Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Bigger doesn't imply better. Bigger often is a sign of obesity, of lost control, of overcomplexity, of cancerous cells

FBI Mayberry Machiavellis Bulletin, 2018

Home 2018 2017 2016

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Apr 17, 2019] Deep State and the FBI Federal Blackmail Investigation

Highly recommended!
Intelligence agencies, once created, has their own development dynamics and tend to escape from the control of civilians and in turn control them. Such an interesting dynamics. In any case, the intelligence agencies and first of all top brass of those agencies constitute the the core of the "deep state". Unlike civiliant emplorres they are protected by the veil of secrecy and has access to large funds. Bush the elder was probably the first deep state creature who became the president of the USA, but "special relationship" of Obama and Brennan is also not a secret.
Another problem is that secrecy and access to surveillance, Which gives intelligence agencies the ability to blackmail politicians.
Availability of unaccounted financial resources make them real kingmakers. In a sense, as soon as such agencies were created the tail started waging the dog.
Notable quotes:
"... Serving under nine presidents, from Calvin Coolidge to Richard Nixon, the FBI was turned into a "Gestapo by Hoover whose modus operandi was blackmail". That's how President Harry Truman (1943-53) reportedly characterized Hoover's bureau. How else do you think he survived for so long – five decades – as the nation's top law enforcer? ..."
"... One of Hoover's mainstay sources is strongly believed to be Mafia crime bosses who had lots of dirt on politicians, from bribe-taking to vote-rigging, to illicit sexual affairs. It is suspected that the Mafia had their own dossier of images on Hoover in a compromising homosexual tryst which, in turn, kept him under their thumb. ..."
"... JFK was particularly wide open to blackmail owing to his rampant promiscuity and extra-marital liaisons, including with screen idol Marilyn Monroe. Kennedy more than once confided to his aides that "the bastards" had him nailed. It was for this reason that he made the thuggish Texan Senator Lyndon B Johnson his vice president even though he detested LBJ. Hoover and Johnson were longtime associates and the former no doubt pulled a favor to get LBJ into the White House. ..."
"... However, Hoover's blackmail on JFK was not enough to curtail his defiance of rabidly anti-communist Cold War politics. Against the hostility of the Pentagon, CIA and FBI, Kennedy pursued a courageous policy of detente with the Soviet Union and Cuba. Such a policy no doubt led to his assassination by the Deep State in Dallas on November 22, 1963. There is ample evidence that Hoover and Johnson, who became the new president, then colluded with the Deep State assassins to cover up the assassination as the act of lone nut Lee Harvey Oswald – a cover-up that persists to this day. ..."
"... But Hoover and Johnson got their revenge by subsequently letting Nixon know that there was classified information on him – thanks to FBI wiretaps. The specter of incrimination is possibly a factor in Nixon becoming increasingly paranoid during this presidency, culminating in the ignominy of the Watergate scandal that ended his career. ..."
"... Hoover certainly was the devious architect of a malign Deep State machine. But he was not alone. He instilled a culture and legacy that pervades the top echelons of the bureau. And not just the FBI. The early Cold War years saw the formation of the CIA and the NSA under the Machiavellian guidance of men like Allen Dulles and Richard Helms and a host of others ..."
Feb 23, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

No other individual in modern US history has a more sinister legacy than John Edgar Hoover, the founder and lifetime director of the FBI. He founded the bureau in 1924 and was its director until his death in 1972 at the age of 77.

Serving under nine presidents, from Calvin Coolidge to Richard Nixon, the FBI was turned into a "Gestapo by Hoover whose modus operandi was blackmail". That's how President Harry Truman (1943-53) reportedly characterized Hoover's bureau. How else do you think he survived for so long – five decades – as the nation's top law enforcer?

J Edgar Hoover and his henchmen kept files on thousands of politicians, judges, journalists and other public figures, according to biographer Anthony Summers. Hoover ruthlessly used those files on the secret and often sordid private lives of senior public figures to control their career conduct and official decisions so as to serve his interests.

And Hoover's interests were of a rightwing, anti-communist, racist bigot.

Ironically, his own suppressed homosexuality also manifested in witch-hunts against homosexuals in public life.

It was Hoover's secret files that largely informed the McCarthyite anti-communist inquisitions of the 1950s, whose baleful legacy on American democracy, foreign policy and freedom of expression continues to this day.

One of Hoover's mainstay sources is strongly believed to be Mafia crime bosses who had lots of dirt on politicians, from bribe-taking to vote-rigging, to illicit sexual affairs. It is suspected that the Mafia had their own dossier of images on Hoover in a compromising homosexual tryst which, in turn, kept him under their thumb.

Absurdly, the FBI chief maintained that there was "no such thing as the Mafia" in public statements.

Two notorious cases of how FBI wiretapping worked under Hoover can be seen in the presidencies of John F Kennedy (1961-63) and Richard Nixon (1969-74).

As recounted by Laurent Guyénot in his 2013 book , 'JFK to 9/11: 50 Years of Deep State', Hoover made a point of letting each new president know of compromising information he had on them. It wouldn't be brandished overtly as blackmail; the president would be briefed subtly, "Sir, if someone were to have copies of this it would be damaging to your career". Enough said.

JFK was particularly wide open to blackmail owing to his rampant promiscuity and extra-marital liaisons, including with screen idol Marilyn Monroe. Kennedy more than once confided to his aides that "the bastards" had him nailed. It was for this reason that he made the thuggish Texan Senator Lyndon B Johnson his vice president even though he detested LBJ. Hoover and Johnson were longtime associates and the former no doubt pulled a favor to get LBJ into the White House.

However, Hoover's blackmail on JFK was not enough to curtail his defiance of rabidly anti-communist Cold War politics. Against the hostility of the Pentagon, CIA and FBI, Kennedy pursued a courageous policy of detente with the Soviet Union and Cuba. Such a policy no doubt led to his assassination by the Deep State in Dallas on November 22, 1963. There is ample evidence that Hoover and Johnson, who became the new president, then colluded with the Deep State assassins to cover up the assassination as the act of lone nut Lee Harvey Oswald – a cover-up that persists to this day.

As for Richard Nixon, it is believed that "Tricky Dicky" engaged in secret communications with the US-backed South Vietnamese regime on the cusp of the presidential elections in 1968. Nixon promised the South Vietnamese stronger military support if they held off entering peace talks with communist North Vietnam, which incumbent President Johnson was trying to organize. LBJ wanted to claim a peace process was underway in order to boost the election chances of his vice president Hubert Humphrey.

Nixon's scheming prevailed. The Vietnam peace gambit was scuttled, the Vietnam war raged on, and so the Democrat candidate lost. Nixon finally got into the White House, which he had long coveted from the time he lost out to JFK back in 1960.

But Hoover and Johnson got their revenge by subsequently letting Nixon know that there was classified information on him – thanks to FBI wiretaps. The specter of incrimination is possibly a factor in Nixon becoming increasingly paranoid during this presidency, culminating in the ignominy of the Watergate scandal that ended his career.

These are but only two examples of how Deep State politics works in controlling and subverting American democracy. The notion that lawmakers and presidents are free to serve the people is a quaintly naive one. For the US media to pretend otherwise, and to hail the FBI as some kind of benign bastion of justice, while also deprecating claims of "Deep State" intrusion as "conspiracy theory", is either impossibly ignorant of history – or a sign of the media's own compromised complicity.

Nonetheless, to blame this culture of institutionalized blackmail and corruption on one individual – J Edgar Hoover – is not fair either.

Hoover certainly was the devious architect of a malign Deep State machine. But he was not alone. He instilled a culture and legacy that pervades the top echelons of the bureau. And not just the FBI. The early Cold War years saw the formation of the CIA and the NSA under the Machiavellian guidance of men like Allen Dulles and Richard Helms and a host of others.

Once formed, the Deep State – as an alternate, unaccountable, unelected government – does not surrender its immense power willingly. It has learnt to hold on to its power through blackmail, media control, incitement of wars, and, even ultimately, assassination of American dissenters.

The illegal tapping of private communications is an oxygen supply for the depredations of the American Deep State.

Thinking that such agencies are not actively warping and working the electoral system to fix the figurehead in the White House is a dangerous delusion.

So too are claims that American democracy is being "influenced" by malign Russian enemies, as the US intelligence chiefs once again chorused in front of the Senate this past week. The consummate irony of it!

The real "influence campaigns" corrupting American democracy are those of the "All-American" agencies who claim to be law enforcers and defenders of national security.

US citizens would do well to refresh on the untold history of their country to appreciate how they are being manipulated.

We might even surmise that a good number of citizens are already aware, if only vaguely, of the elite corruption – and that is why Washington DC is viewed with increasing contempt by the people.

[Mar 11, 2018] Craig Murray smelt a rat and made his suspicions clear, publicly. like Litvinenko case this case will probably remains unresolved and milked mesilessly for anti-russian propaganda purposes, if history is any guide

Notable quotes:
"... As for murray's theory, i think you're both right. while i doubt the primary reason was to gin up more russophobia (they usually just make stuff up out of thin air and it usually works) it is a pleasant side effect for the brit officials who have recently been groveling for more war profiteering under the pretense of "russia on our doorstep". ..."
"... They seem to have the same mentality rahm emanuel had when he said (regarding the 2008 collapse that decimated giant swathes of the US economy) "never let a good crisis go to waste". ..."
"... The whole affair gets curiouser and curiouser. Now there's a report that the Skripals were poisoned at HOME. And then succumbed later, elsewhere? And what about the other 21 people reportedly affected and treated? Huh?? ..."
"... I believe Craig Murray. Anyone who remembers the 9/11 Anthrax scare that threatened US decision makers? ..."
"... The BBC has reported that a "source familiar with the investigation" said the nerve agent was "likely to be rarer than sarin or VX". This suggests that the ground is being prepared for announcing a result that will implicate Russia. ..."
"... Kaszeta's comments are relevant because he works closely with Bellingcat and it appears from his output that since 2013 he has been used to channel information originating from western intelligence services about alleged chemical attacks, based on his status as an independent expert with his company Strongpoint Security. The accounts filed for this company show that its turnover was not enough to provide Kaszeta with a living, raising obvious questions about who or what was paying him. ..."
"... There we go Britain to raise Sergei Skripal poisoning case with Nato allies ..."
"... Similar case in California, Were they addicts? http://abc7.com/2-dead-in-possible-fentanyl-exposure-in-fontana-home/3197127/ ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Christopher Black , Mar 9, 2018 12:22:35 PM | 55

My take on this incident.

https://journal-neo.org/2018/03/09/the-skripal-incident-another-anti-russian-provocation/

the pair , Mar 9, 2018 2:14:50 PM | 56
as mentioned above, the UK is saturated with CCTV cameras. in all the MSM screeching i have yet to hear about any footage being examined.

As for murray's theory, i think you're both right. while i doubt the primary reason was to gin up more russophobia (they usually just make stuff up out of thin air and it usually works) it is a pleasant side effect for the brit officials who have recently been groveling for more war profiteering under the pretense of "russia on our doorstep".

They seem to have the same mentality rahm emanuel had when he said (regarding the 2008 collapse that decimated giant swathes of the US economy) "never let a good crisis go to waste". maybe an even better analogy would be churchill praying for a german attack to justify his bloodlust as seen in dresden and other firebombing targets.

jason , Mar 9, 2018 3:40:04 PM | 57
the fact that putin has elections and the media came out with the story that this move would ensure after the elections that other spies won't have any doubts.....are prepared statements. if your spies were in syria from rus and from us. i think most people know who would have the heavier conscience. and in fact it is reminding their own what they are worth to them .... genius. actually.

before cctv were widespread among civil infrastructure, the opponents against the idea realized that people can just erase the time stamp and put on different ones and have actors act it out and placed onto television as proof. but we see they usually go for the afp reported from cnn report from 50 agencies unnamed unsourced deparment heads, circular fun.

i am not so much interested in the videos from nearby stores and streets, as if one really were to investigate, looking through weeks of tapes is not difficult. i am more interested in Britain next move.

i think it would be easier to britain to just mute this guy permanently if he were to wake up with ideas that it wasn't putin its a big problem for all the milking they are doing on it.

a. he makes it out of the hospital and comes out and becomes anti putin fanatic and makes it believable.
b. he makes it out of the hospital and goes back to normal life.
c. he makes it out of the hospital and is immediately gunned/poisoned by "russians".
d. he doesn't make it out of the hospital and goes back to normal life anyways.
e. he doesn't make it out of the hospital......but his daughter does.
f. he doesn't make it out of the hospital and is in coma indefinitely.
g. he is dropped from the news altogether due to security censorship.

Emily Dickinson , Mar 9, 2018 5:56:52 PM | 58
The whole affair gets curiouser and curiouser. Now there's a report that the Skripals were poisoned at HOME. And then succumbed later, elsewhere? And what about the other 21 people reportedly affected and treated? Huh??

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/09/russian-spy-may-have-poisoned-home-police-believe/

luke8929 , Mar 9, 2018 11:54:55 PM | 61
The police sgt. that became ill wasn't at the initial scene, he later searched the home of the two victims. So someone is making the assumption that they may have been poisoned at their home since that is where the police officer who later became ill was assigned.
francesca , Mar 10, 2018 12:49:40 AM | 62
There is a possible scenario that he was in possession of a nerve agent, and accidentally poisoned himself and his daughter
Porton Down is only 8 miles down the road
somebody , Mar 10, 2018 5:45:04 AM | 63
I believe Craig Murray. Anyone who remembers the 9/11 Anthrax scare that threatened US decision makers?
somebody , Mar 10, 2018 5:58:51 AM | 64
And yes, a MI6 agent is connected to Litvinenko, Skripal and Christopher Steele .
Hoarsewhisperer , Mar 10, 2018 9:58:06 AM | 65
I believe Craig Murray.
...
Posted by: somebody | Mar 10, 2018 5:45:04 AM | 63

Craig Murray smelt a rat and made his suspicions clear, publicly. Whether Murray's speculation is better or worse than anyone else's is unresolved and could remain that way, if History is any guide.

We seem no closer to discovering the ID of the instigators of the sordid and spectacularly public murder of Kim Jong-nam.

yoffa , Mar 10, 2018 10:29:38 AM | 66
The BBC has reported that a "source familiar with the investigation" said the nerve agent was "likely to be rarer than sarin or VX". This suggests that the ground is being prepared for announcing a result that will implicate Russia.

Kaszeta on bellingcat.com brings up the story of "novichoks" a class of organophosphate compounds allegedly developed as military nerve agents in the USSR. Russian chemists published papers in the open literature on these compounds from the 1960s to the 1980s. The story that they were developed for military use and given the name "novichok" comes from a defector in the 1990s, Vil Mirzayanov. An authoritative review by Robin Black notes that there is no independent evidence supporting Mirzayanov's claims about the properties of these compounds.

Kaszeta's comments are relevant because he works closely with Bellingcat and it appears from his output that since 2013 he has been used to channel information originating from western intelligence services about alleged chemical attacks, based on his status as an independent expert with his company Strongpoint Security. The accounts filed for this company show that its turnover was not enough to provide Kaszeta with a living, raising obvious questions about who or what was paying him.

Petra , Mar 10, 2018 10:45:44 AM | 67
65, Hw... Murray has a lot more insider information than he lets on, often couching it as speculation, probably partly to protect sources. He can be admirably or foolishly blunt at times ("z' is b'sh!")but with delicate issues, he often alludes at things insteda of saying outright. He has retained deep connections with many (at least partially like-minded) people at the FCO, the diplomatic corps and (indeed) MS5 and 6.
Fatima Manoubia , Mar 10, 2018 11:10:53 AM | 69
Attention to the thread of comments starting with commenter "Abben" in this article by RI:

https://russia-insider.com/en/putin-recites-love-poem-all-women-internatl-womens-day-march-8-video/ri22732#comment-3793737255

TJ , Mar 10, 2018 11:32:45 AM | 70
@66 yoffa

"Novichok" was just used in the plot of the latest Strike Back TV series, from the Wikipedia article-"She discovers that Zaryn is in fact Karim Markov, a Russian scientist who allegedly killed his colleagues with Novichok, a nerve agent they invented"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_Back:_Retribution

Hoarsewhisperer , Mar 10, 2018 12:53:16 PM | 73
65, Hw... Murray has a lot more insider information than he lets on.
...
Posted by: Petra | Mar 10, 2018 10:45:44 AM | 67

His Former British Ambassador status bolsters his street cred. OTOH one imagines that he is acutely aware of the line dividing whistle-blowing from treason.

On the other, other hand, b is a quite diligent and competent sleuth too, and has more than a passing interest in military/defense intrigue and intel.

somebody , Mar 10, 2018 3:37:56 PM | 74
#65

There we go Britain to raise Sergei Skripal poisoning case with Nato allies

Kalen , Mar 10, 2018 3:40:12 PM | 75
Similar case in California, Were they addicts? http://abc7.com/2-dead-in-possible-fentanyl-exposure-in-fontana-home/3197127/

[Mar 11, 2018] The Elephant In The Room by Craig Murray

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... while totally failing to mention the fact that incident took place only eight miles from the largest stock of nerve agent in western Europe. ..."
"... The adviser said the use of nerve agent suggested a state operation ..."
"... It certainly does. But the elephant in the room is – which state? ..."
Mar 11, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Nerve agents including Sarin and VX are manufactured by the British Government in Porton Down, just 8 miles from where Sergei Skripal was attacked. The official British government story is that these nerve agents are only manufactured "To help develop effective medical countermeasures and to test systems".

The UK media universally accepted that the production of polonium by Russia was conclusive evidence that Vladimir Putin was personally responsible for the murder of Alexander Litvinenko. In the case of Skripal, po-faced articles like this hilarious one in the Guardian speculate about where the nerve agent could possibly have come from – while totally failing to mention the fact that incident took place only eight miles from the largest stock of nerve agent in western Europe.

The investigation comprises multiple strands. Among them is whether there is any more of the nerve agent in the UK, and where it came from.

Chemical weapons experts said it was almost impossible to make nerve agents without training. "This needs expertise and a special place to make it or you will kill yourself. It's only a small amount, but you don't make this in your kitchen," one said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former commanding officer at the UK's chemical, biological and nuclear regiment, said: "This is pretty significant. Nerve agents such as sarin and VX need to be made in a laboratory. It is not an insufficient task. Not even the so-called Islamic State could do it."

Falling over themselves in the rush to ramp up the Russophobia, the Guardian quotes

"One former senior Foreign Office adviser suggested the Kremlin was taking advantage of the UK's lack of allies in the US and EU. He said the British government was in a "weaker position" than in 2006 when two Kremlin assassins poisoned the former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko with a radioactive cup of tea.

The adviser said the use of nerve agent suggested a state operation "

It certainly does. But the elephant in the room is – which state?

[Mar 11, 2018] Funding Fusion GPS would fit Soros agenda perfectly well

Notable quotes:
"... We will have to wait for the evidence, but the accusation is very plausible. Soros' agenda is anti-Trump, anti-Putin, and on a more ideological level, anti-Russian, pro-globalist and in favor of uncontrolled migration. Funding Fusion GPS would fit into this perfectly well. ..."
"... "I have often wondered if Soros is not a front company for an intelligence agency." For me it seems he is living in a symbiosis with the CIA. While both push their own agenda, they help each other out regularly. ..."
"... For context, Soros has vowed to "take down"/"destroy", etc Trump on several occasions. Randomly selected example here: http://yournewswire.com/soros-take-down-trump/ ..."
"... Is the reason this man has not been introduced to a long term stay in a prison cell let alone to a plutonium based dietary supplement or a .45 inch Q-Tip because he is a de facto agent of the Western intelligence communities? ..."
"... Or possibly because his NGOs act against the concept of nation states, which suits international commerce just fine as it reduces their barriers to entry into target national economies. Note that his early-90's foreign currency win was carried out against the Pound, rather than against the Ruble. ..."
"... Soros could be perceived as a person who represents what pat refers to as 'the borg', as he tends to have his monetary tentacles in a number self serving areas, all under the guise of opening up the world for greater dumbocracy and with other such silly catch phrases like that... don't look under the hood!! just go for the 'bright shiny object'. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Richard , 10 March 2018 at 05:35 AM

We will have to wait for the evidence, but the accusation is very plausible. Soros' agenda is anti-Trump, anti-Putin, and on a more ideological level, anti-Russian, pro-globalist and in favor of uncontrolled migration. Funding Fusion GPS would fit into this perfectly well.

For example, Soros has also been funding NGOs operating in the Mediterranean Sea that "rescue" migrants that try to cross over from Libya to Italy in boats that are overloaded and not suitable for traversing off-coast waters.

Interestingly, the government in Hungary is now attacking Soros directly. There are posters on billboards that show Soros and the receivers of Soros' money, with quotes implying that those people were responsible for Hungary being overrun with migrants in summer 2015 because the Soros-funded NGOs gave support, supplies and information to migrants moving from Turkey into EU territory.

Of course, according to Western corporate or government-funded media, these are all "conspiracy theories", which are very "antisemitic": http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-40554844

Balint Somkuti, PhD -> Peter AU... , 10 March 2018 at 09:01 AM
@Peter AU
"I have often wondered if Soros is not a front company for an intelligence agency." For me it seems he is living in a symbiosis with the CIA. While both push their own agenda, they help each other out regularly.

E.g. in my country the Soros founded Central European University received clear official support from the US Department of State, when it was revealed that it clearly and intentionally does not comply with local regulations.

The official message was something like anybody who messes with the CEU crosses path with the US, by intentionally decreasing its influence. From this point of view this university is much like the School of Americas in the 19th century, as disgusting as it is for Eastern European countries with 1000+ vears of history.

Thomas , 10 March 2018 at 10:58 AM
"...all the developments towards singling out russia for everything.."

The new meme for Mischief.

"Who took the cookie from the Jar?

"The Russians did it, Dad!"

"Well it is a good thing they failed to put the top back on, or You and I would not have known of the deed."

Eric Newhill , 10 March 2018 at 11:05 AM
For context, Soros has vowed to "take down"/"destroy", etc Trump on several occasions. Randomly selected example here: http://yournewswire.com/soros-take-down-trump/

Is the reason this man has not been introduced to a long term stay in a prison cell let alone to a plutonium based dietary supplement or a .45 inch Q-Tip because he is a de facto agent of the Western intelligence communities?

JW -> Eric Newhill... , 10 March 2018 at 11:39 AM
Or possibly because his NGOs act against the concept of nation states, which suits international commerce just fine as it reduces their barriers to entry into target national economies. Note that his early-90's foreign currency win was carried out against the Pound, rather than against the Ruble.
james -> Sylvia 1... , 10 March 2018 at 12:45 PM
@7 sylvia... we obviously see this in a similar way!

thanks for the posts here.. many interesting comments that i learn from..

Soros could be perceived as a person who represents what pat refers to as 'the borg', as he tends to have his monetary tentacles in a number self serving areas, all under the guise of opening up the world for greater dumbocracy and with other such silly catch phrases like that... don't look under the hood!! just go for the 'bright shiny object'. lol...

robt willmann 10 March 2018 at 02:09 PM
George Soros may be the face of various organizations, but he may not be the only provider of money, as the article about Fusion GPS asserts. His original name was likely George Schwartz, and his political activity is well-known, except for a more recent move to local elections.

He is now financing elections for District Attorney, the local office with the sole authority to file and prosecute State crimes in a particular area. In the 6 March Democratic primary for District Attorney in San Antonio, Texas, Soros injected around a million dollars in support of an opponent of the incumbent DA. The current DA, Nicholas 'Nico' LaHood, was defeated by Soros's candidate. LaHood is a very good and effective courtroom lawyer who has personally successfully prosecuted several cases as DA. He is attentive and talks in a conversational way (unlike the commonplace, stilted style of Senator Ted Cruz, for example). A DA, U.S. Attorney, or Attorney General rarely personally goes into court to handle a case. Nico's announcement for re-election was on 19 September 2017--

https://therivardreport.com/bexar-county-district-attorney-nico-lahood-announces-re-election-bid/

I immediately thought that there was going to be a candidate against him who was going to get a lot of backing and promotion. Like all people, LaHood is not perfect, but he had the audacity to support a potential lawsuit by the County against pharmaceutical companies for contributing to the destructive opioid addiction problem, often the result of prescription drugs. In addition, he publicly took the position that vaccines may contribute to autism (he has an autistic child). Local doctors organized against him because of his questioning of present immunization policies in the medical field, which policies are also promoted by drug companies. On top of that, he opposed sanctuary cities while his wife is of Mexican heritage. After LaHood lost, the involvement of Soros even made the Daily Caller Internet website, among others--

The front group Soros used in the San Antonio DA's race is called "Texas Justice & Public Safety PAC", a political action committee. The following report covers the period from 26 January to 24 February 2018--

Page four of the filing to the Texas Ethics Commission lists the sole contributor as "George Soros, New York, NY 10019-9710", for $950,000.00. Pages 5-15 list the expenditures, most of which went to "Berlin Rosen Ltd.; 15 Maiden Lane, Suite 1600; New York, NY 10038". That cutout -- pardon me, I mean, company -- then made the in-kind expenditures for LaHood's opponent, which included some polling, which probably concerned the same election.

[Mar 10, 2018] Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in Obama policy and HRC campaign long before any Steele s Dossier. This was a program ofunleashing cold War II

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons. ..."
"... Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing. ..."
"... Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

As chickenhawks related those who experienced war in the USA elite that slide to neocon dominance became inevitable.

SmoothieX12 -> Anna... , 04 February 2018 at 01:39 PM

- If they have read the important books at all... The ongoing scandal has been revealing a stunning incompetence of the "deciders." Too often they look comical, ridiculous, undignified. This is dangerous, considering their power.

My coming book is precisely about that. Especially, once American policy-makers who saw and experienced war (Ike, George Marshall's generation) departed things started to roll down hill with Reagan bringing on board a whole collection of neocons.

Unawareness is always dangerous, a complete blackout in relations between two nuclear powers is more than dangerous--it is completely reckless. Again, the way CW 1.0 is perceived in the current US "elites" it becomes extremely tempting to repeat it. Electing Hillary was another step in unleashing CW 2.0 by people who have no understanding of what they were doing.

Obama started crushing US-Russian relations before any campaigns were launched and before Trump was even seriously considered a GOP nominee, let alone a real contender. New confrontation hinged on HRC being elected. In fact, she was one of the major driving forces behind a serious of geopolitical anti-Russian moves. Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in HRC campaign long before any Steele's Dossier. This was a program.

kooshy said in reply to SmoothieX12 ... , 04 February 2018 at 04:10 PM
John McCain is a war veteran and a policy maker, who has seen war closer than Marshal or Ike still he will shy away from any war even with nuclear Russia.
Joe100 said in reply to kooshy... , 04 February 2018 at 04:40 PM
While McCain is a war veteran, his career was not in any way distinguished - rather he pretty clearly was given "hall pass" after "hall pass" given his father and grandfather. It also seems pretty clear his time as a POW has probably significantly influenced his view of the world.

"The Nightingale's Song" has an excellent treatment of his Naval Academy and service time, along with and in contrast to Ollie North, Jim Webb, admiral Poindexter and Bud MacFarlane. Not a pretty picture..

SmoothieX12 -> kooshy... , 04 February 2018 at 05:00 PM
John McCain is a war veteran and a policy maker, who has seen war closer than Marshal or Ike still he will shy away from any war even with nuclear Russia.

Seeing generations of your close and remote relatives killed and your property destroyed as a result of war is usually a very sobering collective experience. McCain, apart from being a rather exceptional warmonger, doesn't know what it is, despite experiencing some serious trials while being a POW. Ike saw, for starters, concentration camps and, unlike, McCain was mostly on the ground. This is a crucial distinction.

kooshy , 04 February 2018 at 05:15 PM
"It also seems pretty clear his time as a POW has probably significantly influenced his view of the world."
I agree, and, that was the point I tried to make, not all veterans are necessary qualified MINDS for deciding future of the coming generations. I have the same suspicion for General Kelly, having lost a son in Afghanistan and having power to influence the war in Afghanistan, I think is this situation, like judges, one has to recuse him/herself to be part of planers.

[Mar 10, 2018] Russian oligarchs represents the US fifth column in Russia created by Harward mafia in 1990th with this explicit purpose

Notable quotes:
"... Just think about who can go down with Trump is such a case. It's not only Bill and Hillary. It is also a very dangerous thing to open this can of worms as "the people" might learn something that neoliberal elite does not want them to know -- specifically the USA and intelligence agencies role in creating Russian mafia and oligarchs after the dissolution of the USSR. Do you, by any chance, know such a name as Andrei Shleifer and such a term as "Harvard Mafia" ? Please Google those if you do not. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Mark Logan , 10 March 2018 at 02:05 PM

My understanding is Fusion GPS does research for both sides. Soros giving them money is entirely plausible but assuming that money equals control is a bit of a leap.

It appears to be some Russians seeking to discredit the investigation with clever BS/truthiness.

I suspect a few absurdly wealthy Russians harbor a deep fear of Mueller. They may believe he is primarily after them and they may be right. I see Mueller as an old-school lawman, and suspect he is using all this as a golden opportunity to put the hurt on some Russian mobsters, particularly in their money laundering. It would not surprise me if he hopes he will not be forced to nail Trump himself to the wall, which would drag all kinds of political noise into the trials, some of the people around Trump will be bad enough. Using some of them, at least for the moment, is unavoidable, it's the politics is the source of his mission and resources.

If only our press had the bandwidth necessary to distinguish those few Russians from ALL Russians...

likbez said in reply to Mark Logan... , 10 March 2018 at 03:43 PM
"I suspect a few absurdly wealthy Russians harbor a deep fear of Mueller."

"I see Mueller as an old-school lawman, and suspect he is using all this as a golden opportunity to put the hurt on some Russian mobsters"

Thank you ! You have such a refreshing level of naivety that I really enjoyed your posts.

How one in his sound mind can call Mueller "an old-school lawman" if one remember Mueller's role in 9/11 and anthrax investigations.

And FYI those "absurdly wealthy Russians" represents the US fifth column in Russia (as guarantors and protectors of neoliberalism in Russia; Google such a name as Chubais https://www.rusjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Yeltsin_Putin.pdf ) and to destroy them might not be in best USA interests. Moreover, such a move actually will be do Putin a huge favor, strengthening his hand.

As for "a golden opportunity to put the hurt on some Russian mobsters" the danger of such a brilliant move is to reveal criminal connections with Russian oligarchs (and financial oligarchs in general as you never know where the oligarch ends and the mafia boss starts) and the Democratic Party.

Just think about who can go down with Trump is such a case. It's not only Bill and Hillary. It is also a very dangerous thing to open this can of worms as "the people" might learn something that neoliberal elite does not want them to know -- specifically the USA and intelligence agencies role in creating Russian mafia and oligarchs after the dissolution of the USSR. Do you, by any chance, know such a name as Andrei Shleifer and such a term as "Harvard Mafia" ? Please Google those if you do not.

FYI Bill Clinton took a huge bribe in the form of speech fee from people very close to "Russian Mobsters" (organized crime figures should probably more correctly be called "the informal neoliberals" ;-)

There was an interesting discussion in Quora in 2016 on this topic:

https://www.quora.com/Who-paid-Bill-Clintons-2-5-million-commission-and-500-000-speaking-fee-for-brokering-the-sale-of-20-of-Americas-uranium-deposits-to-Russia

[Mar 10, 2018] At one point Steele was appointed as case officer to the FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko. It was in 2006, shortly after Mr Steele's retirement, that Mr Litvinenko was assassinated

Notable quotes:
"... As Mr Steele contemplates his next move, MI6 will also be conducting a damage assessment of just how badly its reputation, and its relationship with the Trump presidency, has been dented. The fact that its boss, Mr Younger, is a former colleague and reportedly a friend of Mr Steele is unlikely to help. ..."
"... So it was to Orbis that Jeb Bush, one of Mr Trump's opponents in the Republican presidential primaries, reportedly turned when he wanted to find material that would damage the billionaire businessman. ..."
"... Associates of Mr Bush hired FusionGPS, a Washington DC-based political research firm, which in turn hired Orbis in December 2015. When Mr Trump became the presumptive nominee, the Republicans ended the deal with FusionGPS, but Democratic supporters of Hillary Clinton stepped in and continued funding Mr Steele's research. ..."
"... The Daily Telegraph has been told that the FBI arranged a meeting with Mr Steele in Europe where they discussed his findings with him. Sources have told the Telegraph that the FBI's approach was approved by the British Government. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | russia-insider.com

Abben • 2 days ago ,

Then, earlier this week, the existence of the dossier became public knowledge when the CNN news network reported that Mr Trump and President Obama had been given a two-page summary of its contents, suggesting the FBI regarded it as sufficiently credible to be put in front of the two men. The news website Buzzfeed then decided to publish the dossier in full.

As all hell broke loose in America, Mr Trump used a news conference in New York to attack the dossier as "phoney" and accuse US intelligence of deliberately leaking it to the media.

Mr Steele packed his bags and fled his Surrey home, leaving others to debate the questions that still remain over his reliability, and that of his report.

Meanwhile Mr Steele remains in hiding, possibly in an MI6 safe house with his wife and four children. His immediate concern is not for his reputation, but for his safety.

His father-in-law, David Hunt, said from his home near Newbury: "Of course I know what he does, some sort of consultancy, but only the broad outlines.

"Christopher never went into the details. It's all very unfortunate because the last thing he'd want is for his name to be out there, associated with this kind of thing."

His mother-in-law Jane Reveley said: "I didn't know anything about this. The first I knew was when I heard it on the Today programme this morning."

As Mr Steele contemplates his next move, MI6 will also be conducting a damage assessment of just how badly its reputation, and its relationship with the Trump presidency, has been dented. The fact that its boss, Mr Younger, is a former colleague and reportedly a friend of Mr Steele is unlikely to help.

Abben • 2 days ago ,

Murkiness is the hallmark of all spy stories, and Mr Steele's is no different in that respect. His route to MI6 was straightforward enough; after growing up in solidly middle-class Wokingham, Berkshire, he went to Cambridge where, in 1986, he served a term as president of the Cambridge Union debating society.

Coincidentally, his opposite number at the Oxford Union in the same term was Boris Johnson, now Foreign Secretary and the minister responsible for MI6.

