2018."

BTW, the tickets were worth $130. Not a very big deal. But Kortan lied numerous times about the tickets, whether he paid for them, who he took as a guest, etc.


adding: there is quite a bit more information at the link. This post is a high level summary

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
A minor point w all that is going on,

but Daily Caller did a FOIA about the FBI person who accepted tickets from CNN and lied about it.

The person was Michael Kortan (former FBI Assistant Director for Public Affairs)

https://www.scribd.com/documen...rt-on-Michael-Kortan

"During the course of the investigation, Kortan retired in Feb 2018."

BTW, the tickets were worth $130. Not a very big deal. But Kortan lied numerous times about the tickets, whether he paid for them, who he took as a guest, etc.

So Kortan sends the OIG an email "splaining" how he'd misled the investigators during the previous interviews on February 6th and retires that same month???

If he'd been charged with lying to Federal Investigators earlier and convicted, he might not have been able to cash in on that retirement. There certainly would have been more of an opportunity to put the squeeze on him for additional information had OIG acted promptly.

quote:

Originally posted by pulicords:
So Kortan sends the OIG an email "splaining" how he'd misled the investigators during the previous interviews on February 6th and retires that same month???

If he'd been charged with lying to Federal Investigators earlier and convicted, he might not have been able to cash in on that retirement. There certainly would have been more of an opportunity to put the squeeze on him for additional information had OIG acted promptly.

Hey, he watched McCabe fumble away his retirement. So...

https://dailycaller.com/2019/1...rump-steele-dossier/

Andrew McCabe, the embattled former FBI deputy director, said at a recent event that former British spy Christopher Steele disclosed to FBI investigators that his infamous anti-Trump dossier should not be taken as “gospel,” and that he could not vouch for the accuracy of some of the material in the infamous document.

so the FBI took the dossier and ran w it anyhow ? McCabe testified they had no corrobation other than Carter Page went to Moscow and gave a speech

McCabe, who spoke Oct. 3 at an event hosted by journalist Carl Bernstein , was defending the FBI’s handling of the Steele dossier by insisting investigators were aware of the document’s flaws during the Trump probe.

McCabe said the FBI opened its case in late July 2016 based on information about Trump adviser George Papadopoulos.

“We open the case, and then we think, ‘OK, now who are we actually going to investigate?'” McCabe said at the event, which aired Tuesday on C-SPAN.

“Who do we know who is associated with the campaign who has known, significant ties to Russian intelligence?” he asked rhetorically. “We quickly come up with four names that will not surprise you.”

McCabe, who served as deputy director of the FBI during the investigation, defended the FBI’s decision to open the investigation, which initially focused on Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn and Carter Page.

He also sought to defend Steele and his salacious dossier, which the FBI used to obtain surveillance warrants on Page.

“It is raw source reporting,” McCabe said, “and Steele presented it as such.”

“We knew that Steele was working a number of different sources, some of which has sub-sources, and sub-sub-sources, and he would represent that in the reporting, as any good source should. It didn’t come with his imprimatur of, ‘this is all gospel.’ It was like, ‘this is what I’m hearing,'” said McCabe

“That’s how good sources report.”

really ? none of it was true

“Some of it he felt was pretty solid, others he made clear, like, ‘Hey, I’m getting this from one person, and I can’t vouch for this sourcing chain, and I’m just giving it to you for your information.'”

note McCabe never identifies what was "solid" and what was just "information". Also Steele was peddling this crap to the major news media trying to get them to publish it w/o identifying him as the source

Bernstein offered his own defense of Steele.

“Steele didn’t pretend that the information was definitive,” the veteran reporter said, briefly noting his own familiarity with the dossier.

Bernstein was one of four CNN reporters who worked on the Jan. 10, 2017, story that revealed intelligence officials briefed then-President-elect Donald Trump on the salacious allegations from the dossier.

It was revealed earlier this year that Steele directed David Kramer , a longtime associate of the late Sen. John McCain, to meet with Bernstein in early January 2017 to discuss his information regarding Trump

Bernstein was part of the effort to spread the dossier story. Did the famous investigative reporter investigate the dossier ?

