not much detail, but

https://www.washingtontimes.co...source=socialnetwork

It was special investigator John Durham who acquired two BlackBerrys used by Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor who jumped-started the FBI’s long Russia probe into President Trump’s campaign.

Sidney Powell, attorney for retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, filed a court motion on Monday disclosing the phones’ existence while tying them to Western intelligence.

She told The Washington Times on Thursday that she has confirmed that it was Mr. Durham’s office who obtained them

Attorney General William P. Barr assigned Mr. Durham, the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, the mission of finding out the origins of the FBI’s counter-intelligence investigation known as Crossfire Hurricane. She told The Times that a “source,” whom she declined to identify, told her about the BlackBerrys.

The FBI and special counsel Robert Mueller have always contended that Mr. Mifsud was a Russian asset. Mr. Mueller’s final report made no mention of the numerous associations Mr. Mifsud maintained with Western diplomats and intelligence figures.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Sheer speculation - but "the source" may have been from Italy

BTW, I'm not going to get into a big back & forth about AG Barr, but I think he is doing a great job. YMMV

AG Barr's special Russia investigator obtained BlackBerrys tied to launch of FBI Russia-Trump probe
THE WASHINGTON TIMES > https://www.washingtontimes.co...source=socialnetwork
===========================================
"It was special investigator John Durham who acquired two BlackBerrys used by Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor who jumped-started the FBI’s long Russia probe into President Trump’s campaign." ........
.........
"Mr. Mifsud, a university professor and well-traveled lecturer, told George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign adviser, in London in April 2016 that Moscow owned thousands of Hillary Clinton emails. When the news reached the FBI in July, agent Peter Strzok initiated the probe.

The FBI and special counsel Robert Mueller have always contended that Mr. Mifsud was a Russian asset. Mr. Mueller’s final report made no mention of the numerous associations Mr. Mifsud maintained with Western diplomats and intelligence figures.

Mr. Papadopoulos contends Mr. Mifsud was a Western agent sent to entrap him.".......
........
=======================================
So, if the Russian agent Professor Mifsud had a code name to communicate undercover with the Soviets I wonder what it was. ......

Wait, wait, I got it...

THE MALTESE FALCON

“WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors reviewing the origins of the Russia investigation have asked witnesses pointed questions about any anti-Trump bias among former F.B.I. officials who are frequent targets of President Trump and about the earliest steps they took in the Russia inquiry, according to former officials and other people familiar with the review.

The prosecutors, led by John H. Durham, the United States attorney in Connecticut, have interviewed about two dozen former and current F.B.I. officials, the people said. Two former senior F.B.I. agents are assisting with the review, the people said.

The number of interviews shows that Mr. Durham’s review is further along than previously known. It has served as a political flash point since Attorney General William P. Barr revealed in the spring that he planned to scrutinize the beginnings of the Russia investigation, which Mr. Trump and his allies have attacked without evidence as a plot by law enforcement and intelligence officials to prevent him from winning the 2016 election.

Closely overseen by Mr. Barr, Mr. Durham and his investigators have sought help from governments in countries that figure into right-wing attacks and unfounded conspiracy theories about the Russia investigation, stirring criticism that they are trying to deliver Mr. Trump a political victory rather than conducting an independent review…” [criticism from deep state denizens]

www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytim...i-witnesses.amp.html

Where is the FISA report? Anticipation builds as DOJ watchdog still hasn’t released review

FOX NEWS > https://www.foxnews.com/politi...ion-in-other-reviews
======================================
..... same old stuff....
.....but then, something new:

"But a Justice Department official told Fox News last week that the report is still in the declassification process — one of the final steps to be completed before the report is released to the public.

“The FBI and the DOJ are working together smoothly on the declassification process,” the official told Fox News.

President Trump -- who has the authority to declassify and release as much of the report as he wants -- has been hyping its forthcoming release. “The IG report is going to come out soon, and we’ll see what happens," the president told reporters last week, adding he's "waiting for the report like everybody else.”