Abben Abben 2 days ago ,

Mr Steele, 52, was soon recruited by the Secret Intelligence Service, and by 1990 he was in Moscow as a spy working out of the British Embassy. His contemporaries included another young recruit, Alex Younger, who rose through the ranks to become the current head of MI6.

Abben Abben 2 days ago ,

While Mr Younger was marked for greatness, Mr Steele was described by one source as a medium-ranked officer of middling ability, who spent most of his 20-year MI6 career on the Russia desk.

At one point he ran MI6's Intelligence Officers New Entry Course at its training establishment in Hampshire, and he was appointed as case officer to the FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko. It was in 2006, shortly after Mr Steele's retirement, that Mr Litvinenko was assassinated in London with a lethal dose of radioactive polonium-210 added to his tea.

Nigel West, European Editor of the World Intelligence Review, suggests Litvinenko's death inevitably coloured Mr Steele's view of Russia, and turned him into a "man with a mission".

Abben Abben 2 days ago ,

By 2009 he had founded Orbis with Christopher Burrows, another MI6 retiree, offering clients access to a "high–level source network with a sophisticated investigative capability".

So it was to Orbis that Jeb Bush, one of Mr Trump's opponents in the Republican presidential primaries, reportedly turned when he wanted to find material that would damage the billionaire businessman.

Associates of Mr Bush hired FusionGPS, a Washington DC-based political research firm, which in turn hired Orbis in December 2015. When Mr Trump became the presumptive nominee, the Republicans ended the deal with FusionGPS, but Democratic supporters of Hillary Clinton stepped in and continued funding Mr Steele's research.

Abben Abben 2 days ago ,

By May last year journalists in Washington were already beginning to hear rumours about the dossier, and by October its existence, and the role of a "former spy" were being written about in US publications.

The 35-page dossier, however, did not see the light of day because of questions over its veracity. Journalists from numerous media companies spent months trying to find evidence to back up the claims made in the dossier, without success.

Meanwhile, Mr Steele, believing its contents to be too important to be restricted only to Mr Trump's political enemies, is understood to have passed copies of his findings to both the FBI, via its Rome office, and to his old colleagues at MI6.

The Daily Telegraph has been told that the FBI arranged a meeting with Mr Steele in Europe where they discussed his findings with him. Sources have told the Telegraph that the FBI's approach was approved by the British Government.

[Mar 10, 2018] It might well be that Christopher Steele was just laundering information (mostly rumors) colliding three streams of data from Sidney bromenthal, Fusion GPS and MI6 (or CIA via MI6)

Notable quotes:
"... 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 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. ..."
"... Simpson was implying that none 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." ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
likbez, 10 March 2018 at 01:54 AM
I do not think it matters who funded creation of Fusion GPS. What is more important is whether it is a private entity, or an FBI front company which was allowed to have some side business (compare with Crowdstrike):

It might well be that Christopher Steele was just laundering information (mostly rumors) colliding three streams of data:

The blatant abuse of "about queries" was one of the reasons that ten days after the election, on November 17th 2016, Admiral Rogers traveled to Trump Tower without telling ODNI James Clapper. Rogers likely informed President-elect Trump of the prior surveillance activity by the FBI and DOJ, including the likelihood that all of Trump Tower's email and phone communication were and still are intercepted.

There is also some interesting bits of information in John Helmer article on the subject ( https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/01/cia-bull-glenn-simpsons-russia-shop.html ) :

The key impression from the testimony is that Glenn Simpson is a puppet, a figurehead with the only one real credential -- paranoid Russophobia:

...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 none 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."

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.


[Mar 10, 2018] Soros role in Fusion GPS? "Follow the money."

Soros might well be a front company for an intelligence agency.
Notable quotes:
"... a former FBI investigator, Feinstein staffer and now a Fusion GPS operative ..."
"... This is quite plausible. Silicon Valley billionaires are definitely "investing" in their PC propaganda agenda. The Seattle billionaire and now the world's wealthiest man owns the neocon rag published from our nation's capital. He's also got lucrative contracts from our IC. Alexa is quite happy to listen into all your private conversations at home. ..."
"... "This funding is critical to ensuring that we continue an aggressive response to malign influence and disinformation and that we can leverage deeper partnerships with our allies, Silicon Valley, and other partners in this fight," said Steve Goldstein, undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs." ..."
"... I have often wondered if Soros is not a front company for an intelligence agency. ..."
"... i think it was the open Russia foundation that was funded by Soros, but i see former owner of yukos - Mikhail Khodorkovsky has his name attached to it... ..."
"... It seems the Magnitsky Act is a critical juncture in all the developments towards singling out russia for everything.. ..."
"... i don't know soros or khodorkovskys connection to bill browder in all of this, but would be curious to know. it seems they are all operating to bring down russia, in some way, shape or form.. ..."
"... My understanding is that Mr. Soros has funded, participated and closely associated himself with US' IC community, for various regime change and copes mostly Eastern Europe in past decades. We know that US IC community has the agenda ( a hard on) for discrediting and removing legally elected president of US from his office. We know US Democratic Party has paid and hired members of foreign intelligence for connecting presidential campaign of DT to Russians, for a possible killing of 2 birds with one shot. We know the cheassy silicon billionaires, are no other than the same old Move on Organization which to the bone are clintonian DLC, or the latter day Obamachies. We know Mr. Soros an Easter European migrant like Zbig is totally and fiercely anti anti Russian. ..."
"... When all facts put to gather, sounds like all these elements, entities, and personalities share a common motif and goal, which centers on anti Trump and anti Puttin Russia. When put together, makes a villain's marriage in haven. ..."
Mar 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"In a Daily Caller op-ed calling the Russian meddling narrative a " false public manipulation ," Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska claims that Daniel Jones - a former FBI investigator, Feinstein staffer and now a Fusion GPS operative - told the Russian Oligarch's lawyer in March, 2017 that Fusion GPS was funded by " a group of Silicon Valley billionaires and George Soros. "" Zerohedge

------------

Now, this is something different. I have no idea what the relative truthiness of this may be, but... pl

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-09/russian-billionaire-claims-fusion-gps-funded-soros

Posted at 12:33 PM in Russiagate | Permalink


Jack , 09 March 2018 at 01:58 PM

Sir

This is quite plausible. Silicon Valley billionaires are definitely "investing" in their PC propaganda agenda. The Seattle billionaire and now the world's wealthiest man owns the neocon rag published from our nation's capital. He's also got lucrative contracts from our IC. Alexa is quite happy to listen into all your private conversations at home.

JW , 09 March 2018 at 02:39 PM
I appreciate your use of the phrase ' relative truthiness', and I suggest this latest truthiness is just part of the movie, and a great movie it is.

Still, it's about time Soros showed up and he's in good company too, along with this week's poisoned Russian spy and a paid prostitute with a Trump story to tell. Next ?

We're probably due for a Clinton/Russia-related Julian Assange document dump, some Russian intel officer arrests in DC and....a new Steele-equivalent originator offering a more respectable document since after all any evidence is good evidence. Anything to keep the show going and the audience enthralled !

As for Soros himself, I suggest that there are plenty of Soros's with plenty of attached money trails, but George has the watch. All he is missing is the white cat on his lap.

Peter AU , 09 March 2018 at 03:04 PM
Silicon Valley. A mention of them in this Politico article
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/26/state-defense-russia-propaganda-426626

"This funding is critical to ensuring that we continue an aggressive response to malign influence and disinformation and that we can leverage deeper partnerships with our allies, Silicon Valley, and other partners in this fight," said Steve Goldstein, undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs."

The entry at wikipedia on Fredric Terman, Stanford university and silicon valley is interesting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Terman

Soros? All NGO's that apear in MSM articles, I look up their funding. Most funding traces back to State Dep NED and Soros, along with other older money 'philanthropist' type foundations.

I have often wondered if Soros is not a front company for an intelligence agency.

james , 09 March 2018 at 04:02 PM
oleg deripaska is a colorful Russian oligarch...

i think it was the open Russia foundation that was funded by Soros, but i see former owner of yukos - Mikhail Khodorkovsky has his name attached to it...

It seems the Magnitsky Act is a critical juncture in all the developments towards singling out russia for everything..

i don't know soros or khodorkovskys connection to bill browder in all of this, but would be curious to know. it seems they are all operating to bring down russia, in some way, shape or form..

Kooshy , 09 March 2018 at 05:04 PM
My understanding is that Mr. Soros has funded, participated and closely associated himself with US' IC community, for various regime change and copes mostly Eastern Europe in past decades. We know that US IC community has the agenda ( a hard on) for discrediting and removing legally elected president of US from his office. We know US Democratic Party has paid and hired members of foreign intelligence for connecting presidential campaign of DT to Russians, for a possible killing of 2 birds with one shot. We know the cheassy silicon billionaires, are no other than the same old Move on Organization which to the bone are clintonian DLC, or the latter day Obamachies. We know Mr. Soros an Easter European migrant like Zbig is totally and fiercely anti anti Russian.

When all facts put to gather, sounds like all these elements, entities, and personalities share a common motif and goal, which centers on anti Trump and anti Puttin Russia. When put together, makes a villain's marriage in haven.

Fred , 09 March 2018 at 05:23 PM
Interesting that a former staffer from Senator Feinstein is implicated in the mess. How many others are there who have been doing the same thing? I wonder if Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultt's IT staffer Mr. Arwan was accessing any relevant information while he was on her payroll and for whom?

[Mar 10, 2018] They view the Trump election as an insurgency, and they view themselves as waging a counterinsurgency, which they dare not lose.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
Feb 03, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

different clue , 03 February 2018 at 08:49 PM

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.

Jack , 03 February 2018 at 08:54 PM
David,

Thanks for your analysis. I always enjoy and learn from your posts. I wish you would post more often.

In my non-expert opinion, the Borg and the media were all in for Hillary. They were convinced that she was gonna win. To curry favor with the Empress who would be certainly crowned after the election they were eager and convinced that their lawlessness would become a badge for promotion and plum positions in her administration. In their conceit, they believed they could kill two birds with one stroke. They could vilify Putin and create the mass hysteria to checkmate him, while at the same time disparage and frame Trump as The Manchurian Candidate to seal their certain electoral victory.

Unfortunately for them voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin didn't buy their sales pitch despite the overwhelming media barrage from all corners. Even news publications who have only endorsed Republican candidates for President for over a century endorsed her.

Trump's election win caused panic among the political establishment, the media and the Deep State. They were already all-in. Their only choice was to double down and get Trump impeached. Now their conspiracy is beginning to unravel. They are doing everything possible to forestall their Armageddon. Of course they have many allies. This battle is gonna be interesting to watch. Trump is clearly getting many Congressional Republicans on side as his base of Deplorables remains solidly behind him. That is what's befuddling the Borg pundits.

[Mar 08, 2018] Cue bono question in Scripal case?

Highly recommended!
This case looks more and more like Litvinenko II -- another false flag designed to implicate Russia a fuel anti-russian hysteria. British MI6 are masters in such provocations.
Along with sabotaging Moscow soccer tournament this also can also be an attempt to distract from MI6 role is creation of Steele dossier too.
Notable quotes:
"... Having worked for Russia's Military Intelligence Directorate (GRU) since the Soviet era, Sergey Skripal was recruited in 1995 by the British agent Pablo Miller, who at the time was posing as Antonio Alvarez de Hidalgo and working in Britain's embassy in Tallinn. Russia's Federal Security Service says Miller was actually an undercover MI6 agent tasked with recruiting Russians. ..."
"... The first reports about Miller's work in Russia emerged in the early 2000s, after multiple Russians arrested for spying fingered Miller as their recruiter. For example, former tax police Major Vyacheslav Zharko says it was Miller who recruited him. He says it was Boris Berezovsky and former Federal Security Service (FSB) agent Alexander Litvinenko who introduced him to British intelligence agents. Zharko surrendered himself to Russian officials when he learned about the British authorities' suspicions that another former FSB officer, Andrey Lugovoi, had poisoned Litvinenko with polonium. ..."
"... Litvinenko also worked for MI6 ..."
"... Skripal, however, never turned himself in. For nine years, according to the FSB, he collaborated actively with British intelligence, transmitting information about Russian agents. ..."
"... Who/what paid Skripal a $472,000 house and a pension? That is way more than the reported $100,000 he earlier got. What did he do to earn the higher pay? ..."
"... Seems Skripal was a British spy at the end. If he required killing, it would have happened long ago as b asserts. Clearly, he knew something dangerously compromising to make himself a target. ..."
"... If b is too moral to consider killing injuring unrelated, innocent people for propaganda as it was 9/11 whoever did it, he must wake up. These days, days of phony YT,FB Twitter reality, the only value is propaganda value nothing else, anybody will be thrown under the bus if this fits aims of ruling elite even some oligarchs who are rich only because their submit to rape of ruling elite as high paid prostitute while the rest are raped for free ..."
"... If fact they will supress details of that crime just to obfuscate obvious perpetrators in a cloud of conspiracy theories in fact mining people's brains busy them up like little ants like Bitcoin miners waste electricity and computer power for delusional quest of riches ..."
"... Sources close to Orbis, the business intelligence firm run by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who was behind a dossier of compromising allegations against Donald Trump, said Mr Skripal did not contribute to the file. But they could not say whether Mr Skripal was involved in different investigations into the US President for other interested parties. ..."
"... It's interesting how quickly the denial from steele comes out... Is skripal dead yet, or still alive? i wonder if he comes back, what he says? i guess we will never know either way... ..."
"... Media management and playing the old "backs to the wall boys & girls, its the blitz all over again" is what the 'counter-terror' mob do. ..."
"... The initial cops played the whole thing really low key, it seemed as though they wanted to get to the bottom of whatever happened, but their replacements 'counter-terror' appear to devote more time and energy to seducing credulous journos than they do trying to find out what actually did occur. ..."
"... Over in the states there have been reports about carfentanil poisoning responders to overdoses because of trace amounts. It is reported as 100 x as powerful as fentanyl. So maybe a chemical cousin is a possible consideration. ..."
"... B's suggestion that Skripal might be longing to return to and die in Russia, and that he was offering a "gift" to Moscow via his daughter (or maybe even a letter apologising for his treachery and begging for forgiveness, Berezovsky-style) is a stroke of genius. Makes me think that Boris Berezovsky's death merits more attention and cannot be brushed off as a suicide. ..."
"... On a park bench, they were discovered. I'll bet my best fishing lure that location's covered by a CCTV whose footage will provide all the answers--unless we aren't to be shown, due to national security or some such. ..."
"... Meanwhile The Guardian is spewing its usual bilge : Russian spy attack inquiry widens after medics treat 21 people ..."
"... The longer Skripal and his daughter stay alive, the more propaganda can be rung out of his death. Be worth watching to see how many sanctions and laws the UK can push through before he finally snuffs it. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Spy Poisons Spy And The Anti-Trump Campaign

On Sunday a former British-Russian double agent and his daughter were seriously injured in a mysterious incident in Salisbury, England. The British government says that both were hurt due to "exposure to a nerve agent". Speculative media reports talk of Sarin and VX, two deadly nerve-agents used in military chemical weapons. Anonymous officials strongly hint that 'Russia did it'.

New reports though point to a deep connection between the case and the anti-Trump/anti-Russia propaganda drive run by the Obama administration and the Hillary Clinton election campaign.

Sergei Skripal once was a colonel in a Russian military intelligence service. In the early 1990s he was recruited by the MI6 agent Pablo Miller. He continued to spy for the Brits after his 1999 retirement. The Russian FSB claims that the British MI6 paid him $100,000 for his service. At that time a Russian officer would only make a few hundred bucks per month. Skripal was finally uncovered in 2004 and two years later convicted for spying for Britain. He was sentenced to 18 years and in 2010 he and other agents ware exchanged in a large spy swap between the United States and Russia. Skripal was granted refuge in Britain and has since lived openly under his own name in Salisbury. His wife and his son died over the last years of natural causes. The only near relative he has left is his daughter who continued to live in Russia.

Last week his daughter flew to Britain and met him in Salisbury. On Sunday they went to a pub and a restaurant. At some point they were poisoned or poisoned themselves. They collapsed on a public bench. They are now in intensive care. A policeman one the scene was also seriously effected.

Authorities have declined to name the substance to which the pair is suspected to have been exposed, but :

Local media had on Monday reported the substance found at the scene to be similar to fentanyl: a lethally strong opioid available even on Salisbury's soporific streets.

The British government is hinting at Russian involvement :


Whorin Piece , Mar 8, 2018 4:30:36 PM | 1

Seth Rich.

Awesome, thank you b,

I think this event is a ramp to offing Knesia Sobchak prior to or just after the national poll. She is a pawn of the West. She has been directed to consolidate the disparate liberal opposition campaigns by the use of primaries...which would just happen to result in her primacy. The idea is to have her win enough vote it can be alleged that she has embarrassed Putin...and then they six her using VX. Her father was close go Putin during Putin's early years in St Pete. The BBC has been running chaff out the foot saying Putin killed his mentor Anatoly Sobchak. Knesia has been moved into position. She will be offed to harm Putin's reputation but also to place e a complex wound in him. The West are monsters

yoffa , Mar 8, 2018 4:35:34 PM | 2
The Orbis consultant / analyst living in Salisbury is identified as Pablo Miller. He had recruited Skripal in 1995 ( https://meduza.io/en/feature/2018/03/06/a-hundred-grand-and-hundreds-of-betrayed-agents).
notheonly1 , Mar 8, 2018 4:40:39 PM | 3
Ms Rudd told MPs it was an "outrageous crime", adding that the government would "act without hesitation as the facts become clearer".

Yeah, right.

Like the illegal invasion of a sovereign foreign country based on the lies by the same 'government', with a million+ casualties among the middle eastern population.

That kind of outrageous crime , correct?

One day the pendulum will swing back hard and merciless at these criminal warmongers and war profiteers. Disgusting how low what goes for 'homo sapiens' can sink.

Christian Chuba , Mar 8, 2018 4:43:02 PM | 4
I was wondering if Grigory Rodchenkov was in danger of meeting the same fate by some of the more unsavory elements of U.S. Intelligence Agencies. He would become a poster boy for Russian assassinations on U.S. soil.

One thing about Rodchenkov, if the doping was not state sponsored, what motive would have have for doing it on his own, is there enough money in the Olympics that individual athletes would bribe him or would it make him look better if his athletes did better? I don't buy that it was state sponsored, or at least there is no evidence to that affect.

Oyyo , Mar 8, 2018 4:51:46 PM | 6
21 people were affected.

https://news.sky.com/story/live-poisoned-salisbury-cop-talking-and-engaging-11280674

xLemming , Mar 8, 2018 5:05:53 PM | 7
Sadly @3 we may have to wait for Judgement Day for that to happen. But if it comes about sooner, and in our lifetime, it will be a day of rejoicing!
b , Mar 8, 2018 5:07:11 PM | 8
@yoffa @2 - thank you. Your link does not work, here is a good one: A hundred grand and hundreds of betrayed agents What was former GRU Colonel Sergey Skripal's treason against Russia?
Having worked for Russia's Military Intelligence Directorate (GRU) since the Soviet era, Sergey Skripal was recruited in 1995 by the British agent Pablo Miller, who at the time was posing as Antonio Alvarez de Hidalgo and working in Britain's embassy in Tallinn. Russia's Federal Security Service says Miller was actually an undercover MI6 agent tasked with recruiting Russians.

The first reports about Miller's work in Russia emerged in the early 2000s, after multiple Russians arrested for spying fingered Miller as their recruiter. For example, former tax police Major Vyacheslav Zharko says it was Miller who recruited him. He says it was Boris Berezovsky and former Federal Security Service (FSB) agent Alexander Litvinenko who introduced him to British intelligence agents. Zharko surrendered himself to Russian officials when he learned about the British authorities' suspicions that another former FSB officer, Andrey Lugovoi, had poisoned Litvinenko with polonium.

Litvinenko also worked for MI6 ..
Skripal, however, never turned himself in. For nine years, according to the FSB, he collaborated actively with British intelligence, transmitting information about Russian agents.

Nikolai Luzan, who calls himself a colonel and a veteran of Russia's security agencies, wrote a detailed book about how the British recruited Sergey Skripal. Luzan says his book, "A Devil's Counterintelligence Dozen," is an "artistic-documentary production."

If we assume that Luzan's account is generally accurate, then Skripal was recruited during a long-term assignment in Malta and Spain, where he "got greedy."
...

Further on:
Skripal led a quiet life in Salisbury, where he reportedly bought an average house for 340,000 British pounds (about $472,000). His neighbors describe him as an ordinary, reasonably friendly pensioner. When he moved to the area, he even invited the whole street over for a housewarming party.

It's unclear why Skripal decided to resettle specifically in Salisbury, but LinkedIn indicates that Pablo Miller -- the MI6 agent who recruited him -- lives in the same town. In 2015, the year he retired, Miller received the Order of the British Empire for services to Her Majesty's Government.

Skripal's wife, Lyudmila, lived with him in Salisbury until her death a few years ago. His son died from liver failure in 2017 in St. Petersburg.

It must be Pablo Miller who worked with Steele ...

Who/what paid Skripal a $472,000 house and a pension? That is way more than the reported $100,000 he earlier got. What did he do to earn the higher pay?

karlof1 , Mar 8, 2018 5:12:03 PM | 9
Seems Skripal was a British spy at the end. If he required killing, it would have happened long ago as b asserts. Clearly, he knew something dangerously compromising to make himself a target. The UK's fairly well covered by CCTV; I'd be very interested in what those in Salisbury observed. The incident has La Carre written all over it.
Kalen , Mar 8, 2018 5:21:30 PM | 10
If someone like MI6 for FSB wanted him dead they would be instantly in a car accident of robbery attempt, they whoever they are, wanted this to thing to prolong in time to feed the press Russia gate and wanted people like b to follow the trap since most of the info here can be found just after few clicks, will be picked up by rational people.

If b is too moral to consider killing injuring unrelated, innocent people for propaganda as it was 9/11 whoever did it, he must wake up. These days, days of phony YT,FB Twitter reality, the only value is propaganda value nothing else, anybody will be thrown under the bus if this fits aims of ruling elite even some oligarchs who are rich only because their submit to rape of ruling elite as high paid prostitute while the rest are raped for free .

If fact they will supress details of that crime just to obfuscate obvious perpetrators in a cloud of conspiracy theories in fact mining people's brains busy them up like little ants like Bitcoin miners waste electricity and computer power for delusional quest of riches .

In the society of control ruling elite controls everything it needs to control and hence is responsible for this. Case closed.

b , Mar 8, 2018 5:39:21 PM | 12
The Independent: Sergei Skripal: Former double agent may have been poisoned with nerve agent over 'freelance' spying, sources say
The Russian double agent poisoned in Salisbury may have become a target after using his contacts in the intelligence community to work for private security firms, investigators believe.

Sergei Skripal could have come to the attention of certain people in Russia by attempting to "freelance" for companies run by former MI5, MI6 and GCHQ spies, security sources say.
...
Sources close to Orbis, the business intelligence firm run by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, who was behind a dossier of compromising allegations against Donald Trump, said Mr Skripal did not contribute to the file. But they could not say whether Mr Skripal was involved in different investigations into the US President for other interested parties.

A very believable denial by Steele. Not.
james , Mar 8, 2018 5:56:08 PM | 13
It's interesting how quickly the denial from steele comes out... Is skripal dead yet, or still alive? i wonder if he comes back, what he says? i guess we will never know either way...
Debsisdead , Mar 8, 2018 6:02:23 PM | 14
For me it was particularly suss when the Leceister Police who are the coppers on the ground in Salisbury were heavied by Scotland Yuk ( or 'the met' as englander papers call that gang of proven torturers & murderers) to turn the Skripsky investigation over to the 'counter-terror squad' - the mob of thugs whose skillful manipulation of england's media combined with evidence falsification made their indicted murder of Brazilian electrician Jean Charles de Menezes seem like an heroic act by playing the old honest whitefella card - "all those brownfellas look the same, who can tell the difference?" . No copper, not the killers or the idiot in charge suffered any disciplinary actiion, much less a criminal one. IIRC the policeperson in charge who claimed to be 'in the bathroom' at the time of de Menzeses murder, one Cressida Dick, is now chief commissioner, the boss of Scotland Yuk.

The local coppers know the area and will have a rapport with witnesses that a mob of arseholes in sharp suits backed by balaclava wearing armed heavies is unlikely to enjoy, so why grab the gig especially since it is certain to remain unsolved?

Well partly that, to make sure it remains unsolved, but also because counter-terror plays the press release regurgitators who are englander 'journos' like a fine old violin. Questions about fentanyl being a nerve agent get tricky? Spin the chooks a yarn about evil a-rabs you have met.

Uncoy , Mar 8, 2018 6:21:20 PM | 15
Kalen is right. Such a flamboyant killing is not how modern intelligence agencies dispose of problems. Unless they want to draw attention to their work.

Maybe there's a bunch of people around the Christopher Steele dossier thinking of talking. What better way to shut them up than to knock off a Steele source.

Peter , Mar 8, 2018 6:33:27 PM | 16
Very good work, B. Thanks for your website, best on the web.
sadness , Mar 8, 2018 6:41:55 PM | 17
It could always be a simple & rather human explanation - The daughter was struggling for cash at home, dad was old but refused to die & had a stash of cash from his past, she knocked him off to get an earlier inheritance but being an amateur at this she did herself in too, which would be poetic justice...?
sadness , Mar 8, 2018 6:49:11 PM | 18
....oh i forgot to add....or it was a sad suicide pact between them when all else was lost & over
ToivoS , Mar 8, 2018 7:08:41 PM | 19
It is highly unlikely that fentanyl was the toxin that poisoned Skribal and his daughter. That hypothesis should be excluded at this point.

The main reason for this is that the patrol man who discovered them also came down with similar symptoms. Fentanyl is extremely toxic when injected intravenously. But not to any one coming into contact with them, touching them or even performing mouth to mouth resusication.

There are numerous acetyl choline inhibitors (e.g. sarin, vx, and many other similar compounds that have never been approved for chemical warfare) that can cause symptoms if someone comes into contact with an intoxicated patient especially one has be exposed externally.

Also the Portland Down lab has identified an ACE inhibitor (of course, that is part of the British military and they could very easily be lying.)

In any case, this looks like a nerve toxin poison, fentanyl is not in that class.

Fatima Manoubia , Mar 8, 2018 7:08:44 PM | 20
Fentanyl patchs are used to control intense chronic pain...If he resigned from GRU because of health issues, as the "Meduzas" affirm, it might be related to this chronic pain and so he could well be a patient using this drug for pain control.....

Thus, fentanyl is not a nerve agent, but an anesthesic in any case....All could well be a performance...to blame the Russians and contribute to scare the population about them previous to some machination to be mounted at......Do not forget that that factory of mannequin challenges broadcasts, the White Helmets, is also a British "enterprise", creation of "former" MI6 LeMesurier....

Debsisdead , Mar 8, 2018 7:40:41 PM | 21
Yesterday when questions about fentanyl were raised, the sick policeman was identified, up until that point all that had been said was that the bill first on the scene were admitted to be checked out by medics. Today the close to death's door copper is in fine fettle once again. I leave it up to others to decide whether he was crook (sick - an Oz term) or the imported police were crooks (lying).

Media management and playing the old "backs to the wall boys & girls, its the blitz all over again" is what the 'counter-terror' mob do. If they were really opposed to scaring the bejeezuz outta englanders which is what their name implies they would A) be better at preventing actions which they hadn't cranked up themselves for entrapment and B) not imagine it was on the up and up to terrify the burghers of Salisbury with yarns about possible 'nerve agent' on the loose that were placing the town's population at risk.

The initial cops played the whole thing really low key, it seemed as though they wanted to get to the bottom of whatever happened, but their replacements 'counter-terror' appear to devote more time and energy to seducing credulous journos than they do trying to find out what actually did occur. The form of this gang of sleek deceitful killers means that just because they claim this local woodentop was poisoned, it doesn't mean that is what actually befell him.

Duck1 , Mar 8, 2018 7:49:18 PM | 22
Over in the states there have been reports about carfentanil poisoning responders to overdoses because of trace amounts. It is reported as 100 x as powerful as fentanyl. So maybe a chemical cousin is a possible consideration.
Jen , Mar 8, 2018 7:54:30 PM | 23
It seems that MI6 was keeping Sergei Skripal on a tight leash by having him live in Salisbury close to Pablo Miller who must be the old fellow's minder as well as recruiter. One way of keeping Skripal on this leash must be to supply him with an addictive painkiller, for whatever pain he is suffering (physical, perhaps psychological?), and fentanyl fits the bill.

Fentanyl also fits the bill for a poisoning agent that also affected the police officer who attended the Skripals. The fentanyl epidemic is apparently forcing emergency and first-response personnel to re-evaluate procedures in handling patients so that they themselves are not affected by sniffing fentanyl accidentally.

B's suggestion that Skripal might be longing to return to and die in Russia, and that he was offering a "gift" to Moscow via his daughter (or maybe even a letter apologising for his treachery and begging for forgiveness, Berezovsky-style) is a stroke of genius. Makes me think that Boris Berezovsky's death merits more attention and cannot be brushed off as a suicide.

karlof1 , Mar 8, 2018 7:59:42 PM | 24
sadness @17 & 18--

Nobody died. Only 3 remain in hospital and are not endangered.

On a park bench, they were discovered. I'll bet my best fishing lure that location's covered by a CCTV whose footage will provide all the answers--unless we aren't to be shown, due to national security or some such.

Briar Patch , Mar 8, 2018 8:05:32 PM | 25
The question raised by the link offered by Oyyo at 6 (at least 21 affected by the "neurotoxin"), the comments offered by Debisdead at 21, and the note from Craig Murry about the nearby chemical site: Was this an attack targeting Skripal at all, or some other kind of "misadventure"? There are so many opportunities to use this kind of incident, by entities capable of spinning it this way and that, that it doesn't give to us individuals reading the news much hope of ever learning the truth.
Ghost Ship , Mar 8, 2018 8:16:50 PM | 26
>>>>> ToivoS | Mar 8, 2018 7:08:41 PM | 19

Fentanyl can enter the body through the skin :

A police officer in East Liverpool, Ohio, collapsed and was rushed to the hospital after he brushed fentanyl residue off his uniform, allowing the drug to enter his system through his hands. The officer had apparently encountered the opioid earlier in the day while making a drug bust.
Fenatanyl acts on the nervous system so could be described as a "nerve agent", particularly by a British politician or civil servant.
WorldBLee , Mar 8, 2018 8:49:38 PM | 30
I love it when the UK media call it a "professional hit job." No, it's not. In a professional hit job the person ends up dead.
Ghost Ship , Mar 8, 2018 9:02:37 PM | 31
Meanwhile The Guardian is spewing its usual bilge: Russian spy attack inquiry widens after medics treat 21 people

Statement from Wiltshire Police :

In addition to the three inpatients**** who are currently receiving treatment in relation to the incident, in line with Public Health England guidance, which asked anyone who was in the area and is concerned because they feel unwell to come forward, the Trust has seen and assessed a number of people who did not need treatment.

**** - These are Sgt Nick Bailey & the two original victims.

Peter AU 1 , Mar 8, 2018 9:04:33 PM | 32
The longer Skripal and his daughter stay alive, the more propaganda can be rung out of his death. Be worth watching to see how many sanctions and laws the UK can push through before he finally snuffs it.

[Mar 08, 2018] Given the CrowdStrike itself is a massively compromised organization due to its founder and CEO, those "certified true images" are themselves tainted evidence

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... To be precise, CrowdStrike did provide the FBI with allegedly "certified true images" of the DNC servers allegedly involved in the alleged "hack." They also allegedly provided these images to FireEye and Mandiant, IIRC ..."
"... Of course, given the CrowdStrike itself is a massively compromised organization due to its founder and CEO, those "certified true images" are themselves tainted evidence. ..."
"... In addition, regardless of whether the images were true or not, the evidence allegedly contained therein is painfully inadequate to confirm that APT28 or APT29 were involved, nor that the Russian government was involved, or even that there was a real hack involved, and even less evidence that any emails that might have been exfiltrated were given to Wikileaks as opposed to another leak such as that alleged by Sy Hersh to have been done by Seth Rich. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Richardstevenhack , 07 March 2018 at 06:23 PM

Re this: " In the case of Russian meddling there is no forensic evidence available to the IC because the Democratic National Committee did not permit the FBI to investigate and examine the computers and the network that was allegedly attacked."

To be precise, CrowdStrike did provide the FBI with allegedly "certified true images" of the DNC servers allegedly involved in the alleged "hack." They also allegedly provided these images to FireEye and Mandiant, IIRC .

All three allegedly examined those images and concurred with CrowdStrike's analysis.

Of course, given the CrowdStrike itself is a massively compromised organization due to its founder and CEO, those "certified true images" are themselves tainted evidence.

In addition, regardless of whether the images were true or not, the evidence allegedly contained therein is painfully inadequate to confirm that APT28 or APT29 were involved, nor that the Russian government was involved, or even that there was a real hack involved, and even less evidence that any emails that might have been exfiltrated were given to Wikileaks as opposed to another leak such as that alleged by Sy Hersh to have been done by Seth Rich.

The "assessment" that Putin ordered any of this is pure mind-reading and can be utterly dismissed absent any of the other evidence Publius points out as necessary.

The same applies to any "estimate" that the Russian government preferred Trump or wished to denigrate Clinton. Based on what I read in pro-Russian news outlets, Russian officials took great pains to not pick sides and Putin's comments were similarly very restrained. The main quote from Putin about Trump that emerged was mistranslated as approval whereas it was more an observation of Trump's personality. At no time did Putin ever say he favored Trump over Clinton, even though that was a likely probability given Clinton's "Hitler" comparison.

As an aside, I also recommend Scott Ritter's trashing of the ICA. Ritter is familiar with intelligence estimates and their reliability based on his previous service as a UN weapons inspector in Iraq and in Russia implementing arms control treaties.

Exposing The Man Behind The Curtain
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/exposing-the-man-behind-the-curtain_us_5877887be4b05b7a465df6a4

Throwing a Curveball at 'Intelligence Community Consensus' on Russia
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/did-17-intelligence-agencies-really-come-to-consensus-on-russia/

His analysis of the NSA document leaked by NSA contractor Reality Winner which supposedly supported the Russia theory is also relevant.

