Understanding the Institutional Protection Racket Via Congress To Pay Bribes In Plain Sight
Many people are now becoming aware of the severity of self-serving corruption in/around the institutions that frame our government. Considering that Sundance has a target on his back; and considering that it is only a matter of time before that targeting gets ugly; let me remind everyone of just how severe the issues are confronting our nation.
Having met with many of the top-level key DC players (including Durham inc) in the “Spygate” investigation/review or (__fill in_ the blank_with whatever name you need), here’s the ugly truth. The staff of the legislative bodies have/had no intent to actually facilitate any sunlight upon the FISA, DOJ-FBI corruption that took place over three years.
How do I know that?
Well, first having sat in a room with the legislative staff, top people who actually write the briefs and inform both congressional representatives on House Committees and Senate Committees, including the chiefs-of-staff for the chairs, it was clear they did not even know the information from within their own research when spread over time. Accepting this reality leads one to a natural conclusion… they don’t know, because they choose not to know… & they choose not to know, because everything is a pantomime for public display.
The system of DC is based on a series of unwritten rules… “You don’t out me, and I will not out you… and that will protect us both.” These rules cross over both parties to the extent they usually have a common enemy, us. The staff of Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, Homeland Security Chair Ron Johnson and even the staff of House Oversight Ranking Member Jim Jordan are purposefully and willfully blind.
They choose not to know things; or at least they claim not to know and do an exceptional job of purposeful pretend.
The investigative information that makes up the news cycles amid the investigative right-side of the spectrum is generally compartmented or silo’d. Within DC all branches and people within them keep information isolated from each-other in order to create and retain plausible deniability. This permits their leadership to talk a good game on television while nothing is actually accomplished.
It is all part of the game.
They shuffle the shells but there is no pea.
When CTH pointed out this institutional process of nothingness the ‘trusty planners’ did not like the discomfort associated with the reality… I get it… no-one wants to be that cynical, and, quite frankly, at a point in mid/late-2018 the ‘trusty plan’ had evolved into a business model. However, what we are seeing today with the Boasberg sentence of Kevin Clinesmith is directly an outcome of this previously mentioned DC institutional preservation process.
Notice how no-one in the executive branch DOJ, FBI, ODNI, ever criticized Robert Mueller, yet we know to a demonstrable certainty the Mueller special counsel was likely more corrupt than the originating DOJ/FBI corruption the special counsel was protecting. The origin of ‘Spygate’ was bad, but the totality of the cover-up effort in the Mueller-Weissmann special counsel was exponentially worse. More actual laws and policies within the justice department were broken by Robert Mueller than any preceding corrupt official.
Let me wrap up several points above with one factual example. The example will highlight: (1) the legislative branch being purposely blind to evidence; (2) the corruption of the special counsel – pay attention to dates; (3) the corruption of the FISA court – contrast against Judge Boasberg today; and (4) the corruption of the executive branch though DOJ, FBI during the entirety of the Trump administration.
♦ Amid a series of documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020 [SEE HERE] there was a rather alarming letter from the DOJ to the FISA Court in July 2018 that pointed out the DC agenda, the “institutional cover-up.” [Link to Letter]
Before getting to the substance of the letter, it’s important to put the release in context. After the FISA Court reviewed the DOJ inspector general report (Dec 2019), the FISC ordered the DOJ-NSD to declassify and release documents related to the Carter Page FISA application.
In the cover letter for this specific release to the Senate Judiciary and Senate Intelligence committees, the DOJ cited the January 7, 2020, FISA court order:
Keep in mind that prior to this release only the FISA court had seen this letter from the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD). As we walk through the alarming content of this letter I think you’ll identify the motive behind the FISC order to release it.
First, the letter in question was sent by the DOJ-NSD to the FISA Court on July 12, 2018. It is critical to keep the date of the letter in mind as we review the content.
Aside from the date the important part of the first page is the motive for sending it. The DOJ is telling the FISA court in July 2018: based on what they know the FISA application still contains “sufficient predication for the Court to have found probable cause” to approve the application.
In essence, in July 2018 the DOJ (now with Mueller in place) is defending the Carter Page FISA application as still valid.
However, it is within the justification of the application that alarm bells are found. On page six the letter identifies the primary participants behind the FISA redactions:
Now things get very interesting.