“But I predict you will see things that you don’t even believe, the level of corruption — whether it’s [James] Comey; whether it’s [Peter] Strzok and his lover, [Lisa] Page; whether it’s so many other people — [Andrew] McCabe; whether it’s President Obama himself,” Trump charged.

He added: “Let’s see whether or not it’s President Obama. Let’s see whether or not they put that in.”

Horowitz has been probing how the infamous and salacious anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele was used to secure the original FISA warrant for Page in October 2016, as well as three renewals."

==================================
>>>>> The President himself brings up the elephant standing in the room for 3 years...Obama.

I think this is a first.

I missed this one earlier.

Saw on Jeff Carlson's blog this interview of Carter Page back on 25 Aug 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml1PKrwCOfk

In 2013 several Russian agents in this country tried to gather info from Carter Page. The Russians, unknown to them, were being monitored by the FBI.

The Russians were arrested and tried in court.

In March 2016, the FBI talked to Carter Page. They wanted him to testify against the Russians.

Page told Maria Bartiromo that he wouldn't go along w the FBI falsehoods and misrepresentations. He said he wouldn't lie in court. He didn't say what they wanted him to say in court.

So Carter Page never actually testified in the trial of the 3 Russian agents.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This may be important shortly when we see the FISA warrant against Page. Did the FBI use the 2013 incident against him in the warrant?

BTW, doesn't this sound similar to what just happened to Michael Flynn ? The FBI wanted Flynn to testify against his old business partner. The judge had warned Flynn that his "cooperation" could determine if Flynn would serve time or not.

Flynn was willing to testify but refused to say what the FBI wanted him to say. Flynn said he wouldn't lie to the court.

The prosecutors did not call Flynn to testify against his former business partner.

The former business partner is Bijan Rafiekian. He was convicted of FARA violations by a jury. (w/o Flynn testimony)

Back on p83, there is a post that after the conviction , the judge threw the case out

“The evidence was insufficient as a matter of law for the jury to convict Rafiekian on either count”

Rand Paul interview w Tucker Carlson

Issue is "why isn't Lindsey Graham using his clout ?"

good interview

Rand Paul: saying not Lindsey Graham, "there are other REP senators whose allegiance is more to the deep state than the President"


https://youtu.be/ACmHp_xe3xM

https://dailycaller.com/2019/1...k-highest-tradition/

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler defended Peter Strzok as operating in the “highest tradition” of government service Tuesday, even though the FBI fired the former agent for exchanging anti-Trump text messages with his mistress.

Nadler heaped praise on Strzok in response to a Republican colleague’s remarks during a hearing on election security that the former FBI counterintelligence official had “very much damaged” the reputation of the FBI.

“People like Peter Strzok and others, I think very much damaged — it’s unfair to the rest of the organization because the FBI is truly a great organization, one of the best in this nation,” said Ohio GOP Rep. Steve Chabot.

Chabot was seemingly referring to anti-Trump text messages that led to Strzok’s removal from the special counsel’s Russia team, as well as his firing from the FBI. Strzok exchanged the messages with Lisa Page, a former FBI lawyer with whom he was having an extramarital affair.

Nadler, a Democrat from New York, jumped to Strzok’s defense.

“ Let me just say for the record that I think Peter Strzok acted in the highest tradition of government workers ,” he said.

quote:

“ Let me just say for the record that I think Peter Strzok acted in the highest tradition of government workers ,” he said.

Yep, being married and having an affair with co-worker.....just like the highest traditions of Congress critters. then again when your tradition turns out to be a tyrannical mega manic who wore women's dresses.......Not a high bar to meet.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/60...46001/#sp=show-clips

Italian prime minister confirms Durham investigation meeting

The Durham investigation was expanded based on new info found in Rome by AG Barr and Durham.