Leaked NSA Report Is Short on Facts, Proves Little in 'Russiagate' Case
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/leaked-nsa-report-is-short-on-facts-proves-little-in-russiagate-case/

[Mar 08, 2018] The perpetrators in the Steel Memo case are and were merely hiding behind claims of sources and methods protection in order to protect themselves

Mar 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

turcopolier 08 March 2018 at 04:36 PM

Linda

PT does not have access to the classified information underlying but your argument that "As you are well aware sources and methods cannot be made public so I fail to see how you believe this should have been publicly done." doesn't hold water for me since I have seen sources and methods disclosed by the government of the US many times when it felt that necessary. One example that I have mentioned before was that of the trial of Jeffrey Sterling (merlin) for which I was an expert witness and adviser to the federal court for four years. In that one the CIA and DoJ forced the court to allow them to de-classify the CIA DO's operational files on the case and read them into the record in open court. I had read all these files when they were classified at the SCI level. IMO the perpetrators in the Steel Memo case are and were merely hiding behind claims of sources and methods protection in order to protect themselve. pl

[Mar 08, 2018] Another day, another rumor about origins of Steele dossir, all trying to smoke screen the role of Brennan and MI6 in this whole thing

Notable quotes:
"... The latest claim (behind a paywall) is in the Daily Telegraph that Colonel Skripal was close to an unnamed member of the consultancy which Christopher Steele is a member of. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

johnf , 08 March 2018 at 02:36 AM

Previous posts on the poisoning of Colonel Skripal, the ex-FSB double agent, have been on the Alistair Crooke thread, but it seems worth continuing in this thread.

The latest claim (behind a paywall) is in the Daily Telegraph that Colonel Skripal was close to an unnamed member of the consultancy which Christopher Steele is a member of.

Personally I think this whole story (which has dominated the British press and media for the last three days) is a false flag, borrowing much of its narrative line from the Litvinenko poisoning (in which Steele was also heavily involved). As the plot line gradually unwinds, it seems to be tying in more and more with Russiagate across the ocean.

Colonel Skripal was recruited in Estonia by MI6.

(David Habbakuk's opinion on this farrago would be greatly appreciated)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/07/poisoned-russian-spy-sergei-skripal-close-consultant-linked/

[Mar 08, 2018] Several respected journalists have cast serious doubt on CrowdStrike s report on the DNC servers

Looks like Brennan was the architect of DNS false flag operation: "Hersh also told Butowsky that the DNC made up the Russian hacking story as a disinformation campaign -- directly pointing a finger at former CIA director (and now MSNBC/NBC contributor ) John Brennan as the architect."
Now all this staff started to remind me 9/11 investigation. Also by Mueller.
Notable quotes:
"... Notably, Crowdstrike has been considered by many to be discredited over their revision and retraction of a report over Russian hacking of Ukrainian military equipment ..."
"... Also notable is that Crowdstrike founder and anti-Putin Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch sits on the Atlantic Council - which is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk. Who else is on the Atlantic Council? Evelyn Farkas - who slipped up during an MSNBC interview with Mika Brzezinski and disclosed that the Obama administration had been spying on the Trump campaign: ..."
"... Hersh also told Butowsky that the DNC made up the Russian hacking story as a disinformation campaign -- directly pointing a finger at former CIA director (and now MSNBC/NBC contributor ) John Brennan as the architect. ..."
"... I have a narrative of how that whole f*cking thing began. It's a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation , and the fu*kin' President, at one point, they even started telling the press -- they were backfeeding the Press, the head of the NSA was going and telling the press, fu*king c*cksucker Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the Russian military intelligence service leaked it. ..."
"... Listen to Seymour Hersh leaked audio: https://www.youtube.com/embed/giuZdBAXVh0 (full transcription here and extended audio of the Hersh conversation here ) ..."
"... As we mentioned last week, Dotcom's assertion is backed up by an analysis done last year by a researcher who goes by the name Forensicator , who determined that the DNC files were copied at 22.6 MB/s - a speed virtually impossible to achieve from halfway around the world, much less over a local network - yet a speed typical of file transfers to a memory stick. ..."
"... Last but not least, let's not forget that Julian Assange heavily implied Seth Rich was a source: ..."
"... Given that a) the Russian hacking narrative hinges on Crowdstrikes's questionable reporting , and b) a mountain of evidence pointing to Seth Rich as the source of the leaked emails - it stands to reason that Congressional investigators and Special Counsel Robert Mueller should at minimum explore these leads. ..."
"... As retired U.S. Navy admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. asks: why aren't they? ..."
Mar 03, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

... ... ...

In addition to several odd facts surrounding Rich's still unsolved murder - which officials have deemed a "botched robbery," forensic technical evidence has emerged which contradicts the Crowdstrike report. The Irvine, CA company partially funded by Google , was the only entity allowed to analyze the DNC servers in relation to claims of election hacking:

Notably, Crowdstrike has been considered by many to be discredited over their revision and retraction of a report over Russian hacking of Ukrainian military equipment - a report which the government of Ukraine said was fake news.

In connection with the emergence in some media reports which stated that the alleged "80% howitzer D-30 Armed Forces of Ukraine removed through scrapping Russian Ukrainian hackers software gunners," Land Forces Command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine informs that the said information is incorrect .

Ministry of Defence of Ukraine asks journalists to publish only verified information received from the competent official sources. Spreading false information leads to increased social tension in society and undermines public confidence in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. -- mil.gov.ua (translated) (1.6.2017)

In fact, several respected journalists have cast serious doubt on CrowdStrike's report on the DNC servers:

Pay attention, because Mueller is likely to use the Crowdstrike report to support the rumored upcoming charges against Russian hackers.

Also notable is that Crowdstrike founder and anti-Putin Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch sits on the Atlantic Council - which is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk. Who else is on the Atlantic Council? Evelyn Farkas - who slipped up during an MSNBC interview with Mika Brzezinski and disclosed that the Obama administration had been spying on the Trump campaign:

The Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff dealing with Russians, that they would try to compromise those sources and methods , meaning we would not longer have access to that intelligence. - Evelyn Farkas

... ... ...

Brennan and Russian disinformation

Hersh also told Butowsky that the DNC made up the Russian hacking story as a disinformation campaign -- directly pointing a finger at former CIA director (and now MSNBC/NBC contributor ) John Brennan as the architect.

I have a narrative of how that whole f*cking thing began. It's a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation , and the fu*kin' President, at one point, they even started telling the press -- they were backfeeding the Press, the head of the NSA was going and telling the press, fu*king c*cksucker Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the Russian military intelligence service leaked it.

Listen to Seymour Hersh leaked audio: https://www.youtube.com/embed/giuZdBAXVh0 (full transcription here and extended audio of the Hersh conversation here )

Hersh denied that he told Butowsky anything before the leaked audio emerged , telling NPR " I hear gossip [Butowsky] took two and two and made 45 out of it. "

Technical Evidence

As we mentioned last week, Dotcom's assertion is backed up by an analysis done last year by a researcher who goes by the name Forensicator , who determined that the DNC files were copied at 22.6 MB/s - a speed virtually impossible to achieve from halfway around the world, much less over a local network - yet a speed typical of file transfers to a memory stick.

The big hint

Last but not least, let's not forget that Julian Assange heavily implied Seth Rich was a source:

Given that a) the Russian hacking narrative hinges on Crowdstrikes's questionable reporting , and b) a mountain of evidence pointing to Seth Rich as the source of the leaked emails - it stands to reason that Congressional investigators and Special Counsel Robert Mueller should at minimum explore these leads.

As retired U.S. Navy admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. asks: why aren't they?

Liberal -> Stan522 Fri, 03/02/2018 - 21:26 Permalink

Relax you conspiracy theory-loving extremists. Our 336 spy agencies are just busy trying to solve the Michael Hasting's murder first. But it's just really hard to find the culprits because they're all hiding in Siberia.

[Mar 07, 2018] The New Surveillance State and the Old Perjury Trap by Peter Van Buren

Notable quotes:
"... " Incidental collection " is the claimed inadvertent or accidental monitoring of Americans' communications under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act. Incidental collection exists alongside court-approved warranted surveillance authorized on a specific individual. But for incidental collection, no probable cause is needed, no warrant is needed, and no court or judge is involved. It just gets vacuumed up. ..."
"... While exactly how many Americans have their communications monitored this way is unknown , we know these Republican Trump supporters and staffers were caught up in surveillance authorized by a Democratic administration (no evidence of incidental surveillance of the Clinton campaign exists). Election-time claims that the Obama administration wasn't " wiretapping " Trump were disingenuous. They in fact gathered an unprecedented level of inside information. How was it used? ..."
"... Incidental collection nailed Michael Flynn : the NSA was ostensibly not surveilling Flynn, just listening in on the Russian ambassador as the two spoke. The embarrassing intercept formed the basis for Flynn's firing as Trump's national security advisor, his guilty plea for perjury, and very possibly his "game-changing" testimony against others. ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
Mar 07, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

March 7, 2018

A significant number of Trump's people were electronically monitored by a Democratic administration -- many "by accident." We now know that a significant number of people affiliated with Donald Trump were surveilled during and after the 2016 campaign, some under warrants, some via "inadvertent" or accidental surveillance. That surveillance is now being used against these individuals in perjury cases, particularly to press them to testify against others, and will likely form the basis of Robert Mueller's eventual action against the president himself.

How did the surveillance state become so fully entrenched in the American political process? Better yet, how did we let it happen?

The role pervasive surveillance plays in politics today has been grossly underreported. Set aside what you think about the Trump presidency for a moment and focus instead on the new paradigm for how politics and justice work inside the surveillance state.

" Incidental collection " is the claimed inadvertent or accidental monitoring of Americans' communications under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act. Incidental collection exists alongside court-approved warranted surveillance authorized on a specific individual. But for incidental collection, no probable cause is needed, no warrant is needed, and no court or judge is involved. It just gets vacuumed up.

While exactly how many Americans have their communications monitored this way is unknown , we know these Republican Trump supporters and staffers were caught up in surveillance authorized by a Democratic administration (no evidence of incidental surveillance of the Clinton campaign exists). Election-time claims that the Obama administration wasn't " wiretapping " Trump were disingenuous. They in fact gathered an unprecedented level of inside information. How was it used?

Incidental collection nailed Michael Flynn : the NSA was ostensibly not surveilling Flynn, just listening in on the Russian ambassador as the two spoke. The embarrassing intercept formed the basis for Flynn's firing as Trump's national security advisor, his guilty plea for perjury, and very possibly his "game-changing" testimony against others.

Jeff Sessions was similarly incidentally surveilled, as was former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon , whose conversations were picked up as part of a FISA warrant issued against Trump associate Carter Page . Paul Manafort and Richard Gates were also the subjects of FISA-warranted surveillance: they were surveilled in 2014, the case was dropped for lack of evidence, and then they were re-surveilled after they joined the Trump team and became more interesting to the state.

Officials on the National Security Council revealed that Trump himself may also have been swept up in the surveillance of foreign targets. Devin Nunes, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, claims multiple communications by Trump transition staff were inadvertently picked up. Trump officials were monitored by British GCHQ with the information shared with their NSA partners. Some reports claim that after a criminal warrant was denied to look into whether or not Trump Tower servers were communicating with a Russian bank, a FISA warrant was issued.

How much information the White House may have acquired on Trump's political strategy, as well as the full story of what might have been done with that information, will never be known. We do know that the director of national intelligence Dan Coats saw enough after he took office to specify that the "intelligence community may not engage in political activity, including dissemination of U.S. person identities to the White House, for the purpose of affecting the political process of the United States."

Coats likely had in mind the use of unmasking by the Obama administration. Identities of U.S. persons picked up inadvertently by surveillance are supposed to be masked, hidden from most users of the data. However, a select group of officials, including political appointees in the White House, can unmask and include names if they believe it is important to understanding the intelligence, or to show evidence of a crime.

Former Obama national security advisor Susan Rice told House investigators in at least one instance she unmasked the identities of Michael Flynn, Jared Kushner , and Steve Bannon. Obama's ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power , also made a number of unmasking requests in her final year in office.

But no one knows who unmasked Flynn in his conversations with the Russian ambassador. That and the subsequent leaking of what was said were used not only to snare Flynn in a perjury trap, but also to force him out of government. Prior to the leak that took Flynn down, Obama holdover and then-acting attorney general Sally Yates warned Trump that Flynn could be blackmailed by Moscow for lying about his calls. When Trump didn't immediately fire Flynn, the unmasked surveillance was leaked by a "senior government official" (likely Yates ) to the Washington Post . The disclosure pressured the administration to dump Flynn.

Similar leaks were used to try to pressure Attorney General Jeff Sessions to resign, though they only resulted in him recusing himself from the Russiagate investigation. Following James Comey's firing, that recusal ultimately opened the door for the appointment of Special Counsel Mueller.

A highly classified leak was used to help marginalize Jared Kushner. The Washington Post , based on leaked intercepts, claimed foreign officials' from four countries spoke of exploiting Kushner's economic vulnerabilities to push him into acting against the United States. If the story is true, the leakers passed on data revealing sources and methods; those foreign officials now know that, however they communicated their thoughts about Kushner, the NSA was listening. Access to that level of information and the power to expose it is not a rank-and-file action. One analyst described the matter as "the Deep State takes out the White House's Dark Clown Prince."

Pervasive surveillance has shown its power perhaps most significantly in creating perjury traps to manufacture indictments to pressure people to testify against others.

Trump associate George Papadopoulos lied to the FBI about several meetings concerning Clinton's emails. The FBI knew about the meetings, " propelled in part by intelligence from other friendly governments, including the British and Dutch." The feds asked him questions solely in the hope that Papadopoulos would commit perjury, even though there was nothing shown to be criminal about the meetings themselves. Now guilty of a crime, the FBI will use the promise of a light punishment to press Papadopoulos into testifying against others.

There is a common thread here of using surveillance to create a process crime out of a non-material lie (the FBI already knew) where no underlying crime of turpitude exists (the meetings were legal). That this is then used to press someone to testify in an investigation that will have a significant political impact seems undemocratic -- yet it appears to be a primary tool Mueller is using.

This is a far cry from a traditional plea deal, giving someone a light sentence for actual crimes so that they will testify against others. Mueller should know. He famously allowed Mafia hitman Sammy the Bull to escape more serious punishment for 19 first-degree murders in return for testimony against John Gotti. No need to manufacture a perjury trap; the pile of bodies that never saw justice did the trick.

Don't be lured into thinking the ends justify the means, that whatever it takes to purge Trump is acceptable. Say what you want about Flynn, Kushner, et al, what matters most is the dark process being used. The arrival of pervasive surveillance as a political weapon is a harbinger that should chill Americans to their cores.

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. MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR


SteveM March 6, 2018 at 10:13 pm

Pervasive surveillance has shown its power perhaps most significantly in creating perjury traps to manufacture indictments to pressure people to testify against others.

Key advice: Never talk to a cop. Never trust an agent of the Security State. They may still wreck your life, but at least you won't make it easy for them.

Al Boehnlein , says: March 6, 2018 at 10:24 pm
Are you really arguing that using surveillance on foreign agents and spies to catch and compel traders to testify against each other is bad????? Isn't that the way it is usually done?
Joe , says: March 6, 2018 at 11:18 pm
They do have the option of telling the truth.
Bruce Heilbrunn , says: March 6, 2018 at 11:31 pm
It is extremely easy to avoid a perjury trap: don't tell lies. And don't tell me the government has no right to investigate what could be treason by the president and his staff. I know how you love Trump and Russia.
Clean Up Crew , says: March 7, 2018 at 12:06 am
I voted for Trump but now I'm completely disgusted with his failures and betrayals and won't vote for him again.

Setting that aside, it's starting to look to me like the Hillary campaign and allies in the Obama federal bureaucracy were spying on the Trump campaign.

They fully expected Hillary to win and therefore to be able to cover up what they were doing.

But then they lost, and now they're ginning up the Russia/national security angle to blow smoke over what's starting to look like the worst campaign skullduggery since Nixon and Watergate.

It needs to be investigated, and if there's any fire there, vigorously prosecuted. I don't give a damn about Trump anymore, but I give a damn about our democracy and system of government, and if it turns out that some government filth was spying on Trump's campaign, I want them arrested, prosecuted, and thrown in the darkest, dirtiest hole in our prison system. We can't have that kind of s***.

connecticut farmer , says: March 7, 2018 at 8:13 am
Reading this raises the following question: At what point does soft-core totalitarianism morph into hard-core totalitarianism?
Peter Van Buren , says: March 7, 2018 at 10:40 am
If I see one more variation on "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" in a comment my brain will explode. Anyone who writes that kind of thing ("Well maybe they shouldn't lie") is missing the point: our political process was surveilled and no one can control what happens to information gathered. Even if you think it good to "take down" Trump, the process will exist past him to be aimed at a future candidate you support.
SteveJ , says: March 7, 2018 at 10:58 am
"It is extremely easy to avoid a perjury trap: don't tell lies."

Even if true, do you think it is fair for Flynn to be hit with felony charges for his "less than candid answers" with regard to politically and diplomatically sensitive phone calls to the Russian ambassador after the elections were over?

connecticut farmer , says: March 7, 2018 at 11:12 am
"if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear"

Sound familiar? The Fifties. When the so-called McCarthyites were peddling this line–to howls of derision from the Left.

Thaomas , says: March 7, 2018 at 11:36 am
Republicans created this mess in their desire to make "security" a partisan issue after 9/11. If they now regret it and wish to undo the mess, more power to them!
MM , says: March 7, 2018 at 11:49 am
Peter: "If I see one more variation on 'if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear' in a comment my brain will explode."

The Left used to be vociferously in favor of privacy rights. I took note during the Obama years that it really only mattered for abortion and library books, nothing beyond that.

But a thought experiment: How many progressives, for that matter how many Black and Hispanic Americans would be comfortable with the following government requirements:

– Federal, state, and local law enforcement have your name and current address on file at all times.
– Federal, state, and local law enforcement have a key to your home at all times.
– Federal, state, and local law enforcement have a tracking device on your car or your person at all times.

If you have nothing to hide, you should have no objections to any of those requirements.

Any takers?

Gerard , says: March 7, 2018 at 11:50 am
[[It is extremely easy to avoid a perjury trap: don't tell lies.]]

Even easier: Be a Democrat, preferably the Party's presidential candidate, and then it doesn't matter whether you tell lies or commit felonies because the corrupt Deep State-lib-Dem-media alliance will hold you safely above the law.

kimp , says: March 7, 2018 at 12:01 pm
Even in the midst of all of this, the ongoing ability to continue to spy on our own citizens was recently voted on and passed overwhelmingly, with large bipartisan support. Save your crocodile tears now.
Will Harrington , says: March 7, 2018 at 12:37 pm
Bruce Heilbrunn

Russia is not an enemy of the United States despite all the hoopla about how eeeevil they are, we are not at war. Treason is not on the table unless you, you know, amend the constitution, or abandon it, or something.

mark_be , says: March 7, 2018 at 1:30 pm
@MM: apart from the key to your house (and even that might be questionable if you have certain "smart" appliances), you are describing Facebook, Google, Amazon, Apple, and/or Microsoft. Adding Federal Government to that list isn't as much of a jump as you seem to believe.
BobS , says: March 7, 2018 at 1:32 pm
"The arrival of pervasive surveillance as a political weapon is a harbinger that should chill Americans to their cores."

Thankfully J. Edgar Hoover practiced his job with restraint.
That being said, while there is certainly a need for improvement of the FISA program (sadly, the 'principled' Devin Nunes, Trey Gowdy, Matt Gaetz, et al., missed their opportunity in January when they voted for reauthorization), those individuals caught in the web "by accident" were regularly communicating with targets of legitimately obtained warrants. It was their choice to subsequently lie.
With respect to their "unmasking", it doesn't seem unreasonable that policy makers in the White House should have knowledge of their identity (even in the politicized environment of a presidential campaign), especially when there's the taint of influence of an adversarial government and/or organized crime on a potential POTUS.

MM , says: March 7, 2018 at 2:15 pm
BobS: "Especially when there's the taint of influence of an adversarial government and/or organized crime on a potential POTUS."

How about an actual POTUS?

Can it be presumed the DOJ and FBI had President Obama under similar surveillance?

MM , says: March 7, 2018 at 2:18 pm
mark_be: "Adding Federal Government to that list isn't as much of a jump as you seem to believe."

No, federal, state, and local *law enforcement*, that's what I put forth

Are you comfortable with that leap, personally? You know, jumping over probable cause and due process?

Youknowho , says: March 7, 2018 at 2:20 pm
It is amazing how many law and order Conservatives start screaming about abuses of power, and targeting specific people when they are the ones at the receiving end.

As a rule, if they did defended the police when the subject was racial profiling, they get to shut up on the subject now.

(Maybe they SHOULD team up with Black Lives Matter..)

b. , says: March 7, 2018 at 2:21 pm
We have come a long way from the reactionary and authoritarian chants of "if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" in the lead-up and then wake of the sarcastically name PATRIOT Act.

Surveillance and monitoring are, like all other "national securities" spending, primarily profit extraction driven public-private "partnerships", but the major point here always was "if you build it, they will use it".

That, too, is the foundational criticism driving Global Zero and the insistence that Article IV of the Non-Proliferation Treaty be honored by all signatory nuclear powers.

The basic principle of any evolutionary stable open society based on checks and balances is that no self-inflating institutions and power centers are permissible – whether that is inbred, networked multi-generational wealth, incorporated power such as financial institutions, or specific government institutions, such as the military, the "intelligence" agencies etc.

Of course, the whole idea of having secret courts applying secret law in secret decisions without adversary parties, and no mandatory disclosure after the fact, is also fundamentally incompatible with the idea of transparency and accountability, without which free speech and elections are little more than a travelling circus and a vehicle for advertising profit.

MM , says: March 7, 2018 at 2:23 pm
mark_be: Sorry, I meant to include fingerprints and DNA samples in that list of items for all levels of law enforcement to retain on file on every American.

How does that sound to you?

Youknowho , says: March 7, 2018 at 2:24 pm
@Will Harrington:

Any government whose interests clash with ours must be considered a potential enemy – not enough to go to war, of course, but to be wary of what steps they may take to protect their interests and thwart ours.

As for Russia, alas, she is known for playing very dirty. Before there was a KGB, there was an Okhrana, among whose achievements was the writing and disemination of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Anyone who thinks that because they are no longer communists they Russians are nice guys lives in a fool's paradise

MM , says: March 7, 2018 at 2:53 pm
YKW: "As a rule, if they did defended the police when the subject was racial profiling, they get to shut up on the subject now."

There is no such rule in a free society. People are within their rights to be as hypocritical and inconsistent as they like.

But if there were such a rule, where are the civil libertarians in the Democratic Party? Why aren't they castigating DOJ abuse of power in the previous administration?

Why are neoconservatives and Bush era creeps like Brennan, Clapper, and Hayden darlings of the Left?

[Mar 06, 2018] Comey, Mueller bungled big anthrax case together by Carl M. Cannon

Notable quotes:
"... Instead, Mueller, who micromanaged the anthrax case and fell in love with the dubious dog evidence, personally assured Ashcroft and presumably George W. Bush that in Steven Hatfill the bureau had its man. Comey, in turn, was asked by a skeptical Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz if Hatfill was another Richard Jewell -- the security guard wrongly accused of the Atlanta Olympics bombing. Comey replied that he was "absolutely certain" they weren't making a mistake. ..."
"... Such certitude seems to be Comey's default position in his professional life. Mueller didn't exactly distinguish himself with contrition, either. In 2008, after Ivins committed suicide as he was about to be apprehended for his crimes, and the Justice Department had formally exonerated Hatfill -- and paid him $5.82 million in a legal settlement -- Mueller could not be bothered to walk across the street to attend the press conference announcing the case's resolution. When reporters did ask him about it, Mueller was graceless. "I do not apologize for any aspect of the investigation," he said, adding that it would be erroneous "to say there were mistakes." ..."
"... Does this mean Comey and Mueller are bad guys? I'm not saying that. Mueller, for one, answered his country's call and enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps when many others of his generation were avoiding combat service in Vietnam. Both men have forsaken millions of dollars in salary at private law firms for public service. Neither has ever had a hint of personal scandal. ..."
"... Connolly said he thought Comey was a "decent guy" who was legitimately fooled by that business with the dogs. And while Willman and I were discussing whether Mueller's reputation for competence was deserved, the reporter volunteered that he did not question the man's integrity. Fair enough. I would, however, pose this query to the keepers of official Washington's agreed-upon narrative. ..."
"... Having lived inside the Beltway for years getting my first graduate degree, and having returned there repeatedly in the course of a couple decades of federal service, I can tell you that there are no heroes there, and damn few honorable men. ..."
"... That night I saw them partying together in a Georgetown bar with their hands up the skirts of a couple Senate pages. Not interns, PAGES who were only high school age. But nobody was going to refuse to over serve a couple of senators nor even their too young to be in the bar (or legally consent to what was going on, even if they had been older) "dates." ..."
May 21, 2017 | www.ocregister.com
... ... ...

First, Jim Comey and Bob Mueller have a long history as professional allies. For Mueller to be brought in to investigate the behavior of the guy who sacked Comey seems a conflict of interest. Perhaps this is the wrong way to look at it, and Mueller's professionalism will supersede any personal loyalty. OK, but here's a second reason: These two guys, working in tandem, have a track record of bureaucratic infighting -- with another Republican White House as their shared adversary -- that belies their reputations for being above political intrigue. This is not news. Some of the positive coverage in the last few days highlighted that episode. It's a long and convoluted story, but the story line that took hold in Washington went like this:

In March 2004, Comey, then deputy attorney general, sped with sirens blazing to the hospital bedside of his boss, John Ashcroft, who was recovering from gallbladder surgery. At the time, the Justice Department was being pressured by White House counsel Alberto Gonzales and Chief of Staff Andrew Card to sign papers reauthorizing a secret anti-terrorism domestic surveillance program initiated after 9/11. The clock was running out and the papers had to be signed or the program would lapse. But Comey, who had a dim view of the program's constitutionality, wouldn't do it. When he heard Gonzales and Card were on their way to the hospital, Comey rushed there, too, to stop them.

Comey had enlisted Bob Mueller, then FBI director, as an ally. Both men apparently told George W. Bush privately they'd quit rather than extend the program. "Here I stand, I can do no other," Comey told Bush. That's Martin Luther's iconic line, and although in 2016 Hillary Clinton would come to see Comey as more akin to Judas than Luther, one thing is apparent: Jim Comey is a government appointee who thinks of himself in a manner many people find grandiose. Bush backed down in the face of the Comey-Mueller insurrection, but three years later Comey told his dramatic Ashcroft hospital bed story in a congressional hearing that eviscerated Gonzales, who was attorney general by then.

The third and most important factor tempering my enthusiasm for the new special prosecutor is that Comey and Mueller badly bungled the biggest case they ever handled. They botched the investigation of the 2001 anthrax letter attacks that took five lives and infected 17 other people, shut down the U.S. Capitol and Washington's mail system, solidified the Bush administration's antipathy for Iraq, and eventually, when the facts finally came out, made the FBI look feckless, incompetent, and easily manipulated by outside political pressure.

This, too, was an enormously complex case. But here are some facts: Despite the jihadist slogans accompanying the mailed anthrax, it had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein or any foreign element; the FBI ignored a 2002 tip from a scientific colleague of the actual anthrax killer, who turned out to be a Fort Detrick scientist named Bruce Edwards Ivins; the reason is that they had quickly obsessed on an innocent man named Steven Hatfill; the bureau was bullied into focusing on the government scientist by Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy (whose office, along with that of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, was targeted by an anthrax-laced letter) and was duped into focusing on Hatfill by two sources -- a conspiracy-minded college professor with a political agenda who'd never met Hatfill and by Nicholas Kristof, who put her conspiracy theories in the paper while mocking the FBI for not arresting Hatfill.

In truth, Hatfill was an implausible suspect from the outset. He was a virologist who never handled anthrax, which is a bacterium. (Ivins, by contrast, shared ownership of anthrax patents, was diagnosed as having paranoid personality disorder, and had a habit of stalking and threatening people with anonymous letters -- including the woman who provided the long-ignored tip to the FBI).

So what evidence did the FBI have against Hatfill? There was none, so the agency did a Hail Mary, importing two bloodhounds from California whose handlers claimed could sniff the scent of the killer on the anthrax-tainted letters. These dogs were shown to Hatfill, who promptly petted them. When the dogs responded favorably, their handlers told the FBI that they'd "alerted" on Hatfill and that he must be the killer.

You'd think that any good FBI agent would have kicked these quacks in the fanny and found their dogs a good home. Or at least checked news accounts of criminal cases in California where these same dogs had been used against defendants who'd been convicted -- and later exonerated. As Pulitzer Prize-winning Los Angeles Times investigative reporter David Willman detailed in his authoritative book on the case, a California judge who'd tossed out a murder conviction based on these sketchy canines called the prosecution's dog handler "as biased as any witness that this court has ever seen."

Instead, Mueller, who micromanaged the anthrax case and fell in love with the dubious dog evidence, personally assured Ashcroft and presumably George W. Bush that in Steven Hatfill the bureau had its man. Comey, in turn, was asked by a skeptical Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz if Hatfill was another Richard Jewell -- the security guard wrongly accused of the Atlanta Olympics bombing. Comey replied that he was "absolutely certain" they weren't making a mistake.

Such certitude seems to be Comey's default position in his professional life. Mueller didn't exactly distinguish himself with contrition, either. In 2008, after Ivins committed suicide as he was about to be apprehended for his crimes, and the Justice Department had formally exonerated Hatfill -- and paid him $5.82 million in a legal settlement -- Mueller could not be bothered to walk across the street to attend the press conference announcing the case's resolution. When reporters did ask him about it, Mueller was graceless. "I do not apologize for any aspect of the investigation," he said, adding that it would be erroneous "to say there were mistakes."

Does this mean Comey and Mueller are bad guys? I'm not saying that. Mueller, for one, answered his country's call and enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps when many others of his generation were avoiding combat service in Vietnam. Both men have forsaken millions of dollars in salary at private law firms for public service. Neither has ever had a hint of personal scandal.

I know Steven Hatfill's attorney, Thomas Connolly, well, and David Willman, a former newsroom colleague, even better -- and I spoke to them last week about these events. Connolly said he thought Comey was a "decent guy" who was legitimately fooled by that business with the dogs. And while Willman and I were discussing whether Mueller's reputation for competence was deserved, the reporter volunteered that he did not question the man's integrity. Fair enough. I would, however, pose this query to the keepers of official Washington's agreed-upon narrative.

While running for president, Donald Trump promised to "drain the swamp." He won enough votes, in the right states, to make him president. So here's the question: How does official Washington, which clearly does not want to be drained, think the 63 million people who voted for Trump will feel about an investigation run by D.C. insiders with a history of grandstanding -- an investigation that some Democrats and commentators are saying aloud they hope will end in impeachment? And what will those Trump voters think of uncritical media coverage of this effort by a self-righteous press corps that has suddenly rediscovered its investigative-reporting impulses, and which behaves as if little of this relevant context is even worth mentioning? .

Carl M. Cannon is executive editor and Washington Bureau chief of RealClearPolitics.

GeorgeHanshaw1 9 months ago ,

Having lived inside the Beltway for years getting my first graduate degree, and having returned there repeatedly in the course of a couple decades of federal service, I can tell you that there are no heroes there, and damn few honorable men.

I recall sitting in the senate gallery once, doing a little studying somewhere warm while waiting for my bus (security was pretty lax in those days) watching Ted Kennedy and Jesse Helms going at it like the sergeant at arms was going to have to physically restrain them from killing one another. It was all Kabuki theater.

That night I saw them partying together in a Georgetown bar with their hands up the skirts of a couple Senate pages. Not interns, PAGES who were only high school age. But nobody was going to refuse to over serve a couple of senators nor even their too young to be in the bar (or legally consent to what was going on, even if they had been older) "dates."

And over the next four or five decades, the place has changed little, and that mainly for the worse. No, if you are expecting to find people of honor, don't waste your time looking at those who have spent their careers inside the beltway.

[Mar 06, 2018] In Her Majesty's Secret Service: How an Agent of British Intelligence Tried (and Failed) to Prevent the Election of Donald Trump

Notable quotes:
"... Another new point in the Mayer piece, not in the above list, is an alleged meeting between the head of the British spy service GCHQ and the head of the CIA John Brennan in which GCHQ briefs Brennan about alleged interceptions of communication between Trump campaign associates and Russia. This is curious because the usual contact for such a case should have been the FBI, not the CIA. ..."
"... But some have suggested that the Brennan came up with the idea or at least directed the campaign of smearing Trump over made-up connections with Russia. For legal reasons and deniability the affair the creation of "evidence" was outsourced to the British partners. As Pat Lang, who has led large intelligence spying and counter-intelligence operations, opines : ..."
"... An unnamed, unknown, unvetted "government official" source is reported by, say, WP, which is then reported by the Times (? since when did competing newspapers use each other as confirmation?), so that official government spokespeople now report "as confirmed by multiple newspaper stories..." ..."
"... Use big words to conceal nonsense and say nothing. ..."
"... Robert Hannigan, head of GCHQ, resigned for "personal reasons" on Jan. 23 2017, a week after Trump's inauguration. ..."
Mar 06, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

... ... ...

Chuck Ross of the Daily Caller (yes, I know it is not deemed reputable) looked into some claims Mayer makes in her piece which, if true, contain new morsels on the issue. They support the standpoint that the whole dossier is fake. These points are:

  1. Steele likely knew who funded the dossier
  2. Steele used dozens of paid confidential 'collectors', not unpaid ones
  3. Steele may have earlier worked for a Kremlin-connected oligarch
  4. The salacious claims in the dossier were based on secondhand information
  5. Steele briefed Jane Mayer during the campaign
  6. A John McCain associate wanted to use dossier to force Trump to resign

Another new point in the Mayer piece, not in the above list, is an alleged meeting between the head of the British spy service GCHQ and the head of the CIA John Brennan in which GCHQ briefs Brennan about alleged interceptions of communication between Trump campaign associates and Russia. This is curious because the usual contact for such a case should have been the FBI, not the CIA.