On page #8 when discussing Christopher Steele’s sub-source, the DOJ notes the FBI found him to be truthful and cooperative.
This is an incredibly misleading statement to the FISA court because what the letter doesn’t say is that 18-months earlier the sub-source, also known in the IG report as the “primary sub-source”, informed the FBI that the material attributed to him in the dossier was essentially junk.
Let’s look at how the IG report frames the primary sub-source, and specifically notice the FBI contact and questioning took place in January 2017 (we now know that date to be January 12, 2017):
Those interviews with Steele’s primary sub-source took place in January, March and May of 2017; and clearly the sub-source debunked the content of the dossier itself.
Those interviews were 18-months, 16-months and 14-months ahead of the July 2018 DOJ letter to the FISC. The DOJ-NSD says the sub-source was “truthful and cooperative” but the DOJ doesn’t tell the court the content of the truthfulness and cooperation. Why?
Keep in mind this letter to the court was written by AAG John Demers in July 2018. Jeff Sessions was Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein was Deputy AG; Christopher Wray was FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy, and Dana Boente is FBI chief-legal-counsel.
Why would the DOJ-NSD not be forthcoming with the FISA court about the primary sub-source? This level of disingenuous withholding of information speaks to an institutional motive.
By July 2018 the DOJ clearly knew the dossier was full of fabrications, yet they withheld that information from the court and said the predicate was still valid. Why?
It doesn’t take a deep-weeds-walker to identify the DOJ motive.
In July 2018 Robert Mueller’s investigation was at its apex.
This letter justifying the application and claiming the current information would still be a valid predicate therein, speaks to the 2018 DOJ needing to retain the validity of the FISA warrant…. My research suspicion is that the DOJ needed to protect evidence Mueller had already extracted from the fraudulent FISA authority. That’s the motive.
In July 2018 if the DOJ-NSD had admitted the FISA application and all renewals were fatally flawed Robert Mueller would have needed to withdraw any evidence gathered as a result of its exploitation. The DOJ in 2018 was protecting Mueller’s poisoned fruit.
If the DOJ had been honest with the court, there’s a strong possibility some, perhaps much, of Mueller evidence gathering would have been invalidated… and cases were pending. The solution: mislead the court and claim the predication was still valid.
This is not simply a hunch, because that motive also speaks to why the FISC would order the current DOJ to release the letter.
Remember, in December 2019 the FISC received the IG Horowitz report; and they would have immediately noted the disparity between what IG Horowitz outlined about the FBI investigating Steele’s sub-source, as contrast against what the DOJ told them in July 2018.
The DOJ letter is a transparent misrepresentation when compared to the information in the Horowitz report. Hence, the FISC orders the DOJ to release the July ’18 letter so that everyone, including congressional oversight and the public can see the misrepresentation.
The court was misled; now everyone can see it. However, no-one in the legislative or executive branch touched it because the court was misled by Robert Mueller.
The court was misled by the special counsel. Reflect on this for a moment.
The content of that DOJ-NSD letter, and the subsequent disparity, points to an institutional cover-up; and as a consequence the FISC also ordered the DOJ to begin an immediate sequestration effort to find all the evidence from the fraudulent FISA application; the proverbial fruit from the poisonous tree. In hindsight the FISC was covering their own ass.
Two more big misstatements within the July 2018 letter appear on page #9. The first is the DOJ claiming that only after the application was filed did they become aware of Christopher Steele working for Fusion-GPS and knowing his intent was to create opposition research for the Hillary Clinton campaign. See the top of the page.
According to the DOJ-NSD claim the number four ranking official in the DOJ, Bruce Ohr, never told them he was acting as a conduit for Christopher Steele to the FBI. While that claim is hard to believe, in essence what the DOJ-NSD is saying in that paragraph is that the FBI hoodwinked the DOJ-NSD by not telling them where the information for the FISA application was coming from. The DOJ, via John Demers, is blaming the FBI.
The second statement, equally as incredulous, is at the bottom of page nine where the DOJ claims they had no idea Bruce Ohr was talking to the FBI throughout the entire time any of the FISA applications were being submitted. October 2016 through June 2017.