“I met with Mr. Bernstein at Mr. Steele’s request,” Kramer said in a deposition in a lawsuit involving BuzzFeed. “And I believe Mr. Bernstein had been in touch with Mr. Steele and so Mr. Steele asked me if I would meet with him and talk with him about it. Since Bernstein was in the U.S. and Steele was in London.”

you think John McCain didn't know this ?

McCabe indicated that investigators decided only after opening a case against Papadopoulos to add three other Trump officials to the investigation.

“We open the case, and then we think, ‘OK, now who are we actually going to investigate?'” he said.

“Who do we know who is associated with the campaign who has known, significant ties to Russian intelligence?” he asked rhetorically. “We quickly come up with four names that will not surprise you.”

McCabe identified Papadopoulos, Manafort, Flynn and Page.

the argument that the counterintel case was opened because of Papadopoulos is ludicrous. That's all it takes to start spying on and investigating the opposition presidential campaign ?

The real reason why the investigation was started was because some FBI and CIA people wanted to stop Donald Trump . There was an old song: "I don't like her, and I'll think of a reason later"

October 12, 2019
Will We Ever Prosecute?
By Gordon Wysong

AMERICAN THINKER > https://www.americanthinker.co..._ever_prosecute.html

"Imagine that the local cops know that a gang member, named William, broke into the pawn shop and stole guns, jewelry, and money. William's fingerprints, film image, and DNA add to the hard evidence log. The owner knows it; the prosecutor knows it; William's gang associates know it. But he is not arrested. Nearby shopkeepers and neighborhood mothers are asking why he is walking the street. No one explains it; mum's the word. Could it be there is a grand plan to take out the gang's leaders? No one knows; mum's the word. Shopkeepers and residents are about to give up and start moving away from the area, and no one asks them to stay the course.

Fast-forward to today's still vocal Obama gang. Why no indictments? Mum's the word. Can anyone hold to the faith in American justice? Those who support the rule of law feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick a football. It's coming — oh, wait, it's coming...oh, wait"......

........"Admittedly, there are always problems in pursuing a criminal case. It must be so under our Constitution, but it cannot be impossible!

Prosecutors don't get all the information, but at a certain point, for each criminal, evidence accumulates that there is a real and provable crime. It may not include every transgression of that person, nor is it the magic revelation, untangling the Gordian knot of the conspirators. It is a simple criminal act. It is what it appears, and it need not be put in the context of the big picture — it is as plain as the nose on your face.

That stage is the stimulus for a prosecutor. It is the time to move. If the DOJ acts, many of the sins can never be prosecuted, because the prosecution of their lesser crimes may foreclose pursuit of other crimes under double jeopardy protection. However, failure to move puts evidence and witnesses at risk of being lost. This point has passed for so many of the coup conspirators that it seems there will be no justice for many of them, like Lois Lerner.

Why?

A full recounting of all that is already known would be tedious, and to expound on the criminal conduct yet again seems shrill. It is not necessary to understand the intertwining of all the crimes before simply bringing the charges that are facially obvious. But the deferral of prosecution, for whatever reason it is done, allows many of the cabal to walk free when they shouldn't. In fact, the indication is that they are continuing the very conduct for which they should be prosecuted.

Why has McCabe not been charged with lying to the FBI, lying under oath? Nothing more is needed to start the dominos falling. Who will step forward to exonerate him? No one can, and no one will. That omission — of a vigorously supported defense — will send a message to the others in the coup conspiracy.

Why has Samantha Power not been indicted for violating national security requirements in unmasking or transferring her unmasking authority to others? It doesn't pass the smell test that she is too important to be prosecuted.

Why is Huma Abedin strolling around, free as a bird? She forwarded classified emails to Anthony Weiner's laptop. What else is needed to demonstrate a crime?

Did Strzok do anything? Did Page? Which one lied to Congress? Their contradictory accounts mean at least one is a perjurer. Sure, there is more "there" there, but it isn't necessary to keelhaul them; just send them to jail, and send others a message.

Listing all the cabal members, who are quite obviously criminal, is not easy — in fact, it not doable. It need not be the aim. A public that finds this whole thing partisan or tedious will not be easily impressed if a 2,000-count indictment naming 43 people is suddenly dropped. Bringing along the public is certainly part of sending the message for future conspirators. It probably is better done gradually.