But some have suggested that the Brennan came up with the idea or at least directed the campaign of smearing Trump over made-up connections with Russia. For legal reasons and deniability the affair the creation of "evidence" was outsourced to the British partners. As Pat Lang, who has led large intelligence spying and counter-intelligence operations, opines :

IMO there was a criminal conspiracy among various parts of the government, the Clinton Campaign and the MSM to rig the election against Trump, and it continues. pl

Posted by b on March 6, 2018 at 05:12 AM | Permalink

Comments


Pictorex , Mar 6, 2018 6:04:54 AM | 1

Very astute observations, as usual.

A more fitting title for Jane Mayer's piece would have been:

"In Her Majesty's Secret Service: How an Agent of British Intelligence Tried (and Failed) to Prevent the Election of Donald Trump"

By the way, please correct this: "They pledged guilty on unrelated issues." should read: "They pleaded guilty on unrelated issues."

J Swift , Mar 6, 2018 6:41:08 AM | 2
Nicely written piece. It just leaves you shaking your head in disbelief sometimes, the brazen repetition of utter nonsense and total lies in hopes that it will eventually start to stick. And I had also noticed some time back the rampant circular citations bootstrapped into being called evidence. An unnamed, unknown, unvetted "government official" source is reported by, say, WP, which is then reported by the Times (? since when did competing newspapers use each other as confirmation?), so that official government spokespeople now report "as confirmed by multiple newspaper stories..."

No wonder the New Yorker and their ilk stick to print rather than video...with AV media, you would be able to hear the heavy breathing and wiki-wiki-wiki sounds of turd polishing in the background.

ELRIUS , Mar 6, 2018 7:12:54 AM | 4
common core education. Use big words to conceal nonsense and say nothing.
Christian Chuba , Mar 6, 2018 7:19:27 AM | 5
And of course this one assertion by Steele is used by the Hannity's of the world to assert that Trump was the victim of a Russian misinformation campaign ...
"In the reports Steele had collected, the names of the sources were omitted, but they were described as "a former top-level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin,""

The beauty of it is that this alleged source never has to be revealed because it would endanger the source so we have to take this Boy Scouts word for it.

lysias , Mar 6, 2018 11:49:39 AM | 21
Robert Hannigan, head of GCHQ, resigned for "personal reasons" on Jan. 23 2017, a week after Trump's inauguration.
dahoit , Mar 6, 2018 12:18:58 PM | 22
How about the report graun had today; The Russians had poisoned their ex-spy? Another made up crap. The NYer is another web of deceit, the web of zionism. All of msm is.
Ike , Mar 6, 2018 1:20:15 PM | 26
@22
The possible poisoned spy case is now being used by Boris Johnson for a possible boycott of the Moscow World Cup. It is obvious bullshit and a rerun of the litvinenko affair some years ago.

Also an Mi6 setup in my opinion. The Russians provided a shipload of LNG to alleviate gas shortages in Britain. Boris Johnson is an ungrateful sack of S--t

Erelis , Mar 6, 2018 5:35:39 PM | 49

Max Blumenthal has observed that much of what is in the "dossier" was available in the public sphere. The dossier is touted as being deep revelation totally missed a figure like Papadopoulos, who only appeared to the public after the dossier was published. Strange that.

What seems strange is that so many people in Russia were willing to divulge what would have been closely held secrets like the golden showers tape. Putin is described in the Western press as somebody who would disappear you if you even criticized his shoe laces.

[Mar 06, 2018] A Parody on New Yorker reporting of Steele dossier saga

Mar 06, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Luther , Mar 6, 2018 8:52:41 AM | 11

"...looked much like the other businessmen heading home, except for the fact that he kept his phones in a Faraday bag -- a pouch, of military-tested double-grade fabric, designed to block signal detection..."

A practical man, Steele also kept a giant roll of telephone line attached to his belt. Unrolling it as he proceeded down the high street, he glanced upwards.

A Pteranodon, perched upon the slate roof was watching him closely. A bead of sweat appeared on his temple, just showing underneath the rim of his bowler hat, trickling down the side of his face, the leaving a streak that resembled a long forgotten river delta.

A chimmney sweet was approaching him on his right, whistling a jaunty tune, his bag of extendable brushes jingling and clanking, just like Steele's nerves. Obviously a Russian operative, the sweep was whistling an excerpt from Tchaikovsky's Sleeping Beauty, an ominous warning...

[Mar 05, 2018] Mueller Has Been Botching Investigations Since The Anthrax Attacks

Notable quotes:
"... Mystery surrounds Robert Mueller and his investigation into Russia and President Trump. Some think he is the ultimate professional, others that he is a Democrat lackey, still others maintain he is working on Trump's side. ..."
"... The anthrax letters began just a week after the 9/11 attack. While planning the airplane hijackings, Al-Qaeda had been weaponizing anthrax , setting up a lab in Afghanistan manned by Yazid Sufaat, the same man who housed two of the 9/11 hijackers . Two hijackers later sought medical help due to conditions consistent with infection via anthrax : Al Haznawi went to the emergency room for a skin lesion which he claimed was from "bumping into a suitcase," and ringleader Mohamed Atta needed medicine for "skin irritation." A team of bioterrorism experts from John Hopkins confirmed that anthrax was the most likely cause of the lesion. Meanwhile, the 9/11 hijackers were also trying to obtain crop-dusting airplanes . ..."
"... A former FBI official involved in the investigation sued the FBI , alleging the FBI concealed evidence exculpatory to Ivins. ..."
"... Mueller made his position known, saying, "I do not apologize for any aspect of this investigation," and stated that the FBI had made no mistakes. ..."
Mar 05, 2018 | thefederalist.com

Mystery surrounds Robert Mueller and his investigation into Russia and President Trump. Some think he is the ultimate professional, others that he is a Democrat lackey, still others maintain he is working on Trump's side.

We can see how he works if we look at how Mueller ran his second-most important investigation as FBI Director. In September of 2001, an entity began mailing anthrax through the US Postal system, hitting such prominent targets as NBC and Senator Daschle's office. The terrorist attacks killed five and left others hospitalized. The world panicked .

Under Mueller's management, the FBI launched an investigation lasting ten years. They now brag about spending "hundreds of thousands of investigator hours on this case." Let's take a closer look at Mueller's response to understand the context of the investigation -- who his people investigated, targeted, and found guilty.

The anthrax letters began just a week after the 9/11 attack. While planning the airplane hijackings, Al-Qaeda had been weaponizing anthrax , setting up a lab in Afghanistan manned by Yazid Sufaat, the same man who housed two of the 9/11 hijackers . Two hijackers later sought medical help due to conditions consistent with infection via anthrax : Al Haznawi went to the emergency room for a skin lesion which he claimed was from "bumping into a suitcase," and ringleader Mohamed Atta needed medicine for "skin irritation." A team of bioterrorism experts from John Hopkins confirmed that anthrax was the most likely cause of the lesion. Meanwhile, the 9/11 hijackers were also trying to obtain crop-dusting airplanes .

So how did Mueller's investigative team handle the case?

Mueller issued a statement in October of 2001, while anthrax victims were still dying: the FBI had found "no direct link to organized terrorism." The John Hopkins team of experts was mistaken, the FBI continued , Al Haznawi never had an anthrax infection. The crop-dusting airplanes they needed was possibly for a separate and unrelated anthrax attack.

A few weeks later, the FBI released a remarkable profile of the attacker. FBI experts eschewed analysis of the content of the letters, where it was written in bold block letters, "Death to America, Death to Israel, Allah is Great." Instead, they focused on a "linguistic analysis," stating that the letter's writer was atypical in many respects and not "comfortable or practiced in writing in lower case lettering." The FBI therefore concluded that it was likely a disgruntled American with bad personal skills.

The investigators hypothesized that the attacker was a lonely American who had wanted to kill people with anthrax for some undefined time period, but then became "mission oriented" following 9/11 and immediately prepared and mailed the deadly spores while pretending to be a Muslim.

Mueller's FBI honed in on Steven Hatfill as the culprit -- a "flag-waving" American, who had served in the Army, then dedicated himself to protecting America from bioterrorist threats by working in the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases.

There was no direct link from Hatfill to the attacks, by the FBI's own admission, and the bureau never charged Hatfill. The FBI did however spy on, follow, and harass him non-stop for years. The Department of Justice also publicly outed Hatfill as the possible terrorist.

While Hatfill's dignity and life was being trampled on by America's secret police, Mueller took a stand. But on a different topic. He made front page news for threatening President Bush he would resign over NSA policy. All while his own team was trampling on the rights of an American in the FBI's largest-ever investigation.

Hatfill successfully sued the government for its unlawful actions. He won almost $6 million dollars.

After the Hatfill investigation blew up in the FBI's face, they moved on to Bruce Ivins, another Army researcher who had actually volunteered to help the FBI investigate this case, and had been doing so for years. It wasn't until five years after the attack that Mueller's men decided Ivins was a target .

The FBI case against Ivins, once again, was based on circumstantial evidence.

The prosecution stated Ivins purposefully gave a misleading sample of anthrax spore, but Frontline documented this was not true. Ivins was "familiar" with the area from which the anthrax letters were mailed, the FBI said, but Pulitzer Prize winning ProPublica lays out the accepted facts of the case showing it was impossible for Ivins to make the trip to mail the letters .

The spores used in the attacks were a similar type to the laboratory spores where Ivins worked, but that ignored the fact that the anthrax letters had a unique additive -- so sophisticated and dangerous a scientist commented , "This is not your mother's anthrax" -- that was likely produced by a nation state or Al-Qaeda.

Ivins was never indicted, just given the Hatfill treatment. His house was raided, and he was threatened with a death sentence, or as his lawyer put it, put under " relentless pressure of accusation and innuendo ." He committed suicide.

One week later, U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor stated Ivins was guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt," and they were "confident that Dr. Ivins was the only person responsible for these attacks."

Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, one of the intended victims of the anthrax terror attacks, did not believe that Ivins was the sole actor . Mueller ordered an independent audit of the FBI's case by the National Academy of Science, then formally closed the case in 2010, sticking with the conclusion that Ivins, and Ivins alone, committed the terror attack. One year later the NAS released their results and confirmed what many scientists had been repeating for years: the FBI's science and conclusions were not solid .

A former FBI official involved in the investigation sued the FBI , alleging the FBI concealed evidence exculpatory to Ivins.

Mueller made his position known, saying, "I do not apologize for any aspect of this investigation," and stated that the FBI had made no mistakes.

The investigation was an unmitigated disaster for America. Mueller didn't go after al-Qaida for the anthrax letters because he couldn't find a direct link. But then he targeted American citizens without showing a direct link. For his deeds, he had the second longest tenure as FBI Director ever, and was roundly applauded by nearly everyone ( except Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert ).

Now he's running the Trump-Russia investigation. Daniel Ashman is the author of two books, "Dominate No-Limit Hold'em" and "Secrets of Short-Handed No Limit Hold'em," that have been published worldwide and translated into four languages. Follow him at @dashman76 .

[Mar 05, 2018] 29 Pages Revealed Corruption, Crime and Cover-up Of 911

Obama was a CIA protégé. At least in his young years. How CIA protégé can ask for 911 investigation, or release of some materials? That's unrealistic.
Mueller was Bush II appointee. That tells us a lot, because it was Cheney who vetted all candidates.
Notable quotes:
"... President Bush did not want the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia investigated. President Bush has deep ties to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its royal family and only wanted to protect the Kingdom. President Bush wanted to go to war in Iraq -- not Saudi Arabia. So, 29 full pages that said "Saudi" and "Bandar" instead of "Hussein" and "Iraq" was a huge problem for President Bush. ..."
"... Notwithstanding the lack of cooperation from the FBI and the pressure from the Bush Administration to thwart any investigation of the Saudis, the Joint Inquiry was still able to write 29 full pages regarding Saudi complicity in the 9/11 attacks. No other nation is given such singular prominence in the Joint Inquiry's Final Report. Not Iraq. Not Iran. Not Syria. Not Sudan. Not even Afghanistan or Pakistan. ..."
"... The 29 pages have been kept secret and suppressed from the American public for fifteen years -- not for matters of genuine national security -- but for matters of convenience, embarrassment, and cover-up. Executive Order 13526 makes that a crime. Neither James Clapper nor Barack Obama want to release a statement about that ..."
"... The only thing James Clapper and Barack Obama are willing to say about the delayed release of the 29 pages is that they stand by the investigation of the 9/11 Commission. This punt by President Barack Obama is repulsive. President Obama's deference to the 9/11 Commission -- who themselves admit that they were unable to fully investigate the Saudi role in the 9/11 attacks -- depicts Obama's utter lack of interest, engagement, or support of the 9/11 families. ..."
"... Four months after Khallad bin Attash met with the two 9/11 hijackers in Los Angeles, the USS Cole was bombed and seventeen U.S. sailors were killed. Khallad bin Attash, Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi were all named as co-conspirators in the bombing of the USS Cole. ..."
"... in San Diego ..."
Mar 05, 2018 | www.huffingtonpost.com

First and foremost, here is what you need to know when you listen to any member of our government state that the newly released 29 pages are no smoking gun -- THEY ARE LYING.

Our government's relationship to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is no different than an addict's relationship to heroin. Much like a heroin addict who will lie, cheat, and steal to feed their vice, certain members of our government will lie, cheat, and steal to continue their dysfunctional and deadly relationship with the KSA -- a relationship that is rotting this nation and its leaders from the inside out.

When CIA Director John Brennan states that he believes the 29 pages prove that the government of Saudi Arabia had no involvement in the 9/11 attacks, recognize that John Brennan is not a man living in reality -- he is delusional by design, feeding and protecting his Saudi vice.

When Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Anne W. Patterson, testifies -- under oath -- that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is an ally that does everything they can to help us fight against Islamic terrorism, recognize that her deep, steep Saudi pandering serves and protects only her Saudi vice.

Read the 29 pages and know the facts.

Do not let any person in our government deny the damning reality of the 29 pages.

And as you read the 29 pages remember that they were written during 2002 and 2003.

President Bush did not want the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia investigated. President Bush has deep ties to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its royal family and only wanted to protect the Kingdom. President Bush wanted to go to war in Iraq -- not Saudi Arabia. So, 29 full pages that said "Saudi" and "Bandar" instead of "Hussein" and "Iraq" was a huge problem for President Bush.

It is well documented that the Joint Inquiry received enormous push-back against its investigation into the Saudis. In fact, former FBI Director Mueller acknowledges that much of the information implicating the Saudis that the Inquiry investigators ultimately uncovered was unknown to him. Why does Mueller say this? Mostly because Mueller and other FBI officials had purposely tried to keep any incriminating information specifically surrounding the Saudis out of the Inquiry's investigative hands. To repeat, there was a concerted effort by the FBI and the Bush Administration to keep incriminating Saudi evidence out of the Inquiry's investigation. And for the exception of the 29 full pages, they succeeded in their effort.

Notwithstanding the lack of cooperation from the FBI and the pressure from the Bush Administration to thwart any investigation of the Saudis, the Joint Inquiry was still able to write 29 full pages regarding Saudi complicity in the 9/11 attacks. No other nation is given such singular prominence in the Joint Inquiry's Final Report. Not Iraq. Not Iran. Not Syria. Not Sudan. Not even Afghanistan or Pakistan.

The 29 pages have been kept secret and suppressed from the American public for fifteen years -- not for matters of genuine national security -- but for matters of convenience, embarrassment, and cover-up. Executive Order 13526 makes that a crime. Neither James Clapper nor Barack Obama want to release a statement about that .

The only thing James Clapper and Barack Obama are willing to say about the delayed release of the 29 pages is that they stand by the investigation of the 9/11 Commission. This punt by President Barack Obama is repulsive. President Obama's deference to the 9/11 Commission -- who themselves admit that they were unable to fully investigate the Saudi role in the 9/11 attacks -- depicts Obama's utter lack of interest, engagement, or support of the 9/11 families. Frankly, it re-victimizes the 9/11 families by not acknowledging the truth, blocking our path to justice, and the very vital assignment of accountability to those who should be held responsible. Most alarmingly, Obama's silence keeps us unsafe because instead of calling for an emergency session of Congress to immediately name the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, President Obama continues to downplay, belittle, and ignore the truth leaving us vulnerable to terrorist attacks that are still to this very day being funded by our "ally" the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

To be clear, the 9/11 Commission did NOT fully investigate the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Staff Director Philip Zelikow blocked any investigation into the Saudis. Zelikow even went so far as to fire an investigator who had been brought over from the Joint Inquiry to specifically follow-up on the Saudi leads and information uncovered in the Joint Inquiry. I will repeat -- the investigator was fired. In addition, Zelikow re-wrote the 9/11 Commission's entire section regarding the Saudi's and their connection to the 9/11 attacks. Former 9/11 Commissioners John Lehman, Bob Kerrey, and Tim Roemer have all acknowledged that the Saudis were not adequately investigated by the 9/11 Commission. Thus, for any government official to hang their hat on the 9/11 Commission's Final Report -- when Commissioners, themselves, have admitted that the Saudis were not fully investigated, is absurd and disgraceful.

For example, one glaring piece of information was not mentioned in either the 9/11 Commission or the Joint Inquiry's 29 pages -- the information regarding Fahad Thumairy and Khallad bin Attash found in both an FBI report and a CIA report -- that are now declassified. Both reports indicate that Fahad Thumairy -- a Saudi Consulate official -- helped bring Khallad bin Attash into the United States in June of 2000 so he could meet with two of the 9/11 hijackers, Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi. Thumairy escorted bin Attash -- a known al Qaeda operative -- through INS and Customs at LAX evading security and any possible alarm bells. Again, this information is found in both a CIA and FBI report.

Four months after Khallad bin Attash met with the two 9/11 hijackers in Los Angeles, the USS Cole was bombed and seventeen U.S. sailors were killed. Khallad bin Attash, Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al Hazmi were all named as co-conspirators in the bombing of the USS Cole.

Where is the information regarding bin Attash and Thumairy? Has it ever been investigated? Had our intelligence agencies capitalized on the known connection between Thumairy and bin Attash, they would have been able to thwart the bombing of the USS Cole. In addition, they would have had access and the ability to weave together nearly all the pieces of the 9/11 attacks -- more than nine months before the 9/11 attacks happened.

But as history shows, Saudi Consulate official Fahad Thumairy was not investigated and 17 sailors in addition to 3,000 others were killed.

I'm sure that Barack Obama, John Brennan, Anne Patterson, and Philip Zelikow would all consider Thumairy's operational and financial support of Attash, Mihdhar, and Hazmi as within the threshold of being an "ally" of the United States. I, and the rest of America, would not.

I know summer is a busy time. I know that next week is the Republican Convention. I know that Congress is out of session for two months. And I know that ISIS attacks continue in Nice, Orlando, San Bernardino, Belgium, Paris, and more. Just like I know that Donald Trump picked Mike Pence as his running mate and that there was a coup in Turkey. For an Administration looking to dump some insanely incriminating evidence and have nobody take notice -- doing it yesterday when Congress was leaving for their two month summer recess was probably the best day anyone could have imagined.

But, the world is an unstable, crazy place. And, while I used to think I was safe because my government was looking out for me and making decisions that were in my best interests and that of other citizens, I now know better. For fifteen long years, I have fought to get information regarding the killing of my husband from the U.S. government. I have fought, pleaded, and begged for the truth, transparency, justice, and accountability because my husband and 3,000 others were brutally slaughtered in broad daylight. And our government has done nothing but block, thwart, impede, and obstruct that path to truth, transparency, accountability, and justice. Even going so far as to gaslight us to this very day by denying the plain truth written on the plain paper of the 29 pages.

Please read the 29 pages. Look at the facts and evidence. And then watch the venal way various members of our government and media play spin-master on those facts -- telling you to deny the very harsh, sobering reality found within those 29 pages. I hope their gaslighting disgusts you as much as it disgusts me.

Note that these 29 pages merely detail the Saudi connection to the 9/11 attacks in San Diego . They briefly touch on the Phoenix information, as well. Though more notably, the 29 pages do not include information found in the more than 80,000 documents that are currently being reviewed by a federal judge in Florida -- 80,000 documents that neither the 9/11 Commission, the Joint Inquiry, the Clinton, Bush, or Obama White House, nor the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wants us to know about.

More than anything, please know this: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia provided operational and financial support to the 9/11 hijackers. That is a fact. And, the U.S. government has been covering up that fact for fifteen years -- even to this very day. And that is a crime.

Corruption, greed, and vice, specifically as it pertains to protecting the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, is not a one-party problem. It spans both democratic and republican administrations. Blame President Clinton, President Bush, and President Obama -- as well as, all of their officials and appointees. They are ALL to blame for failing to prevent the 9/11 attacks, helping to facilitate the 9/11 attacks through their own abject negligence, using the 9/11 attacks to further ill-begotten gains and goals, and covering-up the 9/11 attacks by not coming clean with the American public for fifteen years.

(9/11 widows Monica Gabrielle, Mindy Kleinberg, Lorie Van Auken, and Patty Casazza all sign their names to this blog)

Follow Kristen Breitweiser on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kdbreitweiser

[Mar 05, 2018] 9-11 Whistleblower Rowley on Mueller s History of Cover-up

Notable quotes:
"... I actually had a chance to meet Director Mueller personally the night before I testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee [he was] trying to get us on his side, on the FBI side, so that we wouldn't say anything terribly embarrassing. ..."
"... When you had the lead-up to the Iraq War Mueller and, of course, the CIA and all the other directors, saluted smartly and went along with what Bush wanted, which was to gin up the intelligence to make a pretext for the Iraq War. ..."
"... For instance, in the case of the FBI, they actually had a receipt, and other documentary proof, that one of the hijackers, Mohamed Atta, had not been in Prague, as Dick Cheney was alleging. And yet those directors more or less kept quiet. That included CIA, FBI, Mueller, and it included also the deputy attorney general at the time, James Comey ..."
"... Rowley also noted that Mueller presided over "the 'post 9-11 round-up' of innocent immigrants, the anthrax investigation fiasco, as well as going along with a form of martial law (made possible via secret OLC [Office of Legal Counsel] memos written by John Yoo etc. predicated upon Yoo's theories of absolute 'imperial presidency' or 'war presidency' powers that the Bush administration was making [Attorney General John] Ashcroft sign off on) ..."
"... While not the worst of the bunch, neither Comey nor Mueller deserve their Jimmy Stewart 'G-man' reputations for absolute integrity but have merely been, along the lines of George 'Slam Dunk' Tenet, capable and flexible politicized sycophants to power, that enmeshed them in numerous wrongful abuses of power along with presiding over plain official incompetence. It's sad that political partisanship is so blinding and that so few people remember the actual sordid history. ..."
May 18, 2017 | Accuracy.Org

COLEEN ROWLEY, rowleyclan [at] earthlink.net, @ColeenRowley

Rowley, a former FBI special agent and division counsel whose May 2002 memo to then-FBI Director Robert Mueller exposed some of the FBI's pre-9/11 failures, was named one of TIME magazine's "Persons of the Year" in 2002. She just appeared on The Real News report " Special Counsel Investigating Trump Campaign Has Deep Ties to the Deep State ," about Mueller being appointed to investigate the Trump campaign's ties to Russia.

While Mueller has been widely described as being of impeccable character by much of official Washington, Rowley said today: "The truth is that Robert Mueller (and James Comey as deputy attorney general -- see my New York Times op-ed on day of Comey's confirmation hearing ) presided over a cover-up "

In her interview, Rowley noted: "The FBI and all the other officials claimed that there were no clues, that they had no warning [about 9/11] etc., and that was not the case. There had been all kinds of memos and intelligence coming in. I actually had a chance to meet Director Mueller personally the night before I testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee [he was] trying to get us on his side, on the FBI side, so that we wouldn't say anything terribly embarrassing.

"When you had the lead-up to the Iraq War Mueller and, of course, the CIA and all the other directors, saluted smartly and went along with what Bush wanted, which was to gin up the intelligence to make a pretext for the Iraq War.

For instance, in the case of the FBI, they actually had a receipt, and other documentary proof, that one of the hijackers, Mohamed Atta, had not been in Prague, as Dick Cheney was alleging. And yet those directors more or less kept quiet. That included CIA, FBI, Mueller, and it included also the deputy attorney general at the time, James Comey."

Rowley also noted that Mueller presided over "the 'post 9-11 round-up' of innocent immigrants, the anthrax investigation fiasco, as well as going along with a form of martial law (made possible via secret OLC [Office of Legal Counsel] memos written by John Yoo etc. predicated upon Yoo's theories of absolute 'imperial presidency' or 'war presidency' powers that the Bush administration was making [Attorney General John] Ashcroft sign off on)."

"While not the worst of the bunch, neither Comey nor Mueller deserve their Jimmy Stewart 'G-man' reputations for absolute integrity but have merely been, along the lines of George 'Slam Dunk' Tenet, capable and flexible politicized sycophants to power, that enmeshed them in numerous wrongful abuses of power along with presiding over plain official incompetence. It's sad that political partisanship is so blinding and that so few people remember the actual sordid history."

[Mar 05, 2018] The Pilgrim Underground Trump +247 Mueller, the 9-11 Cover-up and the DNC Crisis

Mar 05, 2018 | pilgrimunderground.blogspot.com

Trump +247: Mueller, the 9/11 Cover-up and the DNC Crisis

Robert Mueller is considered to be a man of integrity, of impeccable credentials and character. His appointment to investigate Russian involvement in the 2016 election was lauded by the Establishment political class, media and a great deal of the public. And yet the same media is utterly failing to connect his name to the recent Saudi scandal that's been quietly making the news. It seems the media would rather this story just went away. For years some of the families associated with the victims of 9/11 have been dissatisfied with the official investigation. With good reason they view it as insufficient, truncated and even corrupt.

Many angles of the 9/11 story were not investigated and many more received only a surface level consideration. The Saudi angle as some would have it has not been sufficiently considered and as the years have gone by numerous investigations and inquiries seem to point to Riyadh playing no small role in the attacks. Many believed this to be the case even in the fall of 2001. Saudi politics have always been confusing and the relationship of the extensive royal family with jihadist groups has always been a present danger but murky and difficult to grasp. On the one hand there's a real antagonism between the House of Saud and groups like al Qaeda. On the other hand the Saudis have provided extensive funding for the spread of Wahhabism and they certainly played no small part in funding some of the Mujahideen groups in 1980's Afghanistan. Some of these same figures (including but not limited to bin Laden) would be instrumental in the founding of al Qaeda. This part of the story isn't all that controversial. Where it becomes problematic for many is that the US and all too often Israel have been right there, right alongside Riyadh in backing these various projects. US intelligence continues to struggle in distancing itself from the founders and initial characters surrounding the founding of al Qaeda and even some of the important figures that later affiliated with the Taliban. You can be sure the media has done all it can to facilitate the re-crafting of the narrative. The so-called 9/11 families were always suspicious of Riyadh. It's understandable considering the fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Investigations have shown that Saudi diplomats and intelligence were in contact with some of these men and even high ranking figures like Ambassador Prince Bandar were involved in funding them. The thing is, the connections point not only to the Saudis but to American intelligence... both the FBI and the CIA. These terrorists were facilitated. The story of their entry and surveillance is more than a little remarkable. There were agents that were on to them but they were silenced and set aside. The scale of the 9/11 cover-up ranges far beyond some Saudi connections to the hijackers. Some believe this is all about money, the connections between the Bush family and the House of Saud. Michael Moore and others have intimated as much. But that can't be the whole story. That might explain some of the cover-up, though such an explanation is hardly sufficient. It does not explain the way in which these men were facilitated by the FBI in the days leading up to 9/11. The CIA angle is also worth looking into and is potentially vast and certainly more than a little suspicious.

Mueller as head of the FBI played a leading role in the suppression of the 9/11 investigation. If there is a cover-up, as indeed I and many others believe there to be, then Mueller is one of the chief perpetrators. Mueller at this point must be reckoned a top figure (or more likely an actor/agent) within the Deep State. His task vis-à-vis the 9/11 investigation was to obscure the hijacker's connections to US intelligence and to deflect any investigation of the Saudi's. For those that have sought to peel back the layers of deception surrounding 9/11 and its cover-up, Mueller is undoubtedly reckoned one of the great villains of the whole affair. To reckon him a man of integrity is laughable... if such things can be laughed at. The fact that he was selected to investigate supposed Russian manipulation of the US election is more than a little interesting. The ironic part is this... those who question 9/11 are deemed conspiracy theorists. And yet the whole Putin/Trump/Wikileaks narrative which Mueller will supposedly uncover is... a conspiracy theory and yet one without merit. All too often conspiracy theories are rooted in conjecture and inference based on circumstantial evidence. That they all too often err does not discount the reality of a conspiracy. It's simply that there are too many gaps in knowledge or often false assumptions driving the inference. The Ockham's Razor reductionist method of focusing purely on so-called brute facts also proves insufficient to postulate unifying theories and in fact is often hostile to the attempt. For a conspiracy theory to be plausible the inference has to make sense in light of the larger context and what can hopefully be described as overwhelming circumstantial evidence. It's akin to and often is criminal in nature. There has to be motive and intent. There has to be some benefit in terms of the outcome. These questions do not guarantee a correct answer or an accurate interpretation of events but they are at the very least necessary to employ the inference that is at the heart of all such inquiries and investigations. The Russian narrative with regard to the 2016 US presidential election fails this most basic of tests. The motives and outcome of the supposed conspiracists fails on all fronts.

I'm speaking politically at this point. Profits and dirty business deals (of which there is some evidence) cannot be entirely divorced from politics, but the motives, means and desired outcome are often quite different. There a host of narratives being spun about Trump and the nature of his administration. Once again I would argue the proper way to understand these events is in terms of an Establishment internecine battle. The present political struggle is not about an embattled Establishment at war with an insurgent rogue power. Rather I view it as a battle of intramural factions and yet undoubtedly some of those factions view this struggle as existential... or it is in their tactical interest to cast it thus. The DNC is in a state of crisis. It has turned to the media, to Hollywood and entertainment figures and to conspiracy theories to explain the election. The results of the 2016 election have discredited their narrative about the United States, what it is and what direction it is heading. Are they that different from Trump? The answer is a resounding 'no' and while they grandstand for the cameras in decrying his thuggish buffoonery they have offered little political resistance to his agenda.

Hillary Clinton is trying to salvage her legacy. Her defeat in 2016 discredited her life-narrative and historical legacy. She was to go down in history as the great pioneer in modern American politics. Obama stole some of her thunder. Her subsequent defeat at the hands of Donald Trump has completely discredited her. Corrupt, plastic and probably self-deceived she has turned in desperation to a grand conspiracy theory in order to justify her loss. As she sees it, she is not a defeated politician but the victim of a crime. It would seem that in her distorted mind she is only one tier below the assassinated Kennedy brothers. Hers is a great administration stolen, a tragic 'what if' that will haunt American political history. But it's all nonsense of course as are the often contrived Kennedy narratives. The two slain brothers are intriguing figures to be sure, complicated and yet hardly the virtuous paragons they are often made out to be. They represented possibility and yet the change in their character came too late. Clinton has also changed and shifted in her outlook but in quite the opposite direction.

She is not the 'liberal' woman many took her to be in the 1990s. And yet she has only grown more deeply entrenched and tied to the US Establishment. She ranks high on the list of corrupt politicians and she utterly lacks the charm and personal connection that many colourful political figures have possessed. She can't even compete with her husband.

Odious to be sure he is nevertheless a masterful politician. The dirty secret of modern democracy is that it has little to do with objective consideration of issues. Some people vote for tribal factions and some vote on the basis of personality. The latter are the folks who are most easily manipulated by the Madison Avenue types and the camera-work of television producers and directors. The Democrats who were once perceived to have stood for the working class have been exposed. Generations of betrayal and the breaking of the trade unions have destroyed that old base that helped put them into office for several decades. They still command a great deal of the minority vote but their grip is not as solid as it once was and social disintegration has led to a great deal of apathy. Figures like Hillary Clinton are not capable of stirring the disengaged masses to participation. The truth is that Hillary Clinton has long been hated by a huge section of the electorate.

The DNC has lost vast portions of its base. The Democrats have embraced sexual perversion and identity politics and yet have done so while moving to the Right in terms of economics and militarism. The Left is beginning to peel off and the Right has moved even farther to the Right leaving no Centrists or working class sector who would still vote democratic or possible consider swinging that direction in a tight contest. We are left with two Right-wing parties...a Centre-Right and a Far Right. The US Establishment has been concerned with the direction the Far Right has headed. It has clearly taken the government into a position of being unable to govern. It is generating too much chaos and dysfunctionality. In 2016 the bulk of the US Establishment was invested in the DNC and Hillary Clinton. Please understand the bulk of the Establishment is really above the political factions. Much of that is just theatre for the masses.

The pseudo-political war between the Red and the Blue also spawns vast sums of money and creates occasions to generate and launder even more. The Clinton defeat created a crisis because it signalled that many assumptions that have dominated for more than a generation have collapsed. The Trump victory signalled not just a crisis for the 2016-2020 political cycle, but a looming threat of social unrest. The Establishment fears the masses and if the working class starts to unite they are in trouble. Seeds of distrust and fear must be sown. Identity politics divides the populist street. Discrediting Trump will not only hinder his agenda and ability to be effective but it will keep the street divided. People will focus on events like Charlottesville and Trump's foolish comments rather than the real issues that place this society, even this civilisation in danger. The Establishment is banking on the fact that the generals can restrain him from disastrous war.

Mueller's task will be to expose enough of the obvious corruption within his family and organisation to leave him paralysed. Mueller is the Establishment's Sword of Damocles, an ever present threat. Like Kenneth Starr, he will continue to dig and gather dirt, whether related or not. With Trump the pile of refuse will be all but endless and he will likely generate as many problems in trying to cover up his deeds as the actual acts and problems themselves. Mueller's placement remains an ongoing threat to Trump... and yet it's one that may not work as Trump seems all too often divorced from reality. Obstruction of justice is as likely to bring him down as anything else. His own hubris and attempts to cover his tracks will further destroy what little integrity he has left. Eventually someone like Mueller will be able to issue a report and say almost whatever he wants. The political class will believe it, because they want to. If they can restrain him... good. If he self-destructs... that's okay too. If he wages war that's also a fine thing. No one in ruling circles has a problem with US militarism. What they don't like it was it's done unilaterally and without utilising the proper mechanisms that proved plausibility, cover and a right narrative. I am certain there are some that are very concerned about what's happening with regard to North Korea and rightly so.