"Everything was arranged thru proper diplomatic channels"

Brennan: doesn't understand AG Barr w his world wide effort to try to uncover dirt - either real or imagined - that would discredit the 2016 investigation into Russian interference

"either real or imagined" Well real dirt may show the whole investigation was a CIA fraudulent set up to (1) get Hillary Clinton elected and (2) subsequently to impeach President Trump

Brennan sounds nervous. From what I'm gathering, he damn well has reason to be nervous.

The DEMs are attacking President Trump on a broad front. In that organized and coordinated attack to take down the 45th President, they are trying to delegitimize and remove from influence the key people who support the President.

The latest example is Kash Patel. He is a REP staffer who has been publicly recognized for outstanding work under Devin Nunes in exposing the FBI/CIA coup attempt.

Schiff's Intel Comm interviewed Fiona Hill the other day. As their standard operating procedure, DEMs leaked some of her testimony to the NYT. (Until we see transcripts we have no idea what she really said)

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...in-secret-testimony/

The New York Times on Wednesday published what would have been a major story on White House National Security Council (NSC) aide Kash Patel—if only it had been true.
The story, which relies on leaks from Democrats conducting the “impeachment inquiry” into President Donald Trump of testimony by one witness who had no firsthand knowledge of the allegations she was making, claims Patel had provided President Trump with documents on Ukraine and met with the president about them.

Citing as its sources “people briefed on the matter,” the Times’ Julian Barnes, Adam Goldman, and Nicholas Fandos wrote that Patel was referred to by President Trump as “one of his top Ukraine policy specialists” and that President Trump “wanted to discuss related documents with him.” The Times reporters claimed that Patel’s NSC and White House colleagues “grew alarmed” over all this.

Later in the Times piece, it became clear where exactly this allegation came from—Fiona Hill, a former Trump administration Russia hand, whom the Democrats have been relying on for testimony in the impeachment inquiry. Hill testified earlier this month in the secret room in the basement of the Capitol building from which Democrats have been running their private impeachment proceedings.

But the problem with the Times story, and its sources that appear to be leaks from Democrats of Hill’s testimony, is that the entire premise is untrue, sources familiar with Patel’s meetings with the president told Breitbart News. Since the Times published its story, Breitbart News has spoken with a dozen sources including current White House officials, then-current-now-former White House officials, congressional officials familiar with the investigation and the meetings Patel had with President Trump, and others in the know about what actually happened and discovered that Patel’s meetings with President Trump had “absolutely nothing,” in the words of one source, to do with Ukraine whatsoever.

One now-former White House official confirmed that President Trump did in fact meet with Patel on a number of occasions, though it’s unclear if these were one-on-one meetings or there were others present.

A source close to House GOP leadership told Breitbart News that Patel’s meetings with the president were focused on domestic national security matters, and that Ukraine did not come up at all.

more at link

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

At this point, w all President Trump has had to put up with, I couldn't care less if he horse traded Ukraine or any other country to get information on the past & ongoing coup attempt, or to shine light on the Biden family corruption.

The DEMs have changed American politics. It will never be the same. There are no "bipartisan" efforts possible any more. The DEMs are cheats, liars, corrupt and are attacking the foundation of what makes our country work. We are a different America now. A divided America that will not be healed in my lifetime.


The greatest threats to our way of life are inside our borders right now. We need to accept that and act accordingly to fight for those things we value and cherish.

The Case for Indicting John Brennan
He was a fount of criminal leaks during Spygate.

https://spectator.org/the-case...icting-john-brennan/

Former CIA director John Brennan calls the Justice Department’s widening probe into Spygate’s origins “bizarre.” It has no “legal basis,” he bleats.

What’s bizarre is that the expanding inquiry didn’t happen earlier. Brennan’s responsibility for criminal leaks during the Obama administration’s investigation of Trump has been obvious for at least two years. Even Trump hater Peter Strzok, the FBI liaison to John Brennan, couldn’t believe the leaks coming out of his shop. Referring to Brennan’s agents as “sisters,” Strzok said to his mistress Lisa Page, “our sisters have begun leaking like mad. Scorned and worried and political, they’re kicking in to overdrive.”