Removing the context and simply prosecuting crimes is the method to educate both today's and tomorrow's citizens.

Selecting single actors, and naming obvious crimes, will have a chance to convince even skeptical partisans that something is wrong. The lack of support from other participants will indeed remove most doubt.

The full scope of what has gone on will never be known, but the lessons for future participants in such a scheme is essential. The next time, the prosecution will be more severe, more certain, and more expedient. Protecting the Constitution is more important than perfect justice. Some miscreants will escape, but they will never sleep well again. The lesson must be taught.

A DOJ that fails to move loses its credibility and its honor. The foundation of the Republic is placed at risk. Without the rule of law, what do we have?

At some point, deferral of prosecution is dereliction or abetting. Has it reached that point?"

Gordon Wysong is an engineer and entrepreneur who has served as a county commissioner in Cobb County, Ga.

As we continue to wait for the Horowitz report, I've started to go over what we know about it. Trying to get ready to understand the report when it comes out.

I'll probably do a few posts to cover a number of related topics.

First, what was DoJ IG Horowitz asked to do ?

Examination of the Department’s and the FBI’s Compliance with Legal Requirements and Policies in Applications Filed with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Relating to a certain U.S. Person

The OIG, in response to requests from the Attorney General and Members of Congress, is examining the Department’s and the FBI’s compliance with legal requirements, and with applicable DOJ and FBI policies and procedures, in applications filed with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) relating to a certain U.S. person.

As part of this examination, the OIG is also reviewing information that was known to the DOJ and the FBI at the time the applications were filed from or about an alleged FBI confidential source. Additionally, the OIG is reviewing the DOJ’s and FBI’s relationship and communications with the alleged source as they relate to the FISC applications. If circumstances warrant, the OIG will consider including other issues that may arise during the course of the review.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The "certain U.S. person" is assumed to be Carter Page

Who is the "alleged FBI confidential source" ?

I would guess Christopher Steele most likely, but Stefan Halper could fit the description also.

The scope of the report might be very narrow to just the 4 FISA warrants against Carter Page.


As an observation, the DoJ IG has other ongoing investigations that have interesting descriptions.

FBI's Adjudication of Misconduct Investigations

The OIG is examining whether FBI’s misconduct investigations are handled according to policy throughout the adjudication process and how FBI determines when and how to revise its misconduct adjudication policies and process

FBI’s Confidential Human Source Program

The OIG is auditing the FBI’s Confidential Human Source Program. The preliminary objectives are to: (1) assess the FBI’s management and oversight of its Confidential Human Source Program, to include the FBI’s oversight of payments to confidential human sources, (2) examine the FBI’s confidential human source policies to ensure consistency with the Attorney General Guidelines, and (3) assess the FBI’s process of determining reliability and appropriateness of confidential human sources.

FBI's Covert Contracts

The OIG is auditing the FBI’s contracts awarded for covert activity. The preliminary objectives of the audit are to assess the FBI’s awarding and administration of these covert contracts and to evaluate the FBI’s procedures and processes for ensuring contractor performance and compliance with the terms, conditions, laws, and regulations applicable to these contracts.

FBI's National Security Undercover Operations

The OIG is conducting an audit of the FBI's National Security Undercover Operations. The preliminary objectives are to evaluate: (1) the FBI’s oversight of national security-related undercover operations, and (2) the FBI’s efforts to recruit and train agents for these undercover operations.

https://oig.justice.gov/ongoing/all.htm

The original warrant against Carter Page and the 3 subsequent extensions were released in highly redacted form.

A 412 page pdf that is mostly blacked out:

https://int.nyt.com/data/docum...7/optimized/full.pdf

Original warrant , 21 Oct 2016 FISC Judge Rosemary Collyer

FBI: Comey, DoJ: Sally Yates

83 pages long

1st Extension, 12 Jan 2017 FISC Judge Michael Mosman

FBI: Comey, DoJ: Sally Yates

98 pages long

2nd Extension 7 Apr 2017 FISC Judge Anne Conway

FBI: Comey, DoJ: Dana Boente

110 pages long

3rd Extension 29 Jun 2017 FISC Judge Raymond Dearie

FBI: Andrew McCabe, DoJ: Rod Rosenstein

121 pages long

New information was added to each iteration so the warrant got longer each time.