They are not opposed to war but how it is being set up and prosecuted. In the meantime the Establishment will continue to spin out the narrative that the country was undermined by dark foreign influences. A new Cold War, a new age of McCarthyism is upon us. Censorship, often voluntary has returned with a vengeance. The corrupt moguls who dominate the media and the neo-media centers of Silicon Valley are part of this re-tooling of American society. Even the Trump interlude is being used to re-shape the Internet and to bolster the surveillance state. It's not that hard when millions are apparently more than willing to not only to reject any notions of privacy but are eager to give up their biometric data to the realm of cyberspace and its corrupt and incompetent guardians. Mueller is no man of integrity. He is a shill for the powers that be. His evident lack of virtue and honesty has no power to render judgment as to what Trump is or is not. These are all evil people. Some seem to be fooled into thinking that there are some 'good' folks who make it into these positions of power. Mueller will investigate Manafort who is obviously a corrupt businessman if not something else. He actually looks more like a CIA connected figure to me. His history and placement within the Trump campaign raises some very interesting questions... as does the timing of his departure. Yet thus far the evidence surrounding Manafort seems to actually exonerate Trump and his campaign, a point the media seems unwilling to acknowledge.

Did Trump's people go after dirt on the Clinton's? Of course they did and so did the Clinton's. Are they tied in with corrupt business people in Ukraine and Russia? Yes. So are the Clinton's. Are these people tied in with the political powers within Ukraine and Russia? Of course. But once again the notion that the Putin collaborated with Trump and Assange and that it was these leaks and some ads taken out on social media that somehow stole the election and led to Clinton's loss... is absurd. The evidence is not there and thus far the policies of the Trump administration do not support this. If this were the case then Putin must be seething. It's a betrayal on the order of the Kennedy double-cross of Sam Giancana and the mafia. But I doubt anyone wants to revisit that chapter of history. In a way Mueller's position is both interesting and ironic. All the events of the present, the discussions about leaks, media, wars, politics, Russia etc.... all rest on the foundation created by 9/11. And so now the investigator of corruption is one of the guardians who continues to protect that fortress of lies upon which the new order has been built. For if 9/11 were to come undone the Orwellian regime wed to the War on Terror narrative would collapse. It is therefore appropriate that Mueller continues in his role as guardian and the media will do all it can to make him out as a man of integrity.

When in reality he is already known as one who is utterly lacking character, an obstructor and facilitator of mass murder. He can claim no moral superiority vis-à-vis someone like Trump...and you can be sure Trump knows it.

See also: http://proto-protestantism.blogspot.com/2017/02/establishment-civil-war-deep-state.html http://proto-protestantism.blogspot.com/2016/01/saudi-arabia-and-iran-1979-and-islamic.html http://pilgrimunderground.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-west-and-trump-138.html

[Mar 05, 2018] His Investigation Is BS Former Trump Aide Refuses To Cooperate With Mueller Subpoena; Hints Trump, Carter May Have Colluded

Mar 05, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

As part of what Donald Trump has dubbed an ongoing "witch hunt", Special Counsel Robert Mueller has subpoenaed longtime Donald Trump associate and former aide Sam Nunberg. requesting he appear before a grand jury investigating Russian interference in the 2016 elections. Nunberg, however, told Bloomberg he has no intention of cooperating with Mueller's subpoena.

"I'm not going to cooperate with Mueller. It's a fishing expedition ," Nunberg told Bloomberg News . " They want me in there for a grand jury for testimony about Roger Stone. He didn't do anything. What is he going to do? His investigation is BS. Trump did not collude with Putin. It's a joke."

Nunberg was on Trump's payroll from mid-2011 to August 2015 when he was fired from Trump's campaign shortly after it emerged that he had posted racially charged Facebook posts. In July 2016, Trump sued him for violating a confidentiality agreement, however the suit was dropped the following month.

. "What's he going to do? He's so tough - let's see what they do. I'm not going to spend 40 hours going over emails. I have a life."

Nunberg told Bloomberg he expects one line of questioning before the grand jury to be related to Stone, who Nunberg worked with closely over the years.

In a somewhat surreal interview, Nunberg also spoke with NBC's Katy Tur on Monday afternoon, reiterating that he was not going to comply with the subpoena while stating his belief that his onetime boss may be guilty of collusion with the Russians.

After admitting to host Katy Tur that he'd been interviewed by Mueller's investigators, the host asked Nunberg if he believes the special counsel "has anything" on Trump.

"I think they may," the ex-aide responded. "I think he may have done something during the election. But I don't know that for sure."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/E86Qy6O4Smo

This isn't the first time Nunberg's given a rambling MSNBC interview. Last week, he called presidential adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner a "weak link" who has done "nefarious things," and earlier this year, called Trump an "idiot" and a "complete pain in the ass to work for." In the latter interview, which was conducted by host Joy Ann Reid, many noted that Nunberg appeared to be intoxicated.

... ... ...

In the subpoena dated Feb. 27, Bloomberg reports that Nunberg was also asked to turn over emails, texts and other communications with 10 campaign associates, including Trump, former campaign manager Corey Lewandoski and outgoing White House communications director Hope Hicks starting in November 2015 and running through the present.

Another possible line of questioning could be related to Trump's activities in Moscow in 2013 during the Miss Universe pageant, which the president once owned. The book by author Michael Wolff, "Fire and Fury," quotes Nunberg extensively describing the early months of the Trump administration. Wolff said the former adviser was "generally regarded as the man who understood Trump's whims and impulses best" and a Bannon associate. Mueller's team interviewed Bannon earlier this month.

Incidentally, when asked if Nunberg was correct that Trump "may have done something during the election", Press Sec. Sanders dnied, saying that "He's incorrect...I certainly can't speak to him or the lack of knowledge that he clearly has."


Bay of Pigs -> Moe Hamhead Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:41 Permalink

Didn't Rosenstein say that no collusion or interference with the election had taken place?

WTF would this guy know about that anyway? He was long gone by then.

pods -> Moe Hamhead Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:46 Permalink

Seriously, what about Trump's Hotels? Do they employ any Russians? I think that black jack dealer looked Russian.

I am not a big fan of OJ, but Jesus Christ this Mueller investigation acts like our QA department. Non-stop making you do retarded shit just because someone, somewhere might not fully get exactly what you did because they are retarded.

Mueller better just close up shop before the people supporting him give him the hook. Russian Troll farm? Really? Shitposting is now a national security issue. omg.

The longer this goes on, the more I think that our government just needs to go away. Total loss of all credibility. And when he does find something HUGE, if it isn't related to Trump (Uranium One) he just passes it by.

We are now past the point of absurd. Trump will next be guilty of having a bottle of Stoli at his house.

Kudos to this guy for calling this for what it is. Just downright stupid.

pods

BarkingCat -> DillyDilly Mon, 03/05/2018 - 16:35 Permalink

I took Russian as my foreign language elective in college and sometimes even understand some of it. I also read RT from time to time and donated to the Trump campaign.

I fear that Mueller will come after me next.

Dorado -> Moe Hamhead Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:55 Permalink

So someone that worked for Trump says that he doesn't know for sure if Trump did something bad and it is headline news? Give me a break! What click-bait garbage this article is.

chunga -> Dorado Mon, 03/05/2018 - 16:12 Permalink

The thing is, the MSM headlines will read "Another Trump Aide Caught in Crosshairs, Refuses To Cooperate in Collusion Probe".

Mueller is going to keep doing this until he's stopped. He was appointed by the DOJ and, supposedly, the AG is the boss.

Billy the Poet -> Deep Snorkeler Mon, 03/05/2018 - 16:31 Permalink

I love the liberal delusion that the Trump-Russia evidence is going to show up any day now while they continue to ignore the fact that Hillary paid for Kremlin help in the election.

How Ex-Spy Christopher Steele Compiled His Explosive Trump-Russia Dossier

Source A -- to use the careful nomenclature of his dossier -- was "a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure." Source B was "a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin."

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/03/how-the-explosive-russian-dossi

Clinton defends funding the dossier

https://www.cnn.com/videos/cnnmoney/2017/11/02/hillary-clinton-dossier-

Bay of Pigs Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:26 Permalink

Finally. Let's see some push back on this bullshit and false narrative.

pods -> Bay of Pigs Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:52 Permalink

Maybe this is the guy who stops pretending? He already sounds like would call Mueller for what he is. I bet Mueller is sitting there in his psychosis thinking that because this guy said what he did he is the one really holding all the dirt.

Someone should go and testify and just start dropping bombs.

"Hey Bob

Savyindallas Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:28 Permalink

I think all witnesses should do the same. Then when they are forced to testify under penalty of contempt, they should plead the 5th amendment and force Mueller to grant them immunity. This is all total BS. Any witness who cooperates and appears before a grand jury runs the risk of some bogus perjury or obstruction of justice charges. Mueller is a piece of human vermin.

Bill of Rights Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:29 Permalink

Mueller has already committed a crime he lied to the Senate, if there was any law and order in this Country Mueller would have been locked up a long time ago.

Born2Bwired Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:31 Permalink

I don't know anything about this guy but glad to see someone is calling bullshit on this ongoing witch hunt. And there are plenty of idiots thinking it is a real thing when basically nothing has been uncovered in a year and a half related to Trump/Putin. Meanwhile gigantic conflicts on the Hillary side are going totally uninvestigated..

Md4 Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:37 Permalink

"I'm not going to cooperate with Mueller. It's a fishing expedition...".

All the president has to do is give Mueller two weeks to wrap it up.

If he doesn't, fire the bastard.

Easy as that.

Joiningupthedots Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:43 Permalink

The truth is Mueller doesn't really know what he is looking for.

Its gone from a controlled search model (which has yielded nothing) to a "pin the tail on the donkey" excersize.

Clinton....the gift that keeps on giving LOL

Distant_Star -> Joiningupthedots Mon, 03/05/2018 - 16:18 Permalink

Mueller is not looking for anything Russia-related because he knows no such evidence exists. Instead, he is looking to file completely unrelated charges against other people such as Paul Manafort, who can then be pressured into making false accusations against Trump. "Special Counsel" Mule-er is nothing but the leader of a star chamber packed with (((Democrat))) loyalists who have no interest in serving justice. This entire ruse is nothing but a seditious attempt to overthrow a Constitutionally elected president because the Deep State and its cronies remain in a state of apoplexy over the 2016 election results. More than anything, this reminds me of some kind of Stalinist NKVD secret police operation from the 1930s: false charges supported by fraudulent evidence followed by show trials that delivered the expected results. Truth and justice be damned. Of course, we know (((who))) was calling the shots in the Soviet Secret Police, don't we?

Md4 -> Joiningupthedots Mon, 03/05/2018 - 16:26 Permalink

I don't think he's actually investigating anything. Once in awhile, he pops up with serious-sounding garbage, that really means nothing.

He's intended to be a shark in the waters around this administration, nothing more. A "potential" threat he might "find" something.

He's had his time at the "Russian collusion" plate, and he needs to be outta pitches.

Meanwhile, the country's business isn't getting done, and Trump's time in office isn't open-ended.

Business like infrastructure, the BloCare repeal, the wall, sanctuary city crackdowns, trade deal overhauls (not simply tariffs, but new deals or no deals at all), and much more.

His supporters really DO need to rise mightily and force these issues to the front and center.

The Bolshevik fascists are stymieing this president, as they bide their time toward the midterms.

Mueller is just one front in that effort.

THAT shouldn't be happening.

Jambo Mambo Bill Mon, 03/05/2018 - 15:56 Permalink

Only in Americana, the deep State mother fuckers, can go over the president like never before, and undermine his authority, take down his staff and stall his presidency... and basically place him in a corner for the kill.

Trump since his inauguration, wasn't able to get anything done because of these fuckers... they are enemies of the people! Why are these freaks being allowed to make a mockery of Trump presidency using bs excuses? How stupid people can be to believe on this shit! Where are the good politicians if any left in Washington? Is there any political decency left in the States? WTFIGO? Most veterans and folks on the service that I know of are ashamed of these debacle!

Hikikomori Mon, 03/05/2018 - 16:17 Permalink

The President needs to set a deadline for Mueller - end of summer would be good - either present evidence of collusion with Russia to Congress - or you're fired. Otherwise this investigation will still be ongoing when Ivanka is sworn in as the 46th. president January 20, 2025.

Fiberton Mon, 03/05/2018 - 16:49 Permalink

He is setting up a trap for Mueller. Get Mueller to go balls to the wall and make a misstep and blow his whole investigation up by being retarded. Stone created an art of being a provocateur. This guy learned from Stone. Mueller will see that conversation and think " WE got the President dig dig dig send subpoenas, do raids. " Thing is doing raids on innocent people catches up to you very fast. You never know who knows who and who is connected to who. This will get Mueller to spend more money and he will for sure go over the line and cut his own throat. Keystone cops tend to die by their own gun.

[Mar 04, 2018] RUSSIAGATE UKRAINE HOW THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION HEIGHTENS THE WAR DANGER Roger Stone Stone Cold Truth by Roger Stone

Notable quotes:
"... Prior to the convention, Manafort was involved in the successful fight to remove language from the party's platform which called for providing lethal weapons to the Poroshenko government, allegedly to fight against "Russian subversion." Manafort had the backing of Trump for this, as Trump had campaigned for an end to U.S. support for regime change wars, such as the Obama-neocon coup in Ukraine. ..."
"... (Manafort was also instrumental in including a plank supporting restoration of Glass Steagall banking separation, something vehemently opposed by Wall Street and the City of London financial institutions.) ..."
"... It was also in June that CIA Director John Brennan was briefed by GCHQ Director Hannigan, on "evidence" compiled by his agency, of "suspicious" activity they had picked up on Russian activity with Trump. GCHQ is Britain's cyber security intelligence agency, which works directly with MI5 and MI6. Brennan then pulled together an inter-agency task force to investigate the British charges of Russian activity. Among those in the FBI unit which was part of this task force were the now-famous duo, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, whose extensive text messaging shows that they were engaged in creating the fake narrative of "Russian meddling and Trump collusion". One text spoke of developing the Russiagate narrative to either defeat Trump in November, or provide an "insurance policy" against him, if he won. ..."
"... Beginning in 2013, Steele drafted more than 100 memos on Ukraine and Russia, and passed these on to Winer, who was then a special assistant to Kerry on Libya, which had been destroyed in a Clinton-Obama regime change operation. Winer admitted, in an oped in the Washington Post on February 8, 2018, that he passed these on to Victoria Nuland, who asked that he continue to bring them to her. Note that these were written at the time of, and the immediate aftermath of the coup in Ukraine. The Washington Post Deep State conduit, James Rosen, wrote that Nuland found these reports "informative and sometimes helpful", and asked Winer to keep them coming. ..."
"... When asked about the Steele memos on Ukraine in an interview with CBS on February 4 -- four days before Winer's oped was published -- Nuland lied, denying that she had used the Steele memos. ..."
"... Nunes and Grassley are both investigating the Steele-Winer-Nuland connection to see what this means as far as Obama administration direct involvement in running the Russiagate coup. ..."
"... The new indictments against Manafort come from squeezing his former partner, Rick Gates. Using a prosecutor's set of tools, Mueller went after Gates on his weak flank, the threat to him and his family of bankruptcy, were he to fight the charges. In entering his guilty plea, Gates told the court, "Despite my initial desire to vigorously defend myself, I have had a change of heart. The reality of how long this legal process will likely take, the cost, and the circus-like atmosphere of an anticipated trial are too much. I will better serve my family moving forward by exiting this process." ..."
"... On the new charges against Manafort on money laundering, a well-informed insider said he's astonished at the lengths to which Mueller is going. He noted the irony that, when Mueller and Comey were FBI Directors, they never made a criminal case against leading banks which engaged in billions of dollars in money laundering, much of it proceeds from drug and arms-trafficking. ..."
"... One of the banks given a repeated pass was the notorious HSBC, which while being fined repeatedly for money laundering, never faced criminal prosecution. Among those arguing against criminal charges was the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, who said a criminal proceeding against a "systemically important" bank, such as HSBC, would risk "global financial disaster." Obama's Attorney General Holder shared this view, as he refused to file any criminal charges against "Too Big to Fail" banks. ..."
"... Until his appointment by Obama as Director of the FBI, James Comey served on the Board of Directors of HSBC! ..."
"... From this review of the significance of Ukraine in the whole Russiagate process, it becomes clear that the perversion of justice it represents is surpassed only by the danger which flows from the anti-Russia theme it serves. Unless there is an intervention to shut down this witch hunt, as there was to end the hysterical red-baiting charges of the infamous Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s, the threshold for a possible nuclear confrontation with Russia is being dramatically reduced. It was Trump's campaign pledge to cooperate with Russia, rather than prepare for war, which is the reason for the Russiagate fraud. ..."
"... With the Ukraine tensions heightened by recent developments, full exposure of Steele's dirty role, and that of his collaborators, has become an essential component of a war-avoidance strategy. ..."
Mar 02, 2018 | stonecoldtruth.com

What is not generally known, however, due to the lying coverage in the Transatlantic "Fake News" media, is that included in this unholy alliance of coup plotters were armed militia units made up of neo-Nazis, who were responsible for the bloodshed on Maidan Square in Kiev, and which threatened the ethnic Russians, which constitute the majority of the population in the eastern Ukraine regions of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The lie that there was no neo-Nazi involvement has been maintained, despite ample evidence to the contrary, including interviews with militants pronouncing admiration for Hitler's collaborators in the Bandera movement in Ukraine during World War II, when Ukrainian units murdered ethnic Poles, Russians, and other "non-Ukrainians", including Ukrainian Jews. The armed "Banderistas" and related thugs have been incorporated into the security apparatus of the Kiev regime, and continue to march in the halls of Parliament and on the streets, under banners with pictures of Bandera, the Nazi collaborator, and symbols going back to their alliance with the Nazi SS.

The coup provoked a chain of events which the U.S., London and NATO used as justification to impose punitive sanctions against Russia, while demonizing Russia's President Putin, asserting that the he was engaged in military operations in Crimea and eastern Ukraine, to reverse the coup. Efforts to stop the fighting between the regime's armed forces and ethnic Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine led to the Minsk Accord in 2015, which included a cease fire and the granting of autonomy for Donetsk and Luhansk. The Minsk Accord was brokered by France, Germany and Russia.

On January 18, 2018, the Ukrainian Parliament ripped up the Minsk Accord, referring to the two republics as "temporarily occupied" by an "aggressor country," that is, Russia, and vowed to reintegrate them, by military force if necessary. This bill, which received the full support of Ukraine's President Poroshenko, has been described by the Russian Foreign Ministry as "a preparation for a new war." It occurs simultaneously with an outburst of war-like propaganda from western neocons, typified by a report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), released on February 20 with the title, "Coping with Surprise in Great Power Conflicts." The report charges that both Russia and China are preparing for war against the U.S., and that the Russians are deploying forces and artillery to overrun the Baltic states in a lightning strike, to reincorporate them into a new Russian empire!

THE CASE OF PAUL MANAFORT

This background is necessary to understand the vicious hostility behind the targeting of Paul Manafort, a long-time U.S. political operative, by the "amoral legal assassin", special counsel Robert Mueller. Manafort, who served as Donald Trump's campaign manager at a key moment in his fight to secure the Republican nomination, from May to August 2016, was indicted by Mueller on October 27, 2017, charged with numerous counts of money laundering, tax fraud, not registering as an agent of a foreign government, and of making false statements to the FBI. Mueller filed a revised indictment on February 28, 2018, following his "turning" of Manafort's partner Rick Gates, who filed a guilty plea to a single count on February 22. While awaiting trial in September, Manafort is confined to house arrest.

None of the charges against Manafort are related to the initial mandate given to Mueller, by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, to investigate the allegations of Russian hacking and sundry meddling in the 2016 election, and whether Donald Trump had "colluded" with the Russians. However, they are directly related to the geopolitical manipulations against Russia, which have been sharply criticized by Trump, both as a candidate and as President.

Manafort was first placed under surveillance following a FISA Court order in 2014. FISA, the super-secret court set up as part of the post-9/11 apparat to spy on potential terrorists, granted the surveillance order as part of an investigation into alleged illegal lobbying on behalf of the Yanukovych government of Ukraine by Manafort and others. Note that the timing of the court order coincided with the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Manafort had been working for several years as an adviser to the Party of the Regions, which was the party of President Yanukovych, who was overthrown by the regime change coup.

The original FISA warrant targeting Manafort was subsequently not renewed, for lack of evidence. A second order, however, was approved by the FISA Court for surveillance of Manafort sometime during 2016 -- the exact date of the order has not been released -- likely around the time Manafort took over the reins of the Trump campaign. Manafort played a key role in holding the Trump coalition together heading into the Republican convention July 18-21, as Bush-directed "Never-Trumpers" were attempting to steal the nomination away from him.

Prior to the convention, Manafort was involved in the successful fight to remove language from the party's platform which called for providing lethal weapons to the Poroshenko government, allegedly to fight against "Russian subversion." Manafort had the backing of Trump for this, as Trump had campaigned for an end to U.S. support for regime change wars, such as the Obama-neocon coup in Ukraine.

Democratic Senator Ben Cardin, a leading campaigner for tougher sanctions against Russia -- he was one of the authors of the initial anti-Russia sanctions, in the Magnitsky Act -- accused Trump and Manafort of changing the platform to benefit Russia, which he accused of robbing Ukraine of sovereignty! It is now reported that Manafort's role in changing the language in the platform is "under investigation" by Mueller!

(Manafort was also instrumental in including a plank supporting restoration of Glass Steagall banking separation, something vehemently opposed by Wall Street and the City of London financial institutions.)

It was during this same time period, June and July, once it was evident that, barring some unforeseen event, Trump would be the Republican nominee, that the anti-Trump activities of the "Deep State" went into high gear. While the "Never Trumpers" were unsuccessfully plotting to prevent his nomination at the convention, Christopher Steele began churning out memos, paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, which included wild claims about Putin's secret service filming Trump in compromising sexual activity during the 2013 Miss Universe contest in Moscow. His first memo was written on June 20, 2016, and he met for the first time with an FBI official on July 5, 2016.

It was also in June that CIA Director John Brennan was briefed by GCHQ Director Hannigan, on "evidence" compiled by his agency, of "suspicious" activity they had picked up on Russian activity with Trump. GCHQ is Britain's cyber security intelligence agency, which works directly with MI5 and MI6. Brennan then pulled together an inter-agency task force to investigate the British charges of Russian activity. Among those in the FBI unit which was part of this task force were the now-famous duo, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, whose extensive text messaging shows that they were engaged in creating the fake narrative of "Russian meddling and Trump collusion". One text spoke of developing the Russiagate narrative to either defeat Trump in November, or provide an "insurance policy" against him, if he won.

This incriminating text describes the meeting as taking place in "Andy's office", a reference to the now-fired Deputy Director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, who told a Congressional hearing that there would have been no surveillance warrant issued by the FISA court in October 2016 against Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page, had it not been for the Steele dossier.

Nunes has sent a list of ten questions regarding how the Steele's dossier shaped the anti-Trump mobilization of Obama's intelligence agencies. Among those receiving the list of ten questions are James Comey, the former FBI director fired by Trump, Obama's Director of National Intelligence Clapper, Brennan and Victoria Nuland. They are given until March 2 to answer, or they will face subpoenas. What Nunes is looking for is answers as to when the Steele dossier was brought to their attention, by whom, what actions were taken in response to it, its role in the submission to the FISA Court, and whether President Obama was briefed on what the dossier contained. They lay the basis for possible indictments against those receiving the questions, and for Steele. Senators Grassley and Graham have already stated they believe charges should be filed against Steele, who has thus far been protected by Her Majesty's government, which has acted to prevent Steele from being brought before a court of law.

STEELE AND THE UKRAINIAN CONNECTION

But Steele's role in shaping U.S. policy predates the setting up of the Get Trump task force. Both Nunes and Grassley are investigating Steele's connections with the U.S. State Department, including with the notorious Nuland. They are looking into the role of Jonathan Winer, a former assistant Secretary of State who served as a long-time aide to former Secretary of State John Kerry. Winer befriended Steele in 2009, when they were collaborating on investigations of Russian "corruption".

Beginning in 2013, Steele drafted more than 100 memos on Ukraine and Russia, and passed these on to Winer, who was then a special assistant to Kerry on Libya, which had been destroyed in a Clinton-Obama regime change operation. Winer admitted, in an oped in the Washington Post on February 8, 2018, that he passed these on to Victoria Nuland, who asked that he continue to bring them to her. Note that these were written at the time of, and the immediate aftermath of the coup in Ukraine. The Washington Post Deep State conduit, James Rosen, wrote that Nuland found these reports "informative and sometimes helpful", and asked Winer to keep them coming.

When asked about the Steele memos on Ukraine in an interview with CBS on February 4 -- four days before Winer's oped was published -- Nuland lied, denying that she had used the Steele memos.

But the Steele-Winer connection continued. In September 2016, Winer met with Steele, who presented to Winer his anti-Trump dossier. Winer drafted a two-page summary of the dossier, which he gave to Nuland. She told him to present this to Kerry. Later in the month, Winer met with Hillary Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal, who showed him another specious anti-Trump dossier, compiled by Clinton operative Cody Shearer. Winer then shared this who Steele, who then claimed it confirmed the charges he made in his dossier, though coming from different "sources."

Nunes and Grassley are both investigating the Steele-Winer-Nuland connection to see what this means as far as Obama administration direct involvement in running the Russiagate coup. Among those calling for a full criminal investigation into Brennan, Clapper, Comey and Hillary Clinton, which would reach Obama as well, is former Washington, D.C. U.S. Attorney Joseph DiGenova, who said it's very likely they could all be indicted.

YET BRITISH HITMAN MUELLER PROCEEDS!

The new indictments against Manafort come from squeezing his former partner, Rick Gates. Using a prosecutor's set of tools, Mueller went after Gates on his weak flank, the threat to him and his family of bankruptcy, were he to fight the charges. In entering his guilty plea, Gates told the court, "Despite my initial desire to vigorously defend myself, I have had a change of heart. The reality of how long this legal process will likely take, the cost, and the circus-like atmosphere of an anticipated trial are too much. I will better serve my family moving forward by exiting this process."

On the new charges against Manafort on money laundering, a well-informed insider said he's astonished at the lengths to which Mueller is going. He noted the irony that, when Mueller and Comey were FBI Directors, they never made a criminal case against leading banks which engaged in billions of dollars in money laundering, much of it proceeds from drug and arms-trafficking.

One of the banks given a repeated pass was the notorious HSBC, which while being fined repeatedly for money laundering, never faced criminal prosecution. Among those arguing against criminal charges was the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, who said a criminal proceeding against a "systemically important" bank, such as HSBC, would risk "global financial disaster." Obama's Attorney General Holder shared this view, as he refused to file any criminal charges against "Too Big to Fail" banks.

Until his appointment by Obama as Director of the FBI, James Comey served on the Board of Directors of HSBC!

From this review of the significance of Ukraine in the whole Russiagate process, it becomes clear that the perversion of justice it represents is surpassed only by the danger which flows from the anti-Russia theme it serves. Unless there is an intervention to shut down this witch hunt, as there was to end the hysterical red-baiting charges of the infamous Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s, the threshold for a possible nuclear confrontation with Russia is being dramatically reduced. It was Trump's campaign pledge to cooperate with Russia, rather than prepare for war, which is the reason for the Russiagate fraud.

With the Ukraine tensions heightened by recent developments, full exposure of Steele's dirty role, and that of his collaborators, has become an essential component of a war-avoidance strategy.

[Mar 03, 2018] I had an experience witnessing Mueller at the Metropolitan Club about 25 years ago. My first and only impression was that he exuded a high level political corruption

Mar 03, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com


Kelley Fri, 03/02/2018 - 22:39 Permalink

I had an experience witnessing Mueller at the Metropolitan Club about 25 years ago. My first and only impression was that he exuded a high level political corruption.

He hasn't changed a bit. His looks come from central casting. Underneath is a dangerous man. He is only now revealing the depths that he is willing to go to maintain the worst kinds of corruption. He has to be this corrupt to keep himself out of prison for his role in the Uranium One scandal. As can plainly be seen he is a Javert type in his willingness to go to the end of the plank - a really ruthless son of a bitch protected by so many ion Washington.

With few exceptions, all of them have dirt on each other. They are preselected based on whether they are blackmailable or not. How can we know this? By their behavior. These are not stupid people. They know what we know when it comes to the guilt of people like Hillary. But they refuse to act because the smell in their closet reeks of little boy's underwear.

Slammofandango Fri, 03/02/2018 - 22:48 Permalink

Last time I checked, Assange was saying Mueller has made no attempt to contact or interview Assange in any way.

RabbitOne Fri, 03/02/2018 - 23:04 Permalink

I keep seeing all these stupid articles. The answer is simple. .... The rule of law is dead...Our ruling class does what they want. Who is going after any of them?. ... Nobody...Well why not? Because too many people know where all the bodies are buried. There is enough "dirt" on people to do 2000 long length movies (greater than 3 hours) about all the scandalous materials. No one wants to stick their nose out because they will get what Seth got - a bullet in the back...

south40_dreams Fri, 03/02/2018 - 23:43 Permalink

Mueller only cares about one thing, winning, truth is for suckers

[Mar 03, 2018] Crowdstrike planted the malware on DNC systems, which they discovered later

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Also note: Crowdstrike planted the malware on DNC systems, which they "discovered" later - https://disobedientmedia.com/2017/12/fancy-frauds-bogus-bears-malware-m ..."
Mar 03, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

mc888 Fri, 03/02/2018 - 20:06 Permalink

Thanks Tyler.

Also note: Crowdstrike planted the malware on DNC systems, which they "discovered" later - https://disobedientmedia.com/2017/12/fancy-frauds-bogus-bears-malware-m

(if that's too 'in the weeds' for you, ask your tech guys to read and verify)

And look who else sits on the Atlantic Council - http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/about/experts/list/irene-chalupa why it's the sister of Andrea Chalupa, unregistered foreign agent employed by the DNC as a "Consultant", whose entire family is tied to Ukraine Intelligence.

http://theantimedia.org/propornot-2017-biggest-fake-news-story/

Irena Chalupa is also the news anchor for Ukraine's propaganda channel Stopfake.org She is a Ukrainian Diaspora leader. The Chalupas are the first family of Ukrainian propaganda. She works with and for Ukrainian Intelligence through the Atlantic Council, Stopfake.org, and her sisters Andrea (EuromaidanPR) and Alexandra.

and lest we forget crazy eyes #1

http://theduran.com/adam-schiffs-collusion-with-oligarch-ukrainian-arms

[Mar 02, 2018] Contradictions In Seth Rich Murder Continue To Challenge Hacking Narrative

Highly recommended!
Muller was the guy who buried 911 investigation. That's probably why he was hired for Russiagate investigation too.
Notable quotes:
"... retired U.S. Navy admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. asks a simple, yet monumentally significant question: Why haven't Congressional Investigators or Special Counsel Robert Mueller addressed the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich - who multiple people have claimed was Wikileaks' source of emails leaked during the 2016 U.S. presidential election? ..."
"... Mueller has been incredibly thorough in his ongoing investigations -- however he won't even respond to Kim Dotcom, the New Zealand entrepreneur who clearly knew about the hacked emails long before they were released, claims that Seth Rich obtained them with a memory stick , and has offered to provide proof to the Special Counsel investigation. ..."
"... In addition to several odd facts surrounding Rich's still unsolved murder - which officials have deemed a "botched robbery," forensic technical evidence has emerged which contradicts the Crowdstrike report. The Irvine, CA company partially funded by Google , was the only entity allowed to analyze the DNC servers in relation to claims of election hacking: ..."
"... Notably, Crowdstrike has been considered by many to be discredited over their revision and retraction of a report over Russian hacking of Ukrainian military equipment - a report which the government of Ukraine said was fake news. ..."
"... Also notable is that Crowdstrike founder and anti-Putin Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch sits on the Atlantic Council - which is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk. Who else is on the Atlantic Council? Evelyn Farkas - who slipped up during an MSNBC interview with Mika Brzezinski and disclosed that the Obama administration had been spying on the Trump campaign: ..."
"... "The facts that we know of in the murder of the DNC staffer, Seth Rich, was that he was gunned down blocks from his home on July 10, 2016. Washington Metro police detectives claim that Mr. Rich was a robbery victim, which is strange since after being shot twice in the back, he was still wearing a $2,000 gold necklace and watch. He still had his wallet, key and phone. Clearly, he was not a victim of robbery, " writes Lyons. ..."
"... Another unexplained fact muddying the Rich case is that of a stolen 40 caliber Glock 22 handguns stolen from an FBI agent's car the same day Rich was murdered. D.C. Metro police said that the theft occurred between 5 and 7 a.m., while the FBI said two weeks later that the theft had occurred between Midnight and 2 a.m. - fueling speculation that the FBI gun was used in Rich's murder ..."
"... Perhaps the most stunning audio evidence, however, comes from leaked audio of a recorded conversation between Ed Butowsky and Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who told him of a " purported FBI report establishing that Seth Rich sent emails to WikiLeaks ." ..."
"... Hersh also told Butowsky that the DNC made up the Russian hacking story as a disinformation campaign – directly pointing a finger at former CIA director (and now MSNBC/NBC contributor ) John Brennan as the architect. ..."
"... and said 'I want money.' ..."
Mar 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

As rumors swirl that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is preparing a case against Russians who are alleged to have hacked Democrats during the 2016 election -- a conclusion based solely on the analysis of cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike, a Friday op-ed in the Washington Times by retired U.S. Navy admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. asks a simple, yet monumentally significant question: Why haven't Congressional Investigators or Special Counsel Robert Mueller addressed the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich - who multiple people have claimed was Wikileaks' source of emails leaked during the 2016 U.S. presidential election?

Mueller has been incredibly thorough in his ongoing investigations -- however he won't even respond to Kim Dotcom, the New Zealand entrepreneur who clearly knew about the hacked emails long before they were released, claims that Seth Rich obtained them with a memory stick , and has offered to provide proof to the Special Counsel investigation.

On May 18, 2017, Dotcom proposed that if Congress includes the Seth Rich investigation in their Russia probe, he would provide written testimony with evidence that Seth Rich was WikiLeaks' source.

In addition to several odd facts surrounding Rich's still unsolved murder - which officials have deemed a "botched robbery," forensic technical evidence has emerged which contradicts the Crowdstrike report. The Irvine, CA company partially funded by Google , was the only entity allowed to analyze the DNC servers in relation to claims of election hacking:

Notably, Crowdstrike has been considered by many to be discredited over their revision and retraction of a report over Russian hacking of Ukrainian military equipment - a report which the government of Ukraine said was fake news.