The “leaking like mad” began in the thick of the 2016 campaign, as the feverishly partisan John Brennan sought to sabotage Donald Trump before Election Day. Has John Durham, the U.S. attorney assigned to the probe of the Obama administration’s spying on Trump, talked to Harry Reid about Brennan’s leaking? He should. Recall Brennan’s blatant disclosure of classified information about the investigation to the former Nevada senator in the late summer/early fall of 2016. Reid has told reporters that Brennan used him as the conduit for that leak against Trump during the campaign: “Why do you think he called me?”

In other words, Brennan knew damn well that he was criminally leaking to a fellow anti-Trump partisan. That’s enough to indict him right there. Reid, of course, was happy to broadcast the leak to the media, but even he found Brennan’s “ulterior motive” for a senatorial briefing a little odd, as he explained to David Corn and Michael Isikoff in their book Russian Roulette. Corn and Isikoff write that Reid “had concluded the CIA chief believed the public needed to know about the Russian operation, including the information about the possible links to the Trump campaign.”

Brennan has said that the widening probe “concerns” him. It should. He is guilty as hell. The news that his subordinates are lawyering up suggests that he is perhaps hoping that one of those saps takes the fall for him. But the fact remains that he conducted the briefing with Reid in the hopes of dirtying up Trump before election day.

Durham could also nail Brennan for perjury — his most obvious whopper being his denial before Congress of knowledge of the Hillary-financed Christopher Steele dossier. Reid had told Brennan about the Steele dossier in the summer of 2016. So, too, did Steele’s old colleagues in British intelligence, whose well-publicized role in feeding Brennan information about alleged Trump–Russia ties depended at least in part on Steele’s recycled yarns. Peter Strzok, to whom Brennan gave a special CIA award, would have also alerted him to Steele’s role in Crossfire Hurricane.

The same demented political animus driving Brennan now drove him before the election. Through leaks to the press, he made it clear to Hillary Clinton that he wanted to remain as CIA director under her. In the last months of the campaign, Brennan was in effect auditioning for her. He had hoped his October surprise with Harry Reid would win him her enduring affection.

The problem was that he didn’t have much to give Reid, apart from the existence of the investigation itself and the half-baked “intelligence” he had picked up from foreign counterparts in Britain, Estonia, and elsewhere. That’s why Brennan and Comey had to concoct the harebrained scheme of using a Cambridge intellectual on the make, Stefan Halper, to try and entrap George Papadopoulos. With Election Day bearing down on them in September 2016, they ran Halper in again to the Trump campaign, who came up empty. (Halper had also been trying to entrap Carter Page.)

Spygate is an immensely complicated tale. It would take a special counsel to unravel it all and indict all the bad guys. But Republicans don’t have the stomach for a special counsel. And so we are left with the hope that John Durham will at least hook a few big fish like Brennan.

That the media is freaking out over the news of Durham hiring more lawyers and receiving more resources from Bill Barr can be taken as a promising sign. The more noise they make, the closer Durham gets to the truth — a truth future historians will prize for its rich irony: that the government that tried the hardest to throw the election was our own.

Music to my ears

Peter Strzok text to Lisa Page on 9 Jun 2017





An agency coin w Brennan signature

What had Strzok worked on for the previous year ? (Russia collusion w Trump Campaign)

^^what’s that mean? Like a challenge coin?

"Like a challenge coin?"

yes

A spokesman said the agency uses the coins as a “non-monetary award” to recognize exceptional ­employees.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...e428a975e_story.html

seen at CTH

comes out - who knows when

A lot of MSM blather, but this too:

“…Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry, according to two people familiar with the matter. The move gives the prosecutor running it, John H. Durham, the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents, to impanel a grand jury and to file criminal charges…”

Other interesting stuff in the article.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytim...vestigation.amp.html

Yeah I saw that on RT:

quote:

DOJ opens criminal probe into 'Russiagate' investigation after administrative review – report

https://www.rt.com/usa/471785-...tion-criminal-probe/