In addition to the people identified above who signed the warrants, each of the warrants had a section labeled "Verification" that was signed by an FBI Supervisory Special Agent. The FBI SSA signature is blacked out. But the SSA hand wrote the date. Each of the 4 dates are in different handwriting and date format. It is possible that there was a different SSA signing each warrant.

more prep work for understanding the report when it comes out

The FISA warrant does not use names for some of the key people in the warrant. From the overall context,

Source #1 = Christopher Steele

Identified U.S. person = Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS

Candidate #1 = Donald Trump

Even with all the redactions, these are problems in the 4 warrants submitted by the FBI:

- Carter Page is an agent of a foreign power (Russia)

Page was never charged with anything

- Glenn Simpson never advised Christopher Steele as to the motivation behind the research into Donald Trump ties to Russia

absurd. Bruce Ohr was telling the FBI about Steele's motive to stop Trump

- Page met w Divyechin and the possibility was discussed of the Russians providing compromising material against Clinton

this section is verbatim from the dossier. Mueller found no substantial and credible proof of any Russia / Trump campaign coordination. So what "verification" did the FBI have to say this ?

- The FBI is unaware of any derogatory information pertaining to Christopher Steele

wrong. Bruce Ohr told them of Steele's bias against Trump. The State Dept also warned that Steele's reports had known inaccuracies

- Yahoo News published an article alleging U.S. intelligence officials are investigating Page with respect to suspected efforts by Russia to influence the 2016 election

The warrant doesn't say "Yahoo News"; it says "identified news organization". By context the article being discussed is the Isikoff story of 23 Sep 2016.

Why would the FBI need a news story to tell the court that U.S. intel was investigating Page ? There was a CIA rep working right inside FBI counter intel spaces

Steele gave dossier info to Isikoff. All of which proved wrong

- Steele told the FBI that he only provided the dossier info to the business associate and the FBI. The FBI does not believe that Steele directly provided the info to the press

Actually Steele had briefed NYT, Wash Post, Yahoo News, New Yorker, CNN, and State Dept. Some of the news media were briefed multiple times before the first warrant was signed.

- The FBI told the court that Trump administration officials tried to distance themselves from Page when the news stories broke in Sep 2016

the stories were all lies

- The warrant explains that Page wrote a letter on 25 Sep 2016 to FBI Dir Comey. Page wrote that the accusations were "garbage"

Page offered to meet w the FBI. The FBI didn't interview Page about the accusations until Mar 2017.

- The FBI believes that the Russia govt efforts are being coordinated w Page and perhaps other individuals associated with the Trump campaign

BS straight from the dossier

- The FBI learned that Page met w Igor Sechin and Igor Divyekin. This info was provided by FBI confidential source #1

The FISA input was straight from the dossier
Note: Comey said the dossier was not a critical part of the warrant

- The FBI speculates that Glenn Simpson was likely looking for info that could be used to discredit Donald Trump's campaign

Simpson has testified to congress that the FBI never talked to him. Let that sink in. They never talked to the guy who hired Steele. Comey and Mueller have trouble even recognizing "Fusion GPS". But the FBI "speculates"

Perkins Coie lawyer Mark Sussman went to FBI General Counsel Baker and provided "evidence" that Trump Tower was secretly communicating w Russia thru Alfa Bank computers. That was 19 Sep 2016

By "coincidence" Steele wrote a 14 Sep 2016 report that Putin had a relationship w "Alpha" Bank. Steele named Alpha Bank leaders who were actually leading Alfa Bank

The secret communications link was later debunked

There are a few more things, but I do get tired of typing this crap. Hopefully Horowitz finds all these issues and lots more.

Up to 4 FBI SSAs declared under penalty of perjury that all this was true.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

most of this material was posted at times earlier in this thread. Just wanted to do a refresher before Horowitz reports

Thank you, sdy. There's a lot there, and you wading through it all is appreciated.