In connection with the emergence in some media reports which stated that the alleged "80% howitzer D-30 Armed Forces of Ukraine removed through scrapping Russian Ukrainian hackers software gunners," Land Forces Command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine informs that the said information is incorrect .

Ministry of Defence of Ukraine asks journalists to publish only verified information received from the competent official sources. Spreading false information leads to increased social tension in society and undermines public confidence in the Armed Forces of Ukraine. –mil.gov.ua (translated) (1.6.2017)

In fact, several respected journalists have cast serious doubt on CrowdStrike's report on the DNC servers:

Pay attention, because Mueller is likely to use the Crowdstrike report to support the rumored upcoming charges against Russian hackers.

Also notable is that Crowdstrike founder and anti-Putin Russian expat Dimitri Alperovitch sits on the Atlantic Council - which is funded by the US State Department, NATO, Latvia, Lithuania, and Ukranian Oligarch Victor Pinchuk. Who else is on the Atlantic Council? Evelyn Farkas - who slipped up during an MSNBC interview with Mika Brzezinski and disclosed that the Obama administration had been spying on the Trump campaign:

The Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff dealing with Russians, that they would try to compromise those sources and methods , meaning we would not longer have access to that intelligence. - Evelyn Farkas

Odd facts surrounding the murder of Seth Rich

"The facts that we know of in the murder of the DNC staffer, Seth Rich, was that he was gunned down blocks from his home on July 10, 2016. Washington Metro police detectives claim that Mr. Rich was a robbery victim, which is strange since after being shot twice in the back, he was still wearing a $2,000 gold necklace and watch. He still had his wallet, key and phone. Clearly, he was not a victim of robbery, " writes Lyons.

Another unexplained fact muddying the Rich case is that of a stolen 40 caliber Glock 22 handguns stolen from an FBI agent's car the same day Rich was murdered. D.C. Metro police said that the theft occurred between 5 and 7 a.m., while the FBI said two weeks later that the theft had occurred between Midnight and 2 a.m. - fueling speculation that the FBI gun was used in Rich's murder.

Furthermore, two men working with the Rich family - private investigator and former D.C. Police detective Rod Wheeler and family acquaintance Ed Butowsky, have previously stated that Rich had contacts with WikiLeaks before his death.

"According to Ed Butowsky, an acquaintance of the family, in his discussions with Joel and Mary Rich, they confirmed that their son transmitted the DNC emails to Wikileaks ," writes Lyons.

While Wheeler initially told TV station Fox5 that proof of Rich's contact with WikiLeaks lies on the murdered IT staffer's laptop, he later walked the claim back - though he maintained that there was "some communication between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks."

Wheeler also claimed in recently leaked audio that Seth Rich's brother, Aaron – a Northrup Grumman employee, blocked him from looking at Seth's computer and stonewalled his investigation.

Wheeler said that brother Aaron Rich tried to block Wheeler from looking at Seth's computer, even though there could be evidence on it. "He said no, he said I have his computer, meaning him," Wheeler said. "I said, well can I look at it? He said, what are you looking for? I said anything that could indicate if Seth was having problems with someone. He said no, I already checked it. Don't worry about it."

Aaron also blocked Wheeler from finding out about who was at a party Seth attended the night of the murder.

"All I want you to do is work on the botched robbery theory and that's it," Aaron told Wheeler - Big League Politics

Perhaps the most stunning audio evidence, however, comes from leaked audio of a recorded conversation between Ed Butowsky and Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who told him of a " purported FBI report establishing that Seth Rich sent emails to WikiLeaks ."

As transcribed and exclusively reported on by journalist Cassandra Fairbanks last year:

What the report says is that some time in late Spring he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that's in his computer," he says. " Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents -- of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC."

Hersh explains that it was unclear how the negotiations went, but that WikiLeaks did obtain access to a password protected DropBox where Rich had put the files.

" All I know is that he offered a sample, an extensive sample, I'm sure dozens of emails, and said 'I want money.' Later, WikiLeaks did get the password, he had a DropBox, a protected DropBox," he said. They got access to the DropBox."

Hersh also states that Rich had concerns about something happening to him, and had

"The word was passed, according to the NSA report, he also shared this DropBox with a couple of friends, so that 'if anything happens to me it's not going to solve your problems,'" he added. "WikiLeaks got access before he was killed."

Brennan and Russian disinformation

Hersh also told Butowsky that the DNC made up the Russian hacking story as a disinformation campaign – directly pointing a finger at former CIA director (and now MSNBC/NBC contributor ) John Brennan as the architect.

I have a narrative of how that whole f*cking thing began. It's a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation , and the fu*kin' President, at one point, they even started telling the press – they were backfeeding the Press, the head of the NSA was going and telling the press, fu*king c*cksucker Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the Russian military intelligence service leaked it.

Listen to Seymour Hersh leaked audio:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/giuZdBAXVh0

(full transcription here and extended audio of the Hersh conversation here )

Hersh denied that he told Butowsky anything before the leaked audio emerged , telling NPR " I hear gossip [Butowsky] took two and two and made 45 out of it. "

Technical Evidence

As we mentioned last week, Dotcom's assertion is backed up by an analysis done last year by a researcher who goes by the name Forensicator , who determined that the DNC files were copied at 22.6 MB/s - a speed virtually impossible to achieve from halfway around the world, much less over a local network - yet a speed typical of file transfers to a memory stick.

The big hint

Last but not least, let's not forget that Julian Assange heavily implied Seth Rich was a source:

Given that a) the Russian hacking narrative hinges on Crowdstrikes's questionable reporting , and b) a mountain of evidence pointing to Seth Rich as the source of the leaked emails - it stands to reason that Congressional investigators and Special Counsel Robert Mueller should at minimum explore these leads.

As retired U.S. Navy admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. asks: why aren't they?

macholatte Permalink

Something all of us here already know, if Mueller gets away from the delusion of Trump-Russia collusion then it will be his ass in the frying pan. So he won't go after the Clintons, Obama, Comey or anyone else. Hitlery could show up with a gun in her hand and tell Mueller she shot Seth and he would ignore it.

And, sadly, there ain't nobody gonna do anything about it unless and until a Special Prosecutor from outside DC is hired. Right now a snowball in hell has a better chance.

Corruption!
It's what's for breakfast!

– Rod Sessions

NumberNone -> hedgeless_horseman Permalink

Why don't the Democrats scream about the exploitation of his murder against them like they do with every minor accusation? It's as if they want his death to disappear from the public view...wonder why?

Theosebes Goodfellow -> WTFRLY Permalink

I think it is mostly because they know so much of their world hangs in the secrecy. If they let the Seth Rich story get out, the Uranium One story gets out. If the Uranium One story gets out, the Awans' stolen cars with diplomatic cover for guns to Syria in return for heroin to America comes out. If that story comes out, then the ISI Pakistani doctors with fake medical degrees pushing pharma opiods in America comes out. And finally, Pizzagate, Pedogate, call it what you want, it comes out too. And then all of these dirty sons of bitches go to jail.

And that's why you aren't hearing any of it. Especially from Mueller. I think he got hoodwinked too. They sold him this job as a slam dunk to get Trump out of the White House. It really is the shits when the best laid plans of mice go south.

Bes Yars Revenge Permalink

One of Trumps big problems is that as an outsider he did not have people both qualified and loyal to appoint to critical offices in the deep state. That is why he wound up with a cipher like Sessions, a guy naive and gullible enough to believe the justice department was filled with honorable and trustworthy people or at least men who played by some set of rules. Having found out the hard way that he screwed up Trump is groping for a way out, trying to use a knife in a gun fight. The other side is too ruthless and i suspect they will take him down in the end.

SlothB77 Yars Revenge Permalink

"All I know is that he offered a sample, an extensive sample, I'm sure dozens of emails, and said 'I want money.' Later, WikiLeaks did get the password, he had a DropBox, a protected DropBox," he said. They got access to the DropBox."

Why has no one followed the money on this yet? This introduces an interesting angle - did Seth Rich get paid by WikiLeaks? And if so, can we find evidence of the payoff? How did he afford his expensive watch and necklace?

Freddie Bastiat Permalink

Dems voters and liberals are silent on all this or really just pushing the Russian and Putin narrative.

Blankenstein RopeADope Permalink

Report a crime, yet don't allow law enforcement access to evidence to help them solve the case.

Sounds like a case in Illinois. A 1 1/2 year old went missing, yet the parent wouldn't let the authorities search the house. I don't remember if there was a warrant or what finally happened that the police were allowed to search the home, but they did, and found the baby, dead, under the sofa.

hedgeless_horseman z530 Permalink

The case is being tried on CNN and in the NYT. It was never intended to go to court.

Withdrawn Sanction z530 Permalink

The other key is Rod Rosenstein's post-indictment presser. At the very end, he gave away the game by admitting there was no collusion, no Americans were involved, and nothing allegedly done by the Russians affected the election's outcome. BOOM. Stick a fork in Mueller's ham sandwich indictment.

truthalwayswinsout Permalink

Without that bit of truth, Mueller can go after people for other crimes but not for what he was mandated to do.

EddieLomax Permalink

The one bit of evidence that pushes me over from the possible to probably is the gun, what are the odds of this gun being stolen from the FBI, not just some random joe, but the FBI themselves. If that was the same gun used in the murder than the odds of it happening to turn up immediately in a robbery where nothing was stolen in an area where no one commits crimes is so small as to be near zero. It is vague above, what do ballistics say?

If Trump really wants to drain his swamp then this would be the way in, however if they did murder Seth then they'll murder Trump's family too so he is neutralized unless they can go in and get everyone involved in one go. Otherwise I'd expect the job to be handed over to someone ready to die, thinking here a retired general/admiral with no family might be the one to do it.

[Feb 27, 2018] What is a crime and what is not

Espionage would possibly be Steele's indictment. But nobody was 'formally' spying for another country. He was simply fed leaked info and he put it into a document and sent it back. Is that a crime?
Notable quotes:
"... The facts are there but I see this as an incredibly difficult case to prosecute. ..."
Feb 27, 2018 | theconservativetreehouse.com

EggsX1 , February 25, 2018 at 1:37 pm

The Obama spying is politically terrible but when I consider what is laid out I am not seeing very many crimes that would put people in prison.

This is most likely why this is taking such a long time – and I worry that most if not all conspirators will skate. They will probably be fired and collect their retirement pensions but that may be the end of it.

Though with the next democrat president, they will make sure that all those lose ends that got them caught this time will be perfectly legal. We have only witnessed the beginning of our own homegrown Stazi

phoenixRising , February 25, 2018 at 1:43 pm
You seem to be attempting to lay out a case for the defense a fraudulently constructed one at that

I suggest you take your "probably not a crime" mantras where less intelligent people congregate

Namaste

Like Liked by 2 people

EggsX1 , February 25, 2018 at 2:00 pm
We have already seen some of their defense through the dem memo. I am outraged at the spying scheme, but you have to recognize that all these people involved are lawyers. They will have made sure to have possible exits when the shtf. There are still plenty of black hats in all our gov bureaus and there will be a constant tit for tat throughout the process. The facts are there but I see this as an incredibly difficult case to prosecute.

Like Like

phoenixRising , February 25, 2018 at 2:06 pm
then try reading the above article and previous ones and there are many cases not simply one again, do your homework.

Like Liked by 2 people

EggsX1 , February 25, 2018 at 2:49 pm
Sundance has summarized the scheme quite nicely. Even so, blog posts are very different than an actual indictment. I suppose there must be more substantial crimes if they have been able to get people to flip – crimes we have not been told (I hope).

You say there are many other cases but fail to name any other crimes that have come to light. You could have enlightened me rather than just make accusations against me and told me to 'do my homework'.

I am simply saying they have created a scheme where it is nebulously legal. They could have just leaked the 702 queries but they laundered it through the PDB. This is all done to make it technically legal.

So far I am only seeing leaking, FISA fraud, and conspiracy/racketeering (which is next to impossible to prove). If there are only indictments along leaking, that would easily be seen as political prosecution (dems live under a different rule book than Trump/GoP being hounded by corrupt prosecutors ala Mueller). The Dem memo is trying to politicize the FISA fraud because they recognize that that is the next closest to an open and shut case.

David A , February 25, 2018 at 3:12 pm
You are forgetting 50 percent of the evidence; not the again Trump evidence, but the for HRC whitewash, or " obstruction of justice".

[Feb 27, 2018] I still say Crowdstrike so called analysis is where the rubber really starts to hit the road with Wikileaks disclosure, saying it was the Russians

Feb 27, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Shell Shell, 2 days ago

So, the Democrats want to show that the FBI spying was due to Page and not the dossier because it came "first" so to speak?

This still doesn't excuse them using the dossier in FISA warrant without disclosing information about how it was obtained and it doesn't take away from the fact that he helped them nail Russians before.

How do they keep their reputation in tact by being "two faced", it appears to me to make their reputation worse so I really don't get the Democrats strategy on this, I suppose as it doesn't change what they have done.

I still say Crowdstrike so called "analysis" is where the rubber really starts to hit the road with Wikileaks disclosure, saying it was the "Russians".

[Feb 27, 2018] Steele used Cohen's name because it would match an independent query of the FISA database, because that's where it came from, thus lending false credibility to the FISA courts in order to obtain surveillance warrants

Feb 27, 2018 | theconservativetreehouse.com

Bobby Barnes , February 25, 2018 at 4:04 pm

1. Steele used Cohen's name because it would match an independent query of the FISA database, because that's where it came from, thus lending false credibility to the FISA courts in order to obtain surveillance warrants.

2. True, but Obama also curtailed the OIG with restrictive new policies that took away the IG's ability to oversee, everything. Obama changed policy so the OIG had to request specific documents. But you can't request what you don't know about. Those policies have been reversed, but Horowitz may have a motive to expose Oboma's administration.

3. Good point on Sessions, however investigators may want to make indictments all at once, doing it piecemeal will tip off all conspirators of the evidence against them. For that reason Congress has to be careful with the specifics of the case it reveals. Congress does not have the authority to indict, only to recommend indictment, the OIG does.

[Feb 27, 2018] Tying All The Loose Threads Together -- DOJ, FBI, DoS, White House: "Operation Latitude"

Notable quotes:
"... The FBI group was participating in a plan to exonerate Hillary Clinton. That same FBI group was simultaneously conducting opposition research on candidate Donald Trump and the larger construct of his campaign team. Those FBI officials were allied by entities outside official government structures. The 'outside group' were "contractors". It is likely one of the contractors was Fusion-GPS or entities in contact with Fusion-GPS. { Go Deep } ..."
"... No longer having access to the FBI intelligence database the group needed a workaround. That's where DOJ official Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie Ohr come into play. ..."
"... The Cohen mistake created a trail from Chris Steele to the FISA database. ..."
"... That raw intelligence needed "unmasking", that's where the Department of State (DoS) comes in. The U.N. Ambassador is part of the DoS. Samantha Power stated she wasn't doing the daily "unmasking" identified by the House Intelligence Committee investigation { Go Deep }. Someone, or a group of people, within the State Department, were doing unmasking requests -- presumably using Ms. Power's authority. ..."
"... The collaborative process by officials within the State Department , as outlined and supported by Senator Chuck Grassley and his investigation , explains why those officials were also communicating with Christopher Steele. ..."
"... The assembled but highly compartmentalized reports from the DOJ-NSD, FBI-Counterintelligence, Department of State, Office of National Intelligence (Clapper) and CIA (Brennan), was then constructed to become part of President Obama's Daily Intelligence Briefing. That's where National Security Adviser Susan Rice comes in and her frequent unmasking of the assembled intelligence product. ..."
"... The Obama PDB was then redistributed internally to more than three dozen administration officials who POTUS Obama allowed to access his PDB. This includes the heads of DOJ, DOJ-NSD, FBI, FBI-counterintel, CIA, DoS, ODNI, NSA and Pentagon. ..."
"... January 31st, 2018, [ ] ..."
Feb 24, 2018 | theconservativetreehouse.com

There are so many threads of information surrounding the 2016 operation to conduct political surveillance on the Trump campaign by various officials and offices within corrupt structures of government it's easy to get lost. However, if we take all the various bits of information and placing them together a more clear picture emerges.

The { Go Deep Threads } look like this: The FISA-702(17) 'About Queries'; the political opposition research of Fusion-GPS and Glenn Simpson; the DOJ officials and FBI officials; Bruce and Nellie Ohr; the U.S. State Department and U.N Ambassador Samantha Power; the Clinton-Steele Dossier and Christopher Steele; the FISA Title-1 surveillance warrant; and the unmasking by former Senior White House officials: Lisa Monaco and Susan Rice. Here's the basic overview of how all those threads come together to paint a picture.

The FBI group was participating in a plan to exonerate Hillary Clinton. That same FBI group was simultaneously conducting opposition research on candidate Donald Trump and the larger construct of his campaign team. Those FBI officials were allied by entities outside official government structures. The 'outside group' were "contractors". It is likely one of the contractors was Fusion-GPS or entities in contact with Fusion-GPS. { Go Deep }

The contractors were using FBI intelligence databases to conduct opposition research "searches" on Trump campaign officials. This is where the use of FISA-702(16)(17) "To/From" and "About" queries comes in. { Go Deep } This FISA abuse was the allowed but unofficial process identified in early 2016 by NSA internal auditors.

This is where NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers steps in on April 18th, 2016, and stops the FBI contractors from having any further access. { Go Deep }

... ... ...

No longer having access to the FBI intelligence database the group needed a workaround. That's where DOJ official Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie Ohr come into play. { Go Deep }

The DOJ side of the operation was conducted within the National Security Division (John P Carlin head). { Go Deep } The DOJ-NSD could use the NSA/FBI database and pass information to, and receive information from, Nellie Ohr. Nellie was hired by Fusion-GPS immediately after Admiral Rogers shut down the FBI 'contractor' use of the system. Nellie would be the go-between.

The problem was that any information from within the FISA searches could not be directly used by the FBI because they would likely have to explain how they gained it and all search queries were illegal. This is where Fusion-GPS hires the retired British MI6 officer Christopher Steele. The FBI needed to launder the intelligence product:

Chris Steele would be the laundry for the intelligence information pulled from the U.S. system. Unauthorized FISA-702(16)(17) results were passed on to Christopher Steele, likely by Nellie Ohr. Steele would then wash the intelligence product, repackage it into what became known as his "Dossier", and pass it back to the FBI 'small group' as evidence for use in their counterintelligence operation which began in July 2016 [ intentionally without congressional oversight { Go Deep }].

Evidence of this laundry process is found in a significant "search query" result that was actually a mistake. The faulty intelligence mistake was the travel history of Michael Cohen, a long-time Trump lawyer. The FISA search turned up a Michael Cohen traveling to Prague. It was the wrong Michael Cohen . However, that mistaken result was passed on to Chris Steele and it made its way into the dossier. Absent of a FISA search, there's no other way Christopher Steele could identify a random "Michael Cohen" traveling to Prague.

The Cohen mistake created a trail from Chris Steele to the FISA database. { Go Deep }

All of the unauthorized FISA-702 search queries, "To From"(16) and/or "About"(17), of the NSA/FBI database were returning results. Those results were "raw intelligence".

That raw intelligence needed "unmasking", that's where the Department of State (DoS) comes in. The U.N. Ambassador is part of the DoS. Samantha Power stated she wasn't doing the daily "unmasking" identified by the House Intelligence Committee investigation { Go Deep }. Someone, or a group of people, within the State Department, were doing unmasking requests -- presumably using Ms. Power's authority.

The collaborative process by officials within the State Department , as outlined and supported by Senator Chuck Grassley and his investigation , explains why those officials were also communicating with Christopher Steele. { Go Deep }

The assembled but highly compartmentalized reports from the DOJ-NSD, FBI-Counterintelligence, Department of State, Office of National Intelligence (Clapper) and CIA (Brennan), was then constructed to become part of President Obama's Daily Intelligence Briefing. That's where National Security Adviser Susan Rice comes in and her frequent unmasking of the assembled intelligence product. { Go Deep }

The Obama PDB was then redistributed internally to more than three dozen administration officials who POTUS Obama allowed to access his PDB. This includes the heads of DOJ, DOJ-NSD, FBI, FBI-counterintel, CIA, DoS, ODNI, NSA and Pentagon.

The distribution of the PDB was how each disparate member of the administration, the larger intelligence apparatus, knew of the ongoing big picture without having to assemble together for direct discussion therein. That's Lisa Monaco and "Operation Latitude":

... ... ...

Additionally, remember this from the FBI?

January 31st, 2018, [ ] "With regard to the House Intelligence Committee's memorandum, the FBI was provided a limited opportunity to review this memo the day before the committee voted to release it. As expressed during our initial review, we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy."

FBI Asst. Director Michael Kortan (aka text message " Mike "), the head of the FBI Public Affairs Office was the one who wrote it . Kortan was part of the scheme team. FBI Director Christopher Wray fired him the following week. { Go Deep }

So now you know. I'll stop there, but hopefully that part helped . a little, maybe.

Oh, Hi Adam!

NoJuan Importante , February 25, 2018 at 12:37 pm
I think Sessions will let them keep their pensions so long as they admit their misdeeds. Which, according to my calculations, will be about two weeks before early voting starts this fall. I don't expect the IG report out till about a month before that. This will be a very sterile analysis by someone that is not trying to play politics. It could have just enough momentum to swing the elections, if properly used by Republican candidates, who have a history of not campaigning very smart. The media won't make a big deal about it. Victor Hanson has a good read about why-basically, its not about the crime. It wasn't in Watergate either-its about who's ox is being gored. The media wanted to gore Nixon. They don't want to gore the Obama administration, plain and simple. So don't expect the second coming.

[Feb 27, 2018] What is the likelihood that Carter Page, Gates and Manafort were planted in the Trump campaign to set the team up for another Russian angle

Notable quotes:
"... Page went from being an undercover employee of the FBI to a Russian spy and thus provide the impetus to then get a Title 1 surveillance warrant issued on him to then legally use all of the raw data that the FBI / DOJ had amassed prior to the initial FISA order in October 2016? ..."
"... Why Gates and Manafort except that thanks to Tony Podesta, and Hillary Clinton, it was known that the shenanigans going on in the Ukraine involved Manafort, Podesta, and Gates (to a much smaller extent). ..."
"... Throw Papadopoulos in here as well. Another possible plant. ..."
Feb 27, 2018 | theconservativetreehouse.com

Louie , February 25, 2018 at 7:07 pm

What is the likelihood that Carter Page, Gates and Manafort were planted in the Trump campaign to set the team up for another Russian angle.

Page went from being an undercover employee of the FBI to a Russian spy and thus provide the impetus to then get a Title 1 surveillance warrant issued on him to then legally use all of the raw data that the FBI / DOJ had amassed prior to the initial FISA order in October 2016?

Why Gates and Manafort except that thanks to Tony Podesta, and Hillary Clinton, it was known that the shenanigans going on in the Ukraine involved Manafort, Podesta, and Gates (to a much smaller extent).

Throw Papadopoulos in here as well. Another possible plant. And, where is Tony Podesta? If you indict Manafort, then you have to indict Podesta. So, if not, then Mueller is a bad actor indeed.

[Feb 27, 2018] Who is Carter Page?

Feb 27, 2018 | theconservativetreehouse.com

mariadelmaria , February 25, 2018 at 1:25 pm

Another angle might be: who is Carter Page?

Day 128.4 Democratic Memo - Carter Page Is a Surveillance Rabbit Since 2013 - YouTube

inquisitorLost , February 25, 2018 at 1:27 pm
Not sure if already posted..

Interesting read on the Schiff memo related to possible Carter Page FISA targeting by FBI.

https://meaninginhistory.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-schiff-memo-and-scandal-of-fisagate.html

[Feb 27, 2018] Shall we check on Lisa Monaco?

Notable quotes:
"... How many unmaskings were done by Lisa Monaco, who worked with Jeh Johnson who wanted to unmask the bad actors? ..."
Feb 27, 2018 | theconservativetreehouse.com

jeans2nd , February 25, 2018 at 10:21 pm

Anyone up for a story? It is going on bedtime somewhere, so why not?
Full disclosure – have not read all the comments (Incorrigibly Deplorable mind elsewhere).

Shall we check on Lisa Monaco? Chris Farrell says Lisa Monaco was the Trump Administraton's Homeland Security Director in the vid above (2:17).

No. Gen John Kelly was Trump Administration Sec of Homeland Security 20 Jan 2017 to 31 Jul 2017 (Wikipedia). Farrell obviously meant Obama Administration.

Monaco's title was Homeland Security Advisor 8 Mar 2013 – 20 Jan 2017, not Secretary of Homeland Security (Wikipedia).
Lisa Monaco was DOJ NSD AAG before John Carlin took over, 1 Jul 2011 – 8 Mar 2013. Monaco was Counsel to Attorney General Janet Reno.
Monaco obviously had DOJ-NSD ties. Monaco's JD is from Univ of Chicago. Where did Obama teach Constitutional Law? Univ of Chicago, iirc. There is much more at Wikipedia.

Working from the PBS youtube uploads of the PBS series "The Putin Files" (25 Oct 2017), as well as Joe Biden at the CFR, the Intel Community's presentation for the Gang of 8 7 Aug 2016 on "Russian hacking" was a Really Big Deal (have listened to hours and hours of these PBS-Putin vids – these people are nutz). The idea was to get the Gang of 8 to sign on to a bi-partisan statement declaring Russia was behind the hacking of the DNC, the DCCC, Podesta, Clinton, etc. The GOPe was reticent, and rightly so. (More on that in a sec.) This was a week before the RNC 2016 Convention.
(a search for these files is easily done, rather than embedding a ton of links – search for "youtube PBS The Putin Files")

Back to our story. Lisa Monaco.

Let us ask Obama Deputy Secretary of State and former Deputy National Security Advisor Anthony Blinken, shall we?

42:58 "And so in August (7 Aug 2016), Brennan, and other leaders in the Intelligence community, as well as our top Counterterrorism and Homeland Security at the White House, Lisa Monaco, went to Capitol Hill to talk to the leadership, about what we had learned and what we were seeing."

Lisa Monaco was "our top Counterterrorism and Homeland Security at the White House," not Homeland Security, during the 2016 campaign. Our top, mind you.

Jeh Johnson was Obama's Secretary of Homeland Security. Shall we ask Jeh Johnson?

33:00 "There was a session on Capitol Hill, in their SKIF, in their classified briefing room. It was me, Lisa Monaco, and Jim Comey. And, they were all there, the Speaker, Leader Pelosi, Leader McConnell, Leader Reed, the Chair and Ranking of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the Intel Committees, and all the Homeland Security Committees, they were all there. And, we briefed them again on what we knew."

Lisa Monaco was in the White House, Counterterrorism and Homeland Security, "our top," even. Lisa Monaco was in on this from the start, before 7 Aug 2016.

The GOPe leaders were reticent to sign on to that bi-partisan agreement, and did not do so until mid-Sept 2016. Why?

The PBS interviewer speaking with Jeh Johnson obviously was a Russian plant.

34:15 "The way the story has been reported is that the Republicans, and McConnell specifically, (garbled, may be the word "eventually") said, I don't see the evidence."

Huh. Imagine that. And there was still was no evidence in the ICA Report. Blast those Deplorables.

Jeh Johnson did not see that, either. The GOPe intentions, and all that.

Apologies. The Incorrigibly Deplorable mind goes to Deplorable places.

Back to our story. Our top whatsit, Lisa Monaco. Unmaskings.

Staying with Jeh Johnson –

39:25 "My preference was that, however we responded, we respond with some things that were cyber-security related, so that part of our steps should be effectively unmasking the bad actors so that they couldn't do it again, outing them, effectively, and that was part of what we did the actions we did, we took within the last month of our Administration "

Unmaskings, huh? Who was doing the unmaskings?

Samantha Power said she was not doing all the bazillon unmaskings that were done in her name.

Oh yes. Anthony Blinken, former Deputy National Security Advisor, was Deputy Secretary of State at that time.

How many unmaskings were done by Lisa Monaco, who worked with Jeh Johnson who wanted to unmask the bad actors?

Lisa Monaco was White House Counterterrorism and Homeland Security. Lisa Monaco was also very experienced in cyber-security (Wikipedia).

The FBI was running a counterintelligence operation. But Lisa Monaco was also Homeland Security Advisor. Lisa Monaco would have every reason to be read into FBI counterintelligence investigations, if one includes the emphasis the Obama White House was presenting at the time, which was cyber-security and Russia's hacking.

Odds are Lisa Monaco was in on the John Brennan-Obama meeting in July 2016, as well as the PDB and all the National Security meetings.

The FBI counterintelligence unit had that FISA Title I thingy going on with DOJ National Security Division. Just like John Brennan had outlined to Obama (PBS vids, detailed in comment couple three days ago). And we know National Security Advisor Susan Rice was unmasking Trump people.
Lisa Monaco did not need to unmask. Others were doing the unmaskings. Laundering unmaskings. Pretty clever, yes?

Go back to the Chris Farrell vid, 02:23 to 03:24 – "She (Lisa Monaco) appears in the notes and calender of Andy McCabe in May of 2016, and if you note back a couple weeks, you remember that there's a text from Page saying that Andy McCabe and Strzok, her friend or boyfriend, that the White House wanted to know everything that they were doing. And so you see that there's contact in May, and then in August you see that the counterintelligence investigation that's opened on the Trump Campaign gets a nickname, they call it Latitude, and it's tied back apparently to Lisa Monaco And who in the White House was managing that? And it appears, it's likely, that it is Lisa Monaco."

Monaco was counterterrorism, not counterintelligence, should one care to get really down in the weeds. Does that matter? Doubtful. The Obama emphasis was originally cyber-security, and Monaco was the Obama cyber-security expert put forward at the time.

Back to our story.
Jake Sullivan was in the Clinton Campaign. What did Jake Sullivan know about FBI investigations? Shall we ask PajamaJake?
47:50 "We heard very late in the day, very late in the process, with just days to go before the election, that there might be some kind of investigation Into the Trump campaign involving the FBI, and we flagged what we were hearing for a variety of reporters who were all told, no that's not true that's not happening. We know now in fact it was true and it was happening, but nobody was able to establish it in the closing days of the campaign."

The Clinton campaign knew about the FBI investigation into the Trump Campaign before the 8 Nov 2016 election. How did Clinton know? McCabe. Wifey. McAuliff.

One last question. Staying with the little weaselly PajamaBoi Jake Sullivan (what a wuss) –
51:57 "The (Trump) White House directed the State Department to essentially draw up a game plan for the lifting of (Russian) sanctions. State Department pushed back hard "

Oh really? Who is leaking from the State Department, one wonders.

Oh yes, Antony Blinken was Deputy Secretary of State. When, exactly, did Anthony Blinken leave the State Department?
Wikipedia says Blinken left the State Department 20 Jan 2017 and was succeeded by John Sullivan. Blinken is now a Global Affairs Analyst for CN&N .
John Sullivan has been working very well with Sec Tillerson by all accounts, and has announced his future retirement.

This Deplorable did not care enough to look up the whereabouts of any of the others. No doubt they are all fomenting our Grande Revolutione somewhere.

Hopefully this is not too convoluted. One's mind has been designated one of the crazies' disaster areas and condemned. There is so much more, but no one would read it anyway.

The Brennan and Podesta stories from those PBS-Putin vids are much too repulsive and frightening for a bedtime story, so we shall save those for summer-round-the-campfire ghost stories.
Nightnight.

[Feb 26, 2018] It looks like Christopher Steele's real role was laundering information which had been obtained through continued Inquiries of the NSA mega-file by our Ambassador to the UN

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Following Admiral Roger's closing the FSA mega-file to the FBI, it looks as though Christopher Steele's real role was laundering information stateside which had been obtained through continued Inquiries of the NSA mega-file by our Ambassador to the UN. *** Fusion GPS immediately hired FBI manager Bruce Ohr's wife, Nellie Ohr, and Christopher Steele. Bruce Ohr passed his illegally obtained information to Nellie, she to Steele, who then relayed the material back to Fusion / FBI as coming from his "Russian contacts." ..."
"... And here 44 may have made a mistake in authorizing the spread his Daily Briefing to 30+ agencies and individuals -- again as a work-around of the Roger's information ban. This places 44's fingerprints on the work-around. ..."
"... As it happens, I think the suggestion that Steele's role may have been, in very substantial measure, to give the impression that material from other source was the product of a high-quality 'humint' investigation merits being taken extremely seriously. ..."
"... Carter Page during his period of cooperation with the FBI, almost certainly was handled by Agents assigned to a field office. I wonder what they had to say, assuming they even knew, about HQ opening a CI case targeting their former cooperating witness for FISA coverage. It will be very interesting to see who handled Steele. Strzok? ..."
"... What was the compelling evidence and who furnished it to turn a US Naval Academy graduate, and presumably a Naval Officer with a readily accessible track record in service, into the targeted subject of an espionage investigation. Did he even have any current access to classified information? This is not looking good. ..."
Feb 26, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

RC, 25 February 2018 at 01:32 PM

Following Admiral Roger's closing the FSA mega-file to the FBI, it looks as though Christopher Steele's real role was laundering information stateside which had been obtained through continued Inquiries of the NSA mega-file by our Ambassador to the UN. *** Fusion GPS immediately hired FBI manager Bruce Ohr's wife, Nellie Ohr, and Christopher Steele. Bruce Ohr passed his illegally obtained information to Nellie, she to Steele, who then relayed the material back to Fusion / FBI as coming from his "Russian contacts."

And here 44 may have made a mistake in authorizing the spread his Daily Briefing to 30+ agencies and individuals -- again as a work-around of the Roger's information ban. This places 44's fingerprints on the work-around.

You may recall the incident of the wrong Michael Cohen traveling to Prague to meet with Russians -- when the future 45's personal lawyer was having a family celebration / baseball game stateside? The error was generated by the NSA mega-file. Steele's "Russian contacts" dutifully corroborated Cohen's visit with them in Prague -- how could they not, since they exist only in Steele's mind. In short, the Steele "Russians contacts" are proved to be fictions and if fictions then there was no Russian collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia.

*** Our UN Ambassador claims she was not generating hundreds of NSA Inquiries per week and we can believe her. The NSA Inquiries were coming from the FBI via her State Department "support" in DC.

David Habakkuk -> RC... , 26 February 2018 at 11:28 AM
RC,

It really does help if, when you make claims, you link to the source so that others can evaluate them. In the case of the claims you are making, the source is clearly a post two days ago by 'sundance' on the 'Conservative Treehouse' site entitled 'Tying All The Loose Threads Together – DOJ, FBI, DoS, White House: "Operation Latitude" '

(See https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/24/tying-all-the-loose-threads-together-doj-fbi-dos-white-house-operation-latitude/ .)

As it happens, I think the suggestion that Steele's role may have been, in very substantial measure, to give the impression that material from other source was the product of a high-quality 'humint' investigation merits being taken extremely seriously.

However, to repeat claims by 'sundance', while not taking the – rather minimal – amount of trouble required to provide the link which allows others to evaluate them, simply puts people's backs up and makes them less likely to take what you are suggesting seriously.

Flavius , 26 February 2018 at 05:32 PM
Most unusual, I would say, for an Agent in an upper management position in FBI HQ to open a counter intelligence case and then for all intents and purposes assign it to himself. Cases are normally worked and directly supervised in field offices.

Carter Page during his period of cooperation with the FBI, almost certainly was handled by Agents assigned to a field office. I wonder what they had to say, assuming they even knew, about HQ opening a CI case targeting their former cooperating witness for FISA coverage. It will be very interesting to see who handled Steele. Strzok?

What was the compelling evidence and who furnished it to turn a US Naval Academy graduate, and presumably a Naval Officer with a readily accessible track record in service, into the targeted subject of an espionage investigation. Did he even have any current access to classified information? This is not looking good.

[Feb 26, 2018] Democrat Memo Lays Egg by Publius Tacitus

Highly recommended!
Carter Page FISA warrant does much, much more than surveille Page himself -- it permits surveillance of most of the Trump campaign.
Notable quotes:
"... The whole Memo discussion above concerns the FBI's data manipulations to cast Carter Page as a spy worthy of an Article 1 warrant by the FISC. As I explained above, once Admiral Rogers closed the FBI's access to the NSA mega-file, the Bureau developed several work-arounds to explain how the FBI had data from the mega-file that they were mining through our Ambassador to the UN. ..."
"... Fusion GPS immediately hired the wife of FBI manager Bruce Ohr, Nellie, and Christopher Steele. Bruce handed material to Nellie, Nellie to Christopher. He repackaged the material claiming it was provided by very personal "Russian contacts" and the FBI then handed that laundered Steele material to the FISC. ..."
"... This laundering operation was exposed with a mistake concerning Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen was actually attending a family celebration and a ball game here in the US when he supposedly met Steele's "Russian contacts" in Prague. Steele's contacts, who exist only in his mind, dutifully confirmed that the meeting took place in Prague. ..."
"... Bill Binney, on Jimmy Dore show, said that FISA warrant enabled "two hop" surveillance. If so, then Carter Page FISA warrant does much, much more than surveille Page himself -- it permits surveillance of most of the Trump campaign. ..."
"... My "dog that didn't bark" question about Carter Page - if Carter Page was such a known danger, why didn't the FBI warn the Trump Campaign against letting him become involved in the campaign? ..."
"... The dog that didn't bark - if the Schiff Memo were so powerful, such a slam dunk, every MSM outlet in the western world would be trumpeting it to the skies and talking about nothing but. They seem to be barely able to acknowledge the existence of the Memo. ..."
"... As it happens, I think the suggestion that Steele's role may have been, in very substantial measure, to give the impression that material from other source was the product of a high-quality 'humint' investigation merits being taken extremely seriously. ..."
"... Schiff's defence sounded so, pardon the pun, shifty and did nothing to really counter the main point Nunes made when he released his memo. ..."
"... Schiff's memo was basically a vendetta against persons. Page and Papadopolis (sp?) are obviously the unpopular kids in the minds of the "mean girl" Democrats because they had links to Trump, the real threat to the popular girl Democrats. ..."
"... Funnily enough the question raised in your excerpt is exactly what I've been thinking since reading a post by TTG about Carter Page being an important FBI informant and state witness to the prosecution of Russian espionage. ..."
"... If the FBI believed Page had become a Russian spy it would have been easy due to their prior relationship with him to interview him and if he lied, to prosecute him for the process crime of perjury. That is such a slam dunk that the fact they didn't do that makes it seem there's something fishy there. ..."
"... And they never verified Steele's allegation that Page met with Sechin and Divyekin which would have been easy to do and now it seems was pure fabrication. Instead the FBI and DOJ lied and misrepresented to FISC to get a surveillance warrant on Page. This seems rather fishy. I speculate they did that to gain incidental collection on members of the Trump campaign. ..."
"... I note that Page hasn't been charged by the DOJ for any crime. ..."
"... Instead of working hard to protect national security, the FBI/CIA/DOJ' senior-idiots (accustomed to comfort and hefty checks) have been politicking and meddling in the electoral process. Meanwhile, the foreign nationals were left free to surf congressional computers – for years! (See Awan affair) and the "natives" like Clinton et al have been making a lot of money by getting huge bribes from Russians and Saudis (see Uranium One, involving Mueller for all other people). ..."
"... Carter Page during his period of cooperation with the FBI, almost certainly was handled by Agents assigned to a field office. I wonder what they had to say, assuming they even knew, about HQ opening a CI case targeting their former cooperating witness for FISA coverage. It will be very interesting to see who handled Steele. Strzok? ..."
"... What was the compelling evidence and who furnished it to turn a US Naval Academy graduate, and presumably a Naval Officer with a readily accessible track record in service, into the targeted subject of an espionage investigation. Did he even have any current access to classified information? This is not looking good. ..."
"... Carter Page is indeed a puzzlement. I don't see any account of him being an FBI informant, but he was a witness in the investigation and trial of the three SVR officers who tried to recruit him in 2013. ..."
"... Obama claimed something to the effect that, it turns out I am pretty good at killing people. This was in reference to the drone program and assume I don't need to footnote. Perhaps he got the notion that his administration was pretty good at intelligence. ..."
Feb 26, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

After reading the memo championed by Democrat Adam Schiff , which was promised to rebut the memo produced by the Republican majority on the House Intel Committee, I was reminded of a Peggy Lee song-- Is That All There Is?

Devin Nunes and his team have saved me the effort of pointing out the problems with the Schiff rebuttal. I am presenting that in full. Here is the bottomline--we now know that Christopher Steele was not a "one-time Charlie." He had a longstanding covert relationship as an FBI intelligence asset. The Democrat memo does nothing to dispute that fact.

It also is clear that DOJ and FBI personnel engaged in unprofessional (and possibly illegal) conduct with respect to making representations to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). Three key points on this front--1: The so-called Steele dossier was proffered as evidence to the FISC without fully disclosing that Steele was a covert asset being paid for his work and that Democrat political operatives were also paying him; 2: Senior DOJ officials, particularly Bruce Our, were totally comprised yet continued to be involved in the process; and 3: The Democrats insist that Carter Page is a bad guy and deserves to be investigated. Yet, no charges have been filed against him and the allegations leveled in the Steele dossier were dismissed by former FBI Director Comey as "salacious and unverified."

Anyway, here are the main points from the Democrat memo and the Republican response.


Publius Tacitus -> steve... , 25 February 2018 at 03:12 PM

Steve,

Page was a campaign nobody. Never had a meeting with Trump. Never briefed Trump. That's what is one of the bizarre aspects of this.

james , 25 February 2018 at 08:53 PM
from page 2 of the pdf - https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hpsci_redacted_minority_memo.pdf

"George Papadopoulos revealed [redacted] that individuals linked to Russia, who took interest in Papadopoulos as a Trump campaign foreign policy adviser, informed him in late April 2016 that Russia [two lines redacted]. Papadopoulos's disclosure, moreover, occurred against the backdrop of Russia's aggressive covert campaign to influence our elections, which the FBI was already monitoring. We would later learn in Papadopoulos's plea that the information the Russians could assist by anonymously releasing were thousands of Hillary Clinton emails."

my problem with this is wikileaks released the e mails via a search-able archive on march 16th 2016...

i still don't see how anything papadopolous said is relevant time wise.. what am i missing here, other then the obvious fact papadopolous looks like a lousy liar.. apparently he got this from Joseph Mifsud who as it turns out was 'director of the London Academy of Diplomacy' and etc - according to the nyt here - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/world/europe/russia-us-election-joseph-mifsud.html

and from the nyt article "Mr. Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. about his conversations with the "professor." Mr. Mifsud is referred to in the papers only as "the professor," based in London, but a Senate aide familiar with emails involving Mr. Mifsud -- lawmakers in both the Senate and the House are investigating Russia's role in the election -- confirmed that he was the person cited."

the whole thing of russia influencing the usa election seems built on via a number of sketchy characters at best..

at any rate - this is what emptywheel thinks is relevant in an otherwise irrelevant memo from schiff... i don't get how it is!

RC said in reply to Fred ... , 25 February 2018 at 09:50 PM
Fred,

The whole Memo discussion above concerns the FBI's data manipulations to cast Carter Page as a spy worthy of an Article 1 warrant by the FISC. As I explained above, once Admiral Rogers closed the FBI's access to the NSA mega-file, the Bureau developed several work-arounds to explain how the FBI had data from the mega-file that they were mining through our Ambassador to the UN.

Fusion GPS immediately hired the wife of FBI manager Bruce Ohr, Nellie, and Christopher Steele. Bruce handed material to Nellie, Nellie to Christopher. He repackaged the material claiming it was provided by very personal "Russian contacts" and the FBI then handed that laundered Steele material to the FISC.

This laundering operation was exposed with a mistake concerning Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen was actually attending a family celebration and a ball game here in the US when he supposedly met Steele's "Russian contacts" in Prague. Steele's contacts, who exist only in his mind, dutifully confirmed that the meeting took place in Prague.

I wish I might be a sock-puppet, but too many of my condo neighbors know otherwise. My favorite hobby in retirement is writing films for children, in which white hats succeed and black hats don't.

Steve McIntyre , 25 February 2018 at 10:25 PM
Bill Binney, on Jimmy Dore show, said that FISA warrant enabled "two hop" surveillance. If so, then Carter Page FISA warrant does much, much more than surveille Page himself -- it permits surveillance of most of the Trump campaign.
Tel said in reply to Boronx... , 25 February 2018 at 10:40 PM
"The entire case against the FBI rests on the idea that they cannot seek a warrant using biased evidence."
The FBI can use any evidence that is convincing to a judge.

Ahhhh, but they cannot legally tell lies to the judge during that process.

RC , 25 February 2018 at 11:19 PM
Hi Fred,

In some ways, being a sock-puppet and napping, in a bureau drawer (?), between soliloquies would be rather peaceful. Alas, too many of my condo neighbors know me to be otherwise !

Do check out sites such as The Conservative Treehouse and you will discover that Admiral Rogers' closing the NSA mega-file to the FBI led to Nellie Ohr's & Christopher Steele's information laundering operation. Other sites yet will introduce you to FISC Chief Judge Rosemary Collyer's 99-page rebuke of the FBI for their defalcations.

At a minimum, you won't be surprised when a plethora of FBI / DOJ / State Department employees are found guilty and sent to prison.

Enrico Malatesta , 26 February 2018 at 12:06 AM
My "dog that didn't bark" question about Carter Page - if Carter Page was such a known danger, why didn't the FBI warn the Trump Campaign against letting him become involved in the campaign?
blue peacock , 26 February 2018 at 03:53 AM
A cogent critique of the Schiff memo and how it doesn't aid the Democrats.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/schiff-memo-russia-investigation-harms-democrats-more-than-helps-them/

The memo does note that "the FBI also interviewed Page multiple times about his Russian intelligence contacts." Apparently, these interviews stretch back to 2013. The memo also lets slip that there was at least one more interview with Page in March 2016, before the counterintelligence investigation began. We must assume that Page was a truthful informant since his information was used in a prosecution against Russian spies and Page himself has never been accused of lying to the FBI .

So . . . here's the question: When Steele brought the FBI his unverified allegations that Page had met with Sechin and Divyekin, why didn't the FBI call Page in for an interview rather than subject him to FISA surveillance? Lest you wonder, this is not an instance of me second-guessing the Bureau with an investigative plan I think would have been better. It is a requirement of FISA law.

When the FBI and DOJ apply for a FISA warrant, they must convince the court that surveillance -- a highly intrusive tactic by which the government monitors all of an American citizen's electronic communications -- is necessary because the foreign-intelligence information the government seeks "cannot reasonably be obtained by normal investigative techniques." (See FISA, Section 1804(a)(6)(C) of Title 50, U.S. Code.) Normal investigative techniques include interviewing the subject. There are, of course, situations in which such alternative investigative techniques will inevitably fail -- a mafia don or a jihadist is not likely to sit down with FBI agents and tell them everything he knows. But Carter Page was not only likely to do so, he had a documented history of providing information to the FBI .

There's a reason why Nunes, Goodlatte and Grassley are focused on the Clinton commissioned Fusion GPS dossier, Christopher Steele and the FISA Title 1 warrant on Carter Page. It is the simplest path to the conspiracy at the Obama administration.

jonst said in reply to Boronx... , 26 February 2018 at 09:35 AM
My, street sense, and experience as a lawyer tells me that -- "tips, confessions.." from informants is true Steve. But the bar for going after a drug dealer, or fence, or kiddie porn type, is supposed -- one assumes -- to be a hell of a lot lower than going after the nominee for President of a major political party.
Green Zone Café , 26 February 2018 at 11:11 AM
Welcome to the criminal defense world. Everyday, hundreds of warrants based on the statements of criminals, paid informers, bitter ex-girlfriends, lying cops, and even non-existent "confidential informants" are issued. With all but the most blatant provably false affidavits, questionable searches are upheld by judges.

At this point I'm just waiting for Mueller's final indictments and the report. The facts will be there, or they won't.

If they are, try arguing a Motion to Suppress Evidence in the impeachment trial. That'll get you far . . .

Sid Finster , 26 February 2018 at 11:14 AM
The dog that didn't bark - if the Schiff Memo were so powerful, such a slam dunk, every MSM outlet in the western world would be trumpeting it to the skies and talking about nothing but. They seem to be barely able to acknowledge the existence of the Memo.
David Habakkuk -> RC... , 26 February 2018 at 11:28 AM
RC,

It really does help if, when you make claims, you link to the source so that others can evaluate them. In the case of the claims you are making, the source is clearly a post two days ago by 'sundance' on the 'Conservative Treehouse' site entitled 'Tying All The Loose Threads Together – DOJ, FBI, DoS, White House: "Operation Latitude" '

(See https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/24/tying-all-the-loose-threads-together-doj-fbi-dos-white-house-operation-latitude/ .)

As it happens, I think the suggestion that Steele's role may have been, in very substantial measure, to give the impression that material from other source was the product of a high-quality 'humint' investigation merits being taken extremely seriously.

However, to repeat claims by 'sundance', while not taking the – rather minimal – amount of trouble required to provide the link which allows others to evaluate them, simply puts people's backs up and makes them less likely to take what you are suggesting seriously.

DianaLC , 26 February 2018 at 01:55 PM
PT,

In the words of Emily Dickinson, I'm nobody. So., I come here to test my reaction when I read what the Democrats wrote -- though it was hard to get any continuity while reading because of all the big black lines--I was completely underwhelmed. I hate it when someone claims that what he/she is going to say will be something that will change my entire Weltanschauung and it turns out to be a nothing burger, in today's parance.

So thank you for confirming my opinion of the memo and thanks to others who have commented and who have way more experience and knowledge about how our Swam works (or doesn't work?).

My first reaction before I even tried to read the memo was correct. My first instinct was to judge on the basis of personality, which I know is not often logical. I felt that nothing put out under Schiff's authority could change my mind about the point Nunes made when he put out his mamo. Schiff's defence sounded so, pardon the pun, shifty and did nothing to really counter the main point Nunes made when he released his memo.

Schiff's memo was basically a vendetta against persons. Page and Papadopolis (sp?) are obviously the unpopular kids in the minds of the "mean girl" Democrats because they had links to Trump, the real threat to the popular girl Democrats. All we have to do is hear their names and we should automatically decide that if we want to be popular, we should malign them also so as to malign Trump and gain our entrance into the popular group in the cafeteria.

Jack said in reply to blue peacock... , 26 February 2018 at 02:00 PM
blue peacock,

Thanks for that link.

Funnily enough the question raised in your excerpt is exactly what I've been thinking since reading a post by TTG about Carter Page being an important FBI informant and state witness to the prosecution of Russian espionage.

If the FBI believed Page had become a Russian spy it would have been easy due to their prior relationship with him to interview him and if he lied, to prosecute him for the process crime of perjury. That is such a slam dunk that the fact they didn't do that makes it seem there's something fishy there.

And they never verified Steele's allegation that Page met with Sechin and Divyekin which would have been easy to do and now it seems was pure fabrication. Instead the FBI and DOJ lied and misrepresented to FISC to get a surveillance warrant on Page. This seems rather fishy. I speculate they did that to gain incidental collection on members of the Trump campaign.

I note that Page hasn't been charged by the DOJ for any crime. I agree with you that the investigation of the "conspiracy" is moving along well despite the roadblocks by the DOJ. Goodlatte who has seen the FISA application has now requested all the DOJ testimony from FISC. In a recent interview Rep. Ratcliffe who has also seen the FISA application made an interesting point that since in a FISC proceeding the accused has no ability to challenge the prosecution's claims, the prosecution has an affirmative obligation under FISA to present all the evidence, which the DOJ did not do but instead knowingly mislead the court.

It looks like we're heading towards another special counsel to investigate law enforcement and the IC regarding both the Trump and Clinton counter-intelligence investigations as well as the IC and media propaganda efforts to build hysteria around the meme of collusion of the Trump campaign with the Russian government. That investigation could lead all the way into the Obama White House.

Anna said in reply to Leaky Ranger... , 26 February 2018 at 02:56 PM
Your answer deserves F.

See post No 14: "...the FBI also interviewed Page multiple times about his Russian intelligence contacts." Apparently, these interviews stretch back to 2013. The memo also lets slip that there was at least one more interview with Page in March 2016, before the counterintelligence investigation began. We must assume that Page was a truthful informant since his information was used in a prosecution against Russian spies and Page himself has never been accused of lying to the FBI."

The case is not closed – it is closing on the high-placed violators of the US Constitution --as well as on their lack of professionalism, sheer incompetence and promiscuous opportunism

Instead of working hard to protect national security, the FBI/CIA/DOJ' senior-idiots (accustomed to comfort and hefty checks) have been politicking and meddling in the electoral process. Meanwhile, the foreign nationals were left free to surf congressional computers – for years! (See Awan affair) and the "natives" like Clinton et al have been making a lot of money by getting huge bribes from Russians and Saudis (see Uranium One, involving Mueller for all other people).

There is another big Q: To what extend both the FBI and the CIA have been infiltrated by Israel-firsters that are loyal to Zion, and how extensive is the damage inflicted by the "duals" on the US.

RC said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 26 February 2018 at 03:30 PM
Thank you David -- will do so in the future.
outthere , 26 February 2018 at 04:30 PM
Some commentators here seem not to know this simple fact: prosecutors in USA have enormous power. They can make mountains of molehills. And their most powerful weapon is the law of conspiracy. Here is an explanation by an experienced attorney:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/02/26/thirteen-russians-a-defense-lawyer-decodes-the-mueller-indictments/
Flavius , 26 February 2018 at 05:32 PM
Most unusual, I would say, for an Agent in an upper management position in FBI HQ to open a counter intelligence case and then for all intents and purposes assign it to himself. Cases are normally worked and directly supervised in field offices.

Carter Page during his period of cooperation with the FBI, almost certainly was handled by Agents assigned to a field office. I wonder what they had to say, assuming they even knew, about HQ opening a CI case targeting their former cooperating witness for FISA coverage. It will be very interesting to see who handled Steele. Strzok?

What was the compelling evidence and who furnished it to turn a US Naval Academy graduate, and presumably a Naval Officer with a readily accessible track record in service, into the targeted subject of an espionage investigation. Did he even have any current access to classified information? This is not looking good.

The Twisted Genius -> Jack... , 26 February 2018 at 07:29 PM
Jack,

Carter Page is indeed a puzzlement. I don't see any account of him being an FBI informant, but he was a witness in the investigation and trial of the three SVR officers who tried to recruit him in 2013.

If he was an informant, the FBI would not have had to obtain a FISA warrant to surveil him in 2014. That also raises doubts about how cooperative he was during that investigation and the 2015 Russian spy trial.

Obviously he didn't obstruct the investigation or prosecution or he would have been charged for that long ago. I get the impression he is a lot more wily than most people give him credit for.

Duck1 , 26 February 2018 at 08:37 PM
Obama claimed something to the effect that, it turns out I am pretty good at killing people. This was in reference to the drone program and assume I don't need to footnote. Perhaps he got the notion that his administration was pretty good at intelligence.

[Feb 26, 2018] Et Tu, Bernie by Justin Raimondo

Looks like neoliberals decided to equate widespread anti-neoliberalism and anti-globalization sentiment with pro-Russian propaganda. A very clever and very dirty trick.
What is funny is that Steele dossier and FBI Mayberry Machiavellians machinations actually deprived Sanders a chance to represent Democratic Party. nt that he wanted this badly, he folded eve without major pressure (many be under behind the scenes intimidation due to business dealing of his wife)
Notable quotes:
"... Instead of standing up to the crazies – by which I mean the Democratic party Establishment – and saying that the whole Russia-phobic campaign is based on nothing but hot air and fantasy, he's kowtowing to the very people who are trying to smear him as a Russian agent. Here he is signing on to the Clintonite canon of faith that poor Hillary " had to run against the Russian government " as well as Trump. ..."
"... This is laughable: there's no evidence for this other than Mueller's comical "indictment," which shows that something called the "Internet Research Agency," run by an out-of-work chef, spent a grand total of $100,000 – mostly after the election – on Facebook ads that were both anti-Clinton and anti-Trump. Michael Moore attended one "Russian-sponsored" event – a rally of thousands targeting Trump Tower, and, by the way, the only successful "Russian" event (the pro-Trump events were flops). ..."
"... Not only is Bernie buying into Russia-gate, now that the case for it is collapsing – nearly two years later and there's still no evidence of "collusion" – but he's calling for a full-fledged witch-hunt: ..."
"... Sanders' followers have taken up the hate-on-Russia battle cry with alacrity, with material by the fraudulent fanatic Luke Harding all over the web site of the Democratic Socialists of America. And being the left edge of the Democratic party, DSA will be supporting the very Democratic officeholders and officials who are shouting the loudest about Russia. ..."
"... Oh, he's got money-laundering charges on Paul Manafort and associates, but that has nothing to do with the Trump campaign: it all happened years before Trump ran. He's got Carter Page pleading guilty to lying to the FBI – but it's not clear what this means, exactly, since he's not been charged with a crime after all this time. ..."
"... So no matter what you may think of Trump and his policies, the real question is: will the Deep State and their allies in the media succeed in their bid for power? Will they oust a sitting President and institute a new era in our politics, one in which the political class can exercise its veto over the democratic will of the people? ..."
"... A SPECIAL NOTE : Yes, our matching funds have arrived: a group of donors has gotten together and pledged $30,000 – but there's a catch. We have to match that amount in smaller donations. So now it's up to you. We need your support so we can get back to doing our job – exposing the lies of the War Party. But we can't do it without your tax-deductible donations. ..."
Feb 26, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

Sanders signs on to Russia-gate conspiracy theory

One by one, the plaster gods fall, cracked and crumbled on the ground: the latest is Bernie Sanders, the Great Pinko Hope of the (very few) remaining Democrats with a modicum of sense who reject the "Russia! Russia! Russia!" paranoia of Rep. Adam Schiff and what I call the party's California Crazies. The official Democratic leadership seems to have no real commitment to anything other than fealty to a few well-known oligarchs, who provide the party with needed cash, a burning hatred of Russia – an issue no ordinary voter outside of the Sunshine State loony bin and Washington, D.C. cares about – and exotic issues of interest only to the upper class virtue-signalers who are now their main constituency (e.g., where will trans people go to the bathroom?). Overlaying this potpourri of nothingness, the glue holding it all together, is pure unadulterated hatred: of President Trump, of Trump voters, of Middle America in general, and, of course, fear and loathing of Russia and all things Russian.

And now the one supposedly bright spot in this pit of abysmal darkness has flickered out, with Bernie Sanders, the Ron Paul of the Reds, jumping on the Russia-did-it bandwagon and cowering in the wake of Robert Mueller's laughable "indictment," in which the special prosecutor avers that $100,000 in Facebook ads were designed to throw the election to Trump – and to help Bernie!

Oh no, says Bernie, from his place of exile in the wilds of Vermont, where the Russians did not take over the electrical grid: It wasn't me!

Instead of standing up to the crazies – by which I mean the Democratic party Establishment – and saying that the whole Russia-phobic campaign is based on nothing but hot air and fantasy, he's kowtowing to the very people who are trying to smear him as a Russian agent. Here he is signing on to the Clintonite canon of faith that poor Hillary " had to run against the Russian government " as well as Trump.

This is laughable: there's no evidence for this other than Mueller's comical "indictment," which shows that something called the "Internet Research Agency," run by an out-of-work chef, spent a grand total of $100,000 – mostly after the election – on Facebook ads that were both anti-Clinton and anti-Trump. Michael Moore attended one "Russian-sponsored" event – a rally of thousands targeting Trump Tower, and, by the way, the only successful "Russian" event (the pro-Trump events were flops).

Not only is Bernie buying into Russia-gate, now that the case for it is collapsing – nearly two years later and there's still no evidence of "collusion" – but he's calling for a full-fledged witch-hunt:

"The key issues now are: 1) How we prevent the unwitting manipulation of our electoral and political system by foreign governments. 2) Exposing who was actively consorting with the Russian government's attack on our democracy."

This is the real goal of anti-Trump groups like the " Alliance for Securing Democracy " and their "Hamilton dashboard," which purports to track "pro-Russian" sentiment online: it's the explicit intention of #TheResistance to censor the media with the cooperation of the tech oligarchs like Google, Twitter, and Facebook. It's back to the 1950s, folks, only this time the Thought Police are "liberals," and "socialists" like Bernie and the Bernie Bros.

Sanders' followers have taken up the hate-on-Russia battle cry with alacrity, with material by the fraudulent fanatic Luke Harding all over the web site of the Democratic Socialists of America. And being the left edge of the Democratic party, DSA will be supporting the very Democratic officeholders and officials who are shouting the loudest about Russia.

Coming soon: a congressional "investigation" into "pro-Russian" Americans using the "Hamilton dashboard" and the Southern Poverty Law Center as templates. Remember the House UnAmerican Activities Committee? Well, it's coming back. That's always been in the cards, and now those cards are about to be dealt.

I'll tell you one thing: I would have colluded with the Klingon Empire to prevent Hillary and her band of authoritarian statists and warmongering nutcases from taking the White House. If only the Russians had intervened, they'd have been doing this country – and the world – a great service. Alas, there's not one lick of solid evidence – forensic, documentary, witness testimony – that shows this. Which is what the Mueller investigation is all about: the Democrats are claiming there was interference, and Mueller is out to find corroboration. Except it's been over a year and he's come up with nothing.

Oh, he's got money-laundering charges on Paul Manafort and associates, but that has nothing to do with the Trump campaign: it all happened years before Trump ran. He's got Carter Page pleading guilty to lying to the FBI – but it's not clear what this means, exactly, since he's not been charged with a crime after all this time.

The Deep State's bid for power has hit several roadblocks recently, but it could yet succeed. First, Mueller could indict the President for "obstruction of justice" – a charge derived not from any real criminal activity, but from the investigation itself. I think this is the most probable outcome of all this.

Barring that, however, there is one road they could and probably would go down, given the intensity of their hatred for this President and their overweening power lust. Having gone this far in an attempt to overthrow a sitting President, they can't just stop halfway to their goal. They have to go all the way, or else suffer the consequences – public exposure, and possible criminal charges. In short, if they fail to get Trump on some semi-legal basis, I think they'd welcome his assassination.

The Deep State cannot allow the Trump administration to stand for a number of reasons, the chief one being that the coup is already in progress and there's no stopping it now. The President's enemies are legion, they are powerful, and they are abroad as well as here on American shores. They cannot allow his brand of "America First" nationalism to succeed, or seem to succeed: it conflicts too violently with their globalist vision of a borderless America-centric empire ruled by a coalition of oligarchs, technocrats, and Deep State operatives who've been shaping world events from the shadows for generations.

So no matter what you may think of Trump and his policies, the real question is: will the Deep State and their allies in the media succeed in their bid for power? Will they oust a sitting President and institute a new era in our politics, one in which the political class can exercise its veto over the democratic will of the people?

That's the issue at hand and that's why I spend so much time writing about Trump and his enemies' efforts to destroy him. Because if the Deep State succeeds, the America we knew and loved will be no more. Something else will take its place – and believe me, it won't be pretty.

A SPECIAL NOTE : Yes, our matching funds have arrived: a group of donors has gotten together and pledged $30,000 – but there's a catch. We have to match that amount in smaller donations. So now it's up to you. We need your support so we can get back to doing our job – exposing the lies of the War Party. But we can't do it without your tax-deductible donations.

If we all get together and make that final push we can make our goal. Every donation counts, no matter the amount. This is how we'll finally win the battle for peace: by uniting, despite superficial differences, to support the institutions that are in the front lines of the struggle for a rational foreign policy. And leading the charge is Antiwar.com.

Please make your tax-deductible contribution today.

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 .

[Feb 25, 2018] Any hierarchic system can and will be exploited by intelligent sociopaths

Notable quotes:
"... Democracy is not under stress – it's under aggressive attack, as unconstrained financial greed overrides public accountability ..."
Feb 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

albert , February 17, 2018 at 2:23 pm

" Democracy is not under stress – it's under aggressive attack, as unconstrained financial greed overrides public accountability ."

I request a lessatorium* on the term 'democracy', because there aren't any democracies. Rather than redefine the term, why not use a more accurate one, like 'plutocracy', or 'corporatocracy'.
-- -- -- -
* It's like a moratorium, you just do less of it.

[Feb 24, 2018] Isn't Steele dossier a better case of election interference than Russiagate?

Notable quotes:
"... He would have needed approval to send the dossier quite apart from the Official Secrets Act. Given that MI6 is an Intelligence Agency it might be thought they knew the destination of the dossier and the use to which it might be put. ..."
"... it was former Ambassador Sir David Wood who was instrumental in handing off the Steele Dossier to McCain. ..."
"... Sir Richard Dearlove was also involved, if only for 'advice' given at the Garrett Club to Steele and Burrows. Alex Thomson discussed the article on the UK Column. He also named Nigel Inkster and a "top official from the Cabinet Office" as potentially being involved. Given the standard of proof required: that's more than enough to allege UK interference? ..."
Feb 24, 2018 | off-guardian.org

Paul says February 18, 2018

Steele's urination dossier was based on what he had gleaned when Head of the Russian Desk at MI6 not very long ago. He would have needed approval to send the dossier quite apart from the Official Secrets Act. Given that MI6 is an Intelligence Agency it might be thought they knew the destination of the dossier and the use to which it might be put. Isn't there a better case that the UK's interference had more influence than Russia? Will Mueller Indict somebody in MI6? Will Steele ever be examined by Congress?
BigB says February 18, 2018
Paul: have you read this article from WaPo ? It gives an indication of the British involvement. Such as, it was former Ambassador Sir David Wood who was instrumental in handing off the Steele Dossier to McCain.

Sir Richard Dearlove was also involved, if only for 'advice' given at the Garrett Club to Steele and Burrows. Alex Thomson discussed the article on the UK Column. He also named Nigel Inkster and a "top official from the Cabinet Office" as potentially being involved. Given the standard of proof required: that's more than enough to allege UK interference?
[UK Column News – 9th February: from 11.05]

[Feb 22, 2018] The US-UK Deep State Empire Strikes Back 'It's Russia! Russia! Russia!'

Notable quotes:
"... For weeks the unfolding story in Washington has been how a cabal of conspirators in the heart of the American federal law enforcement and intelligence apparat ..."
"... Are you reading this commentary? ..."
"... To the extent that Russiagate was less about Trump than ensuring that enmity with Russia will be permanent and will continue to deepen , this latest Mueller indictment is a smashing success already. ..."
Feb 22, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

There's no defense like a good offense.

For weeks the unfolding story in Washington has been how a cabal of conspirators in the heart of the American federal law enforcement and intelligence apparat colluded to ensure the election of Hillary Clinton and, when that failed, to undermine the nascent presidency of Donald Trump. Agencies tainted by this corruption include not only the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ) but the Obama White House, the State Department, the NSA, and the CIA, plus their British sister organizations MI6 and GCHQ , possibly along with the British Foreign Office (with the involvement of former British ambassador to Russia Andrew Wood ) and even Number 10 Downing Street.

Those implicated form a regular rogue's gallery of the Deep State: Peter Strzok (formerly Chief of the FBI's Counterespionage Section, then Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division; busy bee Strzok is implicated not only in exonerating Hillary from her email server crimes but initiating the Russiagate investigation in the first place, securing a FISA warrant using the dodgy "Steele Dossier," and nailing erstwhile National Security Adviser General Mike Flynn on a bogus charge of "lying to the FBI "); Lisa Page (Strzok's paramour and a DOJ lawyer formerly assigned to the all-star Democrat lineup on the Robert Mueller Russigate inquisition); former FBI Director James Comey, former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and – let's not forget – current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, himself implicated by having signed at least one of the dubious FISA warrant requests . Finally, there's reason to believe that former CIA Director John O. Brennan may have been the mastermind behind the whole operation .

Not to be overlooked is the possible implication of a pack of former Democratic administration officials, including former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former National Security Adviser Susan Rice , and President Barack Obama himself, who according to text communications between Strzok and Page "wants to know everything we're doing." Also involved is the DNC, the Clinton campaign, and Clinton operatives Sidney Blumenthal and Cody Shearer – rendering the ignorance of Hillary herself totally implausible.

On the British side we have "former" (suuure . . . ) MI6 spook Christopher Steele, diplomat Wood, former GCHQ chief Robert Hannigan (who resigned a year ago under mysterious circumstances ), and whoever they answered to in the Prime Minister's office.

The growing sense of panic was palpable. Oh my – this is a curtain that just cannot be allowed to be pulled back!

What to do, what to do . . .

Ah, here's the ticket – come out swinging against the main enemy. That's not even Donald Trump. It's Russia and Vladimir Putin. Russia! Russia! Russia!

Hence the unveiling of an indictment against 13 Russian citizens and three companies for alleged meddling in U.S. elections and various ancillary crimes.

For the sake of discussion, let's assume all the allegations in the indictment are true, however unlikely that is to be the case. (While that would be the American legal rule for a complaint in a civil case, this is a criminal indictment, where there is supposedly a presumption of innocence. Rosenstein even mentioned that in his press conference, pretending not to notice that that presumption doesn't apply to Russian Untermenschen – certainly not to Olympic athletes and really not to Russians at all, who are presumed guilty on "genetic" grounds .)

Based on the public announcement of the indictment by Rosenstein – who is effectively the Attorney General in place of the pro forma holder of that office, Jeff Sessions (R-Recused) – and on an initial examination of the indictment, and we can already draw a few conclusions:

The Mueller indictment against the Russians is a well-timed effort to distract Americans' attention from the real collusion rotting the core of our public life by shifting attention to a foreign enemy. Many of the people behind it are the very officials who are themselves complicit in the rot. But the sad fact is that it will probably work.

[Feb 21, 2018] Thus, Putin-basher Clinton hired Putin-basher Alperovitch to investigate an alleged electronic heist, and to absolutely no one's surprise, his company concluded that guilty party was Vladimir Putin. Amazing!

Feb 21, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Partisan | Feb 20, 2018 5:06:58 PM | 11

The whole piece is just hilarious and I laughed out loud all time while reading it.

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/02/16/nyts-really-weird-russiagate-story/

Since the FBI never inspected the DNC's computers first-hand, the only evidence comes from an Irvine, California, cyber-security firm known as CrowdStrike whose chief technical officer, Dmitri Alperovitch, a well-known Putin-phobe, is a fellow at the Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank that is also vehemently anti-Russian as well as a close Hillary Clinton ally.

Thus, Putin-basher Clinton hired Putin-basher Alperovitch to investigate an alleged electronic heist, and to absolutely no one's surprise, his company concluded that guilty party was Vladimir Putin. Amazing! Since then, a small army of internet critics has chipped away at CrowdStrike for praising the hackers as among the best in the business yet declaring in the same breath that they gave themselves away by uploading a document in the name of "Felix Edmundovich," i.e. Felix E. Dzerzhinsky, founder of the Soviet secret police.

As noted cyber-security expert Jeffrey Carr observed with regard to Russia's two main intelligence agencies: "Raise your hand if you think that a GRU or FSB officer would add Iron Felix's name to the metadata of a stolen document before he released it to the world while pretending to be a Romanian hacker. Someone clearly had a wicked sense of humor."

[Feb 20, 2018] Thus, Putin-basher Clinton hired Putin-basher Alperovitch to investigate an alleged electronic heist, and to absolutely no one's surprise, his company concluded that guilty party was Vladimir Putin. Amazing!

Feb 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Partisan | Feb 20, 2018 5:06:58 PM | 11

The whole piece is just hilarious and I laughed out loud all time while reading it.

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/02/16/nyts-really-weird-russiagate-story/

Since the FBI never inspected the DNC's computers first-hand, the only evidence comes from an Irvine, California, cyber-security firm known as CrowdStrike whose chief technical officer, Dmitri Alperovitch, a well-known Putin-phobe, is a fellow at the Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank that is also vehemently anti-Russian as well as a close Hillary Clinton ally.

Thus, Putin-basher Clinton hired Putin-basher Alperovitch to investigate an alleged electronic heist, and to absolutely no one's surprise, his company concluded that guilty party was Vladimir Putin. Amazing! Since then, a small army of internet critics has chipped away at CrowdStrike for praising the hackers as among the best in the business yet declaring in the same breath that they gave themselves away by uploading a document in the name of "Felix Edmundovich," i.e. Felix E. Dzerzhinsky, founder of the Soviet secret police.

As noted cyber-security expert Jeffrey Carr observed with regard to Russia's two main intelligence agencies: "Raise your hand if you think that a GRU or FSB officer would add Iron Felix's name to the metadata of a stolen document before he released it to the world while pretending to be a Romanian hacker. Someone clearly had a wicked sense of humor."

[Feb 19, 2018] Kim Dotcom Let Me Assure You, The DNC Hack Wasn t Even A Hack Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... All fucking Kabuki. All of it. ..."
"... The Deep State (Oligarchs and the MIC) is totally fucking loving this: they have Trump and the GOP giving them everything they ever wanted and they have the optics and distraction of an "embattled" president that claims to be against or a victim of the "deep state" and a base that rally's, circles the wagons around him, and falls for the narrative. ..."
"... They know exactly who it was with the memory stick, there is always video of one form or another either in the data center or near the premises that can indicate who it was. They either have a video of Seth Rich putting the stick into the server directly, or they at least have a video of his car entering and leaving the vicinity of the ex-filtration. ..."
"... This would have been an open and shut case if shillary was not involved. Since it was involved, you can all chalk it up to the Clinton body count. I pray that it gets justice. It and the country, the world - needs justice. ..."
Feb 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Kim Dotcom: "Let Me Assure You, The DNC Hack Wasn't Even A Hack"

by Tyler Durden Mon, 02/19/2018 - 07:51 3.4K SHARES

Kim Dotcom has once again chimed in on the DNC hack, following a Sunday morning tweet from President Trump clarifying his previous comments on Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

In response, Dotcom tweeted " Let me assure you, the DNC hack wasn't even a hack. It was an insider with a memory stick. I know this because I know who did it and why," adding "Special Counsel Mueller is not interested in my evidence. My lawyers wrote to him twice. He never replied. 360 pounds! " alluding of course to Trump's "400 pound genius" comment.

Dotcom's assertion is backed up by an analysis done last year by a researcher who goes by the name Forensicator , who determined that the DNC files were copied at 22.6 MB/s - a speed virtually impossible to achieve from halfway around the world, much less over a local network - yet a speed typical of file transfers to a memory stick.

The local transfer theory of course blows the Russian hacking narrative out of the water, lending credibility to the theory that the DNC "hack" was in fact an inside job, potentially implicating late DNC IT staffer, Seth Rich.

John Podesta's email was allegely successfully "hacked" (he fell victim to a phishing scam ) in March 2016, while the DNC reported suspicious activity (the suspected Seth Rich file transfer) in late April, 2016 according to the Washington Post.

On May 18, 2017, Dotcom proposed that if Congress includes the Seth Rich investigation in their Russia probe, he would provide written testimony with evidence that Seth Rich was WikiLeaks' source.

On May 19 2017 Dotcom tweeted "I knew Seth Rich. I was involved"

Three days later, Dotcom again released a guarded statement saying "I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK," adding:

"I have consulted with my lawyers. I accept that my full statement should be provided to the authorities and I am prepared to do that so that there can be a full investigation. My lawyers will speak with the authorities regarding the proper process.

If my evidence is required to be given in the United States I would be prepared to do so if appropriate arrangements are made. I would need a guarantee from Special Counsel Mueller, on behalf of the United States, of safe passage from New Zealand to the United States and back. In the coming days we will be communicating with the appropriate authorities to make the necessary arrangements. In the meantime, I will make no further comment."

Dotcom knew.

While one could simply write off Dotcom's claims as an attention seeking stunt, he made several comments and a series of tweets hinting at the upcoming email releases prior to both the WikiLeaks dumps as well as the publication of the hacked DNC emails to a website known as "DCLeaks."

In a May 14, 2015 Bloomberg article entitled "Kim Dotcom: Julian Assange Will Be Hillary Clinton's Worst Nightmare In 2016 ": "I have to say it's probably more Julian," who threatens Hillary, Dotcom said. " But I'm aware of some of the things that are going to be roadblocks for her ."

Two days later, Dotcom tweeted this:

Around two months later, Kim asks a provocative question

Two weeks after that, Dotcom then tweeted "Mishandling classified info is a crime. When Hillary's emails eventually pop up on the internet who's going to jail?"

It should thus be fairly obvious to anyone that Dotcom was somehow involved, and therefore any evidence he claims to have, should be taken seriously as part of Mueller's investigation. Instead, as Dotcom tweeted, "Special Counsel Mueller is not interested in my evidence. My lawyers wrote to him twice. He never replied. "

chunga Sun, 02/18/2018 - 21:59 Permalink

Pffft...this guy sounds like the reds with their "blockbuster" memo. Honest Hill'rey is laughing!

SethPoor -> chunga Sun, 02/18/2018 - 22:00 Permalink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_8VaMbPjUU

Bes -> J S Bach Sun, 02/18/2018 - 22:17 Permalink

All fucking Kabuki. All of it.

The Deep State (Oligarchs and the MIC) is totally fucking loving this: they have Trump and the GOP giving them everything they ever wanted and they have the optics and distraction of an "embattled" president that claims to be against or a victim of the "deep state" and a base that rally's, circles the wagons around him, and falls for the narrative.

Meanwhile they keep enacting the most Pro Deep State/MIC/Police State/Zionist/Wall Street agenda possible. And they call it #winning

----

pathetic.

bigkahuna -> CheapBastard Mon, 02/19/2018 - 09:58 Permalink

"Had to be a Russian mole with a computer stick. MSM, DNC and Muller say so."

They know exactly who it was with the memory stick, there is always video of one form or another either in the data center or near the premises that can indicate who it was. They either have a video of Seth Rich putting the stick into the server directly, or they at least have a video of his car entering and leaving the vicinity of the ex-filtration.

This would have been an open and shut case if shillary was not involved. Since it was involved, you can all chalk it up to the Clinton body count. I pray that it gets justice. It and the country, the world - needs justice.

StarGate -> CheapBastard Mon, 02/19/2018 - 11:23 Permalink

Don't forget the "hack" analysis of Russian owned "Crowdstrike" since the FBI did and continues to, refuse to analyze the DNC computers.

KuriousKat -> CheapBastard Mon, 02/19/2018 - 13:26 Permalink

Isn't Alperovitch the Only Russian in there?.. When you rule out the impossible...whatever remains probable.. probably is..

wildbad -> IntercoursetheEU Mon, 02/19/2018 - 03:05 Permalink

Kim is great, Assange is great. Kim is playing a double game. He wants immunity from the US GUmmint overreach that destroyed his company and made him a prisoner in NZ.

Good on ya Kim.

His name was Seth Rich...and he will reach out from the grave and bury Killary who murdered him.

NumberNone -> wildbad Mon, 02/19/2018 - 10:04 Permalink

There are so many nuances to this and all are getting mentioned but the one that also stands out is that in an age of demands for gun control by the Dems, Seth Rich is never, ever mentioned. He should be the poster child for gun control. Young man, draped in a American flag, helping democracy, gunned down...it writes itself.

They either are afraid of the possible racial issues should it turn out to be a black man killing a white man (but why should that matter in a gun control debate?) or they just don't want people looking at this case. I go for #2.

Socratic Dog -> Buckaroo Banzai Mon, 02/19/2018 - 12:09 Permalink

Funny that George Webb can figure it out, but Trump, Leader of the Free World, is sitting there with his dick in his hand waiting for someone to save him.

Whatever he might turn out to be, this much is clear: Trump is a spineless weakling. He might be able to fuck starlets, but he hasn't got the balls to defend either himself or the Republic.

verumcuibono -> Buckaroo Banzai Mon, 02/19/2018 - 14:26 Permalink

Webb's research is also...managed. But a lot of it was/is really good (don't follow it anymore) and I agree re: SR piece of it.

I think SR is such an interesting case. It's not really an anomaly because SO many Bush-CFR-related hits end the same way and his had typical signatures. But his also squeels of a job done w/out much prior planning because I think SR surprised everyone. If, in fact, that was when he was killed. Everything regarding the family's demeanor suggests no.

verumcuibono -> NumberNone Mon, 02/19/2018 - 12:41 Permalink

MANY patterns in shootings: failure in law enforcement/intelligence who were notified of problem individuals ahead of time, ARs, mental health and SSRIs, and ongoing resistance to gun control in DC ----these are NOT coincidences. Nor are distractions in MSM's version of events w/ controlled propaganda.

Children will stop being killed when America wakes the fuck up and starts asking the right questions, making the right demands. It's time.

KJWqonfo7 -> wildbad Mon, 02/19/2018 - 11:15 Permalink

Kim is awesome to watch, I remember his old website of pics of him on yachts with hot girls and racing the Gumball Rally.

verumcuibono -> wildbad Mon, 02/19/2018 - 14:28 Permalink

I don't think you know how these hackers have nearly ALL been intercepted by CIA--for decades now. DS has had backdoor access to just about all of them. I agree that Kim is great, brilliant and was sabotaged but he's also cooperating. Otherwise he'd be dead.

StarGate -> Billy the Poet Mon, 02/19/2018 - 11:48 Permalink

Bes is either "disinfo plant" or energy draining pessimist. Result is the same - to deflate your power to create a new future.

Trump saw the goal of the Fed Reserve banksters decades ago and spoke often about it. Like Prez Kennedy he wants to return USA economy to silver or gold backed dollar then transition to new system away from the Black Magic fed reserve/ tax natl debt machine.

The Globalist Cabal has been working to destroy the US economy ever since they income tax April 15th Lincoln at the Ford theater. 125 years. But Bes claims because Trump cannot reverse 125 years of history in one year that it is kabuki.

Pessimism is its own reward.

[Feb 18, 2018] Here s how Mueller s latest indictment further discredits the Trump Dossier by Alexander Mercouris

Notable quotes:
"... As the days since Mueller's latest indictment have passed, the failure of his investigation to make any claim of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia has begun to sink in, even amongst some of Donald Trump's most bitter enemies. ..."
"... Even the Guardian – arguably the most fervid of Donald Trump's British media critics, and the most vocal supporter of the Russiagate conspiracy theory – has grudgingly admitted that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has "once again failed to nail Donald Trump" ..."
"... In fact the latest indictment when considered properly is a further huge nail in the coffin of the Russiagate conspiracy theory and in the already disintegrating credibility of the Trump Dossier, which is the foundation document for that theory ..."
"... Notwithstanding claims to the contrary, the Russiagate conspiracy theory is laid out in its most classic form in the Trump Dossier, and it is the Trump Dossier which remains the primary and indeed so far the only 'evidence' for it ..."
"... This theory holds that Donald Trump was compromised by the Russians in 2013 when he was filmed by Russian intelligence performing an orgy in a hotel room in Moscow, and he and his associates Paul Manafort, Carter Page and Michael Cohen subsequently engaged in a massive criminal conspiracy with Russian intelligence to steal the election from Hillary Clinton by having John Podesta's and the DNC's emails stolen by Russian intelligence and passed on by them for publication by Wikileaks. ..."
"... The Trump Dossier never mentions Jared Kushner's four conversations with Russian ambassador Kislyak, including the famous meeting between Kislyak and Kushner in Trump Tower on 1st December 2016 (which Michael Flynn also attended) over the course of which the setting up of a backchannel to discuss the crisis in Syria is supposed to have been discussed (Kushner denies that it was). ..."
"... The last entry of the Trump Dossier is dated 13th December 2016 ie. twelve days after this meeting took place, and given its high level a genuinely well-informed Russian source familiar with the private ongoing discussions in the Kremlin might have been expected to know about it. ..."
"... Nor does the Trump Dossier mention the now famous meeting in Trump Tower between the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and Donald Trump Junior – which Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner also attended – which took place on 9th June 2016. ..."
"... Now Special Counsel Mueller has provided further details in his latest indictment of actual albeit unknowing contacts between members of the Trump campaign and various Russian employees of Yevgeny Prigozhin's Internet Research Agency, LLC, apparently both in person and online. ..."
"... The Trump Dossier has however nothing to say about these contacts either, just as it has nothing to say about the Internet Research Agency, LLC, Yevgeny Prigozhin, or the entire social media campaign set out in such painstaking detail by Special Counsel Mueller in his indictment. ..."
"... I only remembered Helmer's 18th January 2017 article about the Trump Dossier after I wrote my article about Senator Grassley's and Senator Lindsey Graham's memorandum to the Justice Department on 6th February 2018. ..."
"... This is most unfortunate, not only because Grassley's and Lindsey Graham's memorandum resoundingly vindicates Helmer's reporting, but because it shows that a genuine expert about Russia like Helmer was able to spot immediately the holes in the Trump Dossier, which only now – a whole year and months of exhaustive investigations later – are starting to be officially admitted. ..."
"... Heroic efforts to elevate Papadopoulos's case and the meeting between Donald Trump Junior and the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya into 'evidence' of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia which exists supposedly independently of the Trump Dossier fail because as I have discussed extensively elsewhere (see here and here ) they in fact do no such thing. ..."
"... With the Trump Dossier – the lynchpin of the whole collusion case – not just unverified and discredited but proved repeatedly to have been completely uninformed about events which were actually going on, why do some people persist in pretending that there is still a collusion case to investigate? ..."
Feb 19, 2018 | theduran.com

As the days since Mueller's latest indictment have passed, the failure of his investigation to make any claim of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia has begun to sink in, even amongst some of Donald Trump's most bitter enemies.

Even the Guardian – arguably the most fervid of Donald Trump's British media critics, and the most vocal supporter of the Russiagate conspiracy theory – has grudgingly admitted that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has "once again failed to nail Donald Trump"

There will be understandable disappointment in many quarters that the latest indictments delivered by Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election, once again failed to nail Donald Trump. Although the charges levelled against 13 Russians and three Russian entities are extraordinarily serious, they do not directly support the central claim that Trump and senior campaign aides colluded with Moscow to rig the vote.

The Times of London meanwhile has admitted that the latest indictment contains "no smoking gun"

The Department of Justice, however, offered no confirmation to those still smarting from the election in Nov­em­ber 2016, who believe that, in the absence of Russian interference, Hillary Clinton would be in the White House today. Friday's allegations offered no evidence that the outcome had been affected. Sir John Sawers, former head of MI6, said yesterday that Donald Trump's victories in the key swing states were his own.

There was further comfort for Mr Trump, which he was quick to celebrate with a tweet. The investigation uncovered no evidence "that any American was a knowing participant in the alleged unlawful activity". That includes, so far, anybody involved in the Trump campaign. If there is a smoking gun it has yet to emerge, though Robert Mueller's investigation will grind on. Presi­dent Vladimir Putin is a malign and dangerous mischief maker. It has not been proved that he is an evil genius with the ability to swing a US election.

In fact the latest indictment when considered properly is a further huge nail in the coffin of the Russiagate conspiracy theory and in the already disintegrating credibility of the Trump Dossier, which is the foundation document for that theory.

Notwithstanding claims to the contrary, the Russiagate conspiracy theory is laid out in its most classic form in the Trump Dossier, and it is the Trump Dossier which remains the primary and indeed so far the only 'evidence' for it

This theory holds that Donald Trump was compromised by the Russians in 2013 when he was filmed by Russian intelligence performing an orgy in a hotel room in Moscow, and he and his associates Paul Manafort, Carter Page and Michael Cohen subsequently engaged in a massive criminal conspiracy with Russian intelligence to steal the election from Hillary Clinton by having John Podesta's and the DNC's emails stolen by Russian intelligence and passed on by them for publication by Wikileaks.

Belief in this conspiracy dies hard, and an interesting article in the Financial Times by Edward Luce provides a fascinating example of the dogged determination of some people to believe in it. Writing about Mueller's latest indictment Luce has this to say

Mr Mueller's report hints at more dramatic possibilities by corroborating contents of the "Steele dossier", which was compiled in mid-2016 by the former British intelligence officer, Christopher Steele -- long before the US intelligence agencies warned of Russian interference. Mr Steele, who is in hiding, alleged that the Russians were using "active measures" to support the campaigns of Mr Trump, Bernie Sanders, the Democratic runner-up to Hillary Clinton, and Jill Stein, the Green party nominee. Mr Mueller's indictment confirms that account.

Likewise, Mr Mueller's indictment confirms the Steele dossier's claim that Russia wished to "sow discord" in the US election by backing leftwing as well as rightwing groups. Among the entities run by the IRA were groups with names such as "Secured Borders", "Blacktivists", "United Muslims of America" and "Army of Jesus".

What is fascinating about these words is that none of them are true.

Christopher Steele is not in hiding.

The actua l Trump Dossier does not allege "that the Russians were using "active measures" to support the campaigns of Mr Trump, Bernie Sanders, the Democratic runner-up to Hillary Clinton, and Jill Stein, the Green party nominee".

Bernie Sanders is mentioned by the Trump Dossier only in passing. By the time the Trump Dossier's first entries were written Bernie Sanders's campaign was all but over and it was already clear that Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic Party's candidate for the Presidency.

Jill Stein is mentioned – again in passing – only once, in a brief mention which refers to her now infamous visit to Russia where she attended the same dinner with President Putin as Michael Flynn.

Nor does the Trump Dossier anywhere claim that "Russia wished to "sow discord" in the US election by backing leftwing as well as rightwing groups".

On the contrary the Trump Dossier is focused – exclusively and obsessively – on documenting at fantastic length the alleged conspiracy between the Russian government and the campaign of the supposedly compromised Donald Trump to get him elected US President.

Supporters of the Russiagate conspiracy theory need to start facing up to the hard truth about the Trump Dossier.

At the time the Trump Dossier was published in January 2017 little was known publicly about the contacts which actually took place between members of Donald Trump's campaign and tranisiton teams and the Russians during and after the election.

Today – a full year later and after months of exhaustive investigation – we know far more about those contacts.

What Is striking about those contacts is how ignorant the supposedly high level Russian sources of the Trump Dossier were about them.

Thus the Trump Dossier never mentions Jeff Sessions's two meetings with Russian ambassador Kislyak, or the various conversations Michael Flynn is known to have had with Russian ambassador Kislyak, some of which apparently took place before Donald Trump won the election.

The Trump Dossier never mentions Jared Kushner's four conversations with Russian ambassador Kislyak, including the famous meeting between Kislyak and Kushner in Trump Tower on 1st December 2016 (which Michael Flynn also attended) over the course of which the setting up of a backchannel to discuss the crisis in Syria is supposed to have been discussed (Kushner denies that it was).

The last entry of the Trump Dossier is dated 13th December 2016 ie. twelve days after this meeting took place, and given its high level a genuinely well-informed Russian source familiar with the private ongoing discussions in the Kremlin might have been expected to know about it.

Nor does the Trump Dossier mention the now famous meeting in Trump Tower between the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and Donald Trump Junior – which Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner also attended – which took place on 9th June 2016.

This despite the fact that the Trump Dossier's first entry is dated 20th June 2016 i.e. eleven days later, so that if this meeting really was intended to set the stage for collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia – as believers in the Russiagate conspiracy theory insist – a well informed Russian source with access to information from the Kremlin would be expected to know about it.

Nor does the Trump Dossier have anything to say about George Papadopoulos, the Trump campaign aide who had the most extensive contacts with the Russians, and whose drunken bragging in a London bar is now claimed by the FBI to have been its reason for starting the Russiagate inquiry.

In fact George Papadopoulos is not mentioned in the Trump Dossier at all.

This despite the fact that members of Russia's high powered Valdai Discussion Club were Papadopoulos's main interlocutors in his discussions with the Russians, and Igor Ivanov – Russia's former foreign minister, and a senior albeit retired official genuinely known to Putin – was informed about the discussions also, making it at least possible that high level people in the Russian Foreign Ministry and conceivably in the Russian government and in the Kremlin were kept informed about the discussions with Papadopoulos, so that a genuinely well-informed Russian source might be expected to know about them.

By contrast none of the secret meetings between Carter Page and Michael Cohen and the Russians discussed at such extraordinary length in the Trump Dossier have ever been proved to have taken place.

Now Special Counsel Mueller has provided further details in his latest indictment of actual albeit unknowing contacts between members of the Trump campaign and various Russian employees of Yevgeny Prigozhin's Internet Research Agency, LLC, apparently both in person and online.

The Trump Dossier has however nothing to say about these contacts either, just as it has nothing to say about the Internet Research Agency, LLC, Yevgeny Prigozhin, or the entire social media campaign set out in such painstaking detail by Special Counsel Mueller in his indictment.

The only conclusion possible is that if the Trump Dossier's Russian sources actually exist (about which I am starting to have doubts) then they were extraordinarily ignorant of what was actually going on.

That of course is consistent with the fact – recently revealed in the heavily redacted memorandum sent to the Justice Department by Senators Grassley and Lindsey Graham – that many of the sources of the Trump Dossier were not actually Russian but were American.

John Helmer – the most experienced journalist covering Russia, and a person who has a genuine and profound knowledge of the country – made that very point – that many of the Trump Dossier's sources were American rather than Russian – in an article he published on 18th January 2017, ie. just days after the Trump Dossier was published.

In that same article Helmer also made this very valid point about the Trump Dossier's compiler Christopher Steele

Steele's career in Russian intelligence at MI6 had hit the rocks in 2006, and never recovered. That was the year in which the Russian Security Service (FSB) publicly exposed an MI6 operation in Moscow. Russian informants recruited by the British were passed messages and money, and dropped their information in containers fabricated to look like fake rocks in a public park. Steele was on the MI6 desk in London when the operation was blown. Although the FSB announcement was denied in London at the time, the British prime ministry confirmed its veracity in 2012.Read more on Steele's fake rock operation here , and the attempt by the Financial Times to cover it up by blaming Putin for fabricating the story.

Given that Steele was outed by Russian intelligence in 2006, with his intelligence operation in Russia dismantled by the FSB that year, it beggars belief that ten years later in 2016 he still had access to high level secrets in the Kremlin.

What we now know in fact proves that he did not.

I only remembered Helmer's 18th January 2017 article about the Trump Dossier after I wrote my article about Senator Grassley's and Senator Lindsey Graham's memorandum to the Justice Department on 6th February 2018.

This is most unfortunate, not only because Grassley's and Lindsey Graham's memorandum resoundingly vindicates Helmer's reporting, but because it shows that a genuine expert about Russia like Helmer was able to spot immediately the holes in the Trump Dossier, which only now – a whole year and months of exhaustive investigations later – are starting to be officially admitted.

For my part I owe Helmer an apology for not referencing his 18th January 2017 article in my article of 6th February 2018. I should have done so and I am very sorry that I didn't.

I have spent some time discussing the Trump Dossier because despite denials it remains the lynchpin of the whole Russiagate scandal and of the claims of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Heroic efforts to elevate Papadopoulos's case and the meeting between Donald Trump Junior and the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya into 'evidence' of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia which exists supposedly independently of the Trump Dossier fail because as I have discussed extensively elsewhere (see here and here ) they in fact do no such thing.

Despite Edward Luce's desperate efforts to argue otherwise, Mueller's latest indictment far from corroborating the Trump Dossier, has done the opposite.

With the Trump Dossier – the lynchpin of the whole collusion case – not just unverified and discredited but proved repeatedly to have been completely uninformed about events which were actually going on, why do some people persist in pretending that there is still a collusion case to investigate?

[Feb 17, 2018] 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

Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
"... "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. ..."
Feb 15, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

likbez , 15 February 2018 at 11:33 PM

TTG,

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] The Russiagate Intelligence Wars What We Do and Don t Know

Steele dossier became hot potato for anti-Trump color revolution plotters. That's why probably 13 Russians were extracted from the back pocket
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 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.

Clark M Shanahan says: February 16, 2018 at 3:44 pm

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 16, 2018] Christopher Steele The Real Foreign Influence in the 2016 Election by Peter Van Buren

Steel role in propagating information should not be overestimated. The key here was probably Brennan, not Steele.
Scott Ritter: Steele's entire business model is built on the framework of an MI-6 anti-Russian information operation.
Notable quotes:
"... 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 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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.) ..."
"... 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? ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
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."

Have you (or anyone else here) seen the application? I am not aware that is has been declassified.

Lenny , says: February 15, 2018 at 12:26 am
Carter Page Touted Kremlin Contacts in 2013 Letter

http://time.com/5132126/carter-page-russia-2013-letter/

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.

john , says: February 15, 2018 at 12:49 am
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/heard
Peter Van Buren , says: February 15, 2018 at 10:21 am
Commenters 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 am
This 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.

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!

Lenny , says: February 15, 2018 at 11:05 am
The Steel dossier which was not released during the campaign was an information operation but the coordinated leaks by Assange was not?

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?

Will Harrington , says: February 15, 2018 at 11:07 am
ARK 712

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.

Scott Ritter , says: February 15, 2018 at 11:24 am
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.

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.

Johann , says: February 15, 2018 at 1:16 pm
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 pm
The 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".'

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.

Ken Zaretzke , says: February 15, 2018 at 3:35 pm
"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."

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.

Peter Van Buren , says: February 15, 2018 at 3:54 pm
"Leaving aside the validity of what has become known as the "Steele dossier "

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.

OzPerch , says: February 15, 2018 at 9:00 pm
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] Tucker: Claims of the Steele dossier are completely absurd

Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
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] Trump's War on the Deep State by Conrad Black

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... 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 ..."
"... 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. ..."
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] Tucker You have to be a moron to believe Steele dossier

Impressive dissection of Steele dossier
Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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... ..."
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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29vHVcXVN_M


Melotte 22 , February 14, 2018 5:48 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.

Joseph Sobecki , February 14, 2018 1:29 PM

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.

john vieira , February 15, 2018 1:06 AM

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...

Vierotchka , February 14, 2018 1:28 PM

I can only concur.

[Feb 14, 2018] BuzzFeed Suing DNC For Proof They Were Hacked Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... 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). ..."
"... 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 ..."
"... Wouldn't it be funny if BuzzFeed proves the DNC wasn't hacked? ..."
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 14, 2018] The Anti-Trump Coup by Michael S. Rozeff

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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). ..."
"... 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." ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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." ..."
"... 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. ..."
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 14, 2018] Is John Brennan the Mastermind behind Russiagate by Mike Whitney

Notable quotes:
"... Bottom line: Despite the denials of former-CIA Director John Brennan, the dossier may have been used in the ICA. ..."
"... Most disturbing is the fact that Steele reportedly received information from friends of Hillary Clinton. (supposedly, Sidney Blumenthal and others) ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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? ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... Last 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 ..."
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 GMT

Deepstate ain't gonna go quietly.

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.)

Anon Disclaimer , February 13, 2018 at 10:02 pm GMT
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'.

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.

The Alarmist , February 14, 2018 at 12:32 am GMT
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 GMT
Planting 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 GMT
Investigative reporting at its best. Thank you, Mike Whitney. Every member of Congress should read this.
Dan Hayes , February 14, 2018 at 5:39 am GMT
Last 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 .

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.

Toby Keith , February 14, 2018 at 6:07 am GMT
@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.

[Feb 12, 2018] Vault 8 and false-flag allegations: The US Intelligence Community reiterates its conclusion that dog bites man

Informative YouTube video
Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
"... The US Intelligence Community reiterates its conclusion that dog bites man, or rather, that Russia wants to work mischief with the United States ..."
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 12, 2018] A CIA Cyber False Flag by Federico Pieraccini.

Notable quotes:
"... 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 ..."
"... 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 ..."
"... 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 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. ..."
"... This article first appeared on Strategic-Culture.org and was authored by Federico Pieraccini. ..."
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.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/9678427951402854?pubid=ld-4970-8393&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwearechange.org&rid=duckduckgo.com&width=550

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] I am wondering why it is that much of a stretch to believe that the CIA might have engineered the whole thing

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... 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." ..."
"... 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." ..."
"... 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? ..."
"... 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." ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... In fact I am fairly certain that it is the case, although from what I understand the FBI and MI6 were also involved. ..."
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 none 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 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.

Rhondda , January 22, 2018 at 3:57 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.

3.14e-9 , January 22, 2018 at 6:49 pm

Rhondaa writes:

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."

integer , January 23, 2018 at 4:16 am

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!

Scott1 , January 22, 2018 at 4:37 pm

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?

The Rev Kev , January 23, 2018 at 12:29 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.

John Gilberts , January 24, 2018 at 12:25 am

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
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48650.htm

[Feb 11, 2018] 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

Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
"... James Baker ..."
"... The House intelligence committee majority memo specifically notes that Steele had lied to the FBI about his contact with Isikoff. ..."
"... 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. ..."
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] A very strange story of Page surveellance extentions by Scott Ritter

Notable quotes:
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
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 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.... ...

coronaoutgloria2 , February 8, 2018 9:09 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.

Kronosaurus , February 7, 2018 3:14 PM

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.

mulga mumblebrain Kronosaurus , February 8, 2018 12:51 AM

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 7, 2018 5:24 PM

The dems deserve to be burned to the ground........next stop republicans

truthynesslover Kronosaurus , February 8, 2018 1:59 PM

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.

Ironinc no?

How Donald Trump blasted George W. Bush in S.C. -- and won ...

▶ 2:03

https://www.cnn.com/2016/02...

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

▶ 8:50

www.aljazeera.com/.../break... ...

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 ...

https://www.realclearpoliti... ...

Sep 11, 2015In 2007 in an interview with Wolf Blitzer, Donald Trump spoke about the Bush administration and the Iraq War ...

RoloTomassi truthynesslover , February 8, 2018 8:48 AM

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 RoloTomassi , February 8, 2018 2:05 PM

LOL!!

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.

truthynesslover Calvinius , February 7, 2018 7:55 PM

The entire corporate media is coming down with the Russia ruse....

from James Petras:

The Logic behind Mass Spying: Empire and Cyber Imperialism
https://petras.lahaine.org/...

The Deeper Meaning of Mass Spying in America
http://petras.lahaine.org/?...

The Two Faces of a Police State: Sheltering Tax Evaders, Financial Swindlers and Money Launderers while Policing the Citizens
http://petras.lahaine.org/?...

The Rise of the Police State and the Absence of Mass Opposition
http://petras.lahaine.org/?...

The Great Transformation: From the Welfare State to the Imperial Police State
http://petras.lahaine.org/?...

[Feb 11, 2018] British spy who meddled in US elections disappears

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... former British MI-6 intelligence officer Christopher Steele was a no-show on Monday at a London courthouse. ..."
"... "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. ..."
"... "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 ..."
"... 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." ..."
"... 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." ..."
"... 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 ..."
"... 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 ..."
"... Zerohedge ..."
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.

Zerohedge reports

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.

<