In essence the claim there is that Bruce Ohr was working with the FBI and never told anyone in the DOJ throughout 2016 and all the way past June 29th of 2017. That denial seems rather unlikely; however, once again the DOJ-NSD (Weissmann) is putting the FBI in the crosshairs and claiming they, the special counsel, knew nothing about the information pipeline.
Bruce Ohr, whose wife was working for Fusion-GPS and assisting Christopher Steele with information, was interviewed by the FBI over a dozen times as he communicated with Steele and fed his information to the FBI. Yet the DOJ claims they knew nothing about it.
Again, just keep in mind this claim by the DOJ-NSD is being made in July 2018, six months after Bruce Ohr was demoted twice (December 2017 and January 2018). If what the DOJ is saying was true (it wasn’t), well, the FBI was completely off-the-rails and rogue.
CTH did not buy the DOJ-NSD spin.
The reason is simple, the DOJ was claiming in the July 2018 letter the predication was still valid… if the DOJ-NSD (Mueller team) genuinely didn’t know about the FBI manipulation, they would be informing the court in 2018 the DOJ no longer supported the FISA application due to new information. They did not do that. Instead, in July 2018, they specifically told the court the predicate was valid, yet the DOJ-NSD knew it was not.
The last point about the July 2018 letter is perhaps the most jarring. Again, keep in mind when it was written Chris Wray is FBI Director, David Bowditch is Deputy and Dana Boente is FBI chief legal counsel.
Their own FBI reports, by three different INSD and IG investigations; had turned up seriously alarming evidence going back to the early 2017 time-frame; the results of which ultimately led to the DC FBI office losing all of their top officials; and knowing the letter itself was full of misleading and false information about FBI knowledge in/around Christopher Steele; this particular sentence is alarming:
“The FBI has reviewed this letter and confirmed its factual accuracy?”
As we have just shared, the July 2018 letter itself is filled with factual inaccuracies, misstatements and intentional omissions. So who exactly did the “reviewing”?
This declassification release raised more questions than any other; and yet no-one, not a single investigative body, asked questions about it…
Because the letter itself was prima-facie evidence of lies directly from the special counsel of Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann. No-one in the executive branch, legislative branch or even judicial branch wanted to highlight the corruption of the special counsel.
Here’s the Full Letter. I strongly suggest everyone read the 14-pages slowly. If you know the background, this letter is infuriating… AND keep in mind, every single staff member in the House and Senate (those investigating the issue) said they never saw it.
That’s how badly broken the system of justice, and the system of checks-and-balances in Washington DC, really is. What we are seeing now in the blatant targeting, silencing, and outright in-your-face behavior is a downstream result of the system knowing everyone is too far gone…. they have nothing to fear now.
Jake Sullivan was one of the most prolific users of Hillary Clinton's forbidden email server. Now he's Joe Biden's national security adviser.
Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland previously had ties to Christopher Steele in the Russia scandal.
White House domestic adviser Susan Rice once falsely declared the Benghazi terror attack was provoked by an anti-Muslim video and later wrote the famously curious did-it-by-the-books email in the Russia scandal during her last minutes in he Obama administration.
And top Securities and Exchange Commission enforcement official Melissa Hodgman is married to Peter Strzok, the fired FBI agent who supervised the discredited Crossfire Hurricane probe into Russia-Trump collusion.
As Biden fills out his team, the list of people tied to past scandals and controversy keeps getting bigger And the pattern has some prominent Republicans taking note.
"If you look at the larger picture, the Russia hoaxers, the people that were pushing this out from the very beginning and lying about it after the fact, they're all at the top echelons of the Biden administration," former House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) said Sunday.
During an appearance on Fox News' Sunday show hosted by Maria Bartiromo, Nunes took issue with Hodgman's appointment as acting chief of the SEC enforcement division, saying while she "could be a great public servant," it created the appearance of a Democratic payback to her husband for pursuing Trump.
"Looks like Peter Strozk is actually going to get reimbursed for all of his troubles," Nunes said. "The guy lost his job, but nothing's happened to him at this point."
Hodgman has worked her way up the career SEC enforcement staff over the last 12 years and praised her staff after her appointment was announced.
"I am constantly inspired by the dedication of my colleagues in the Division and across the Commission, especially with the challenges of the last year," she said. "I look forward to continuing my work with them in the role of Acting Director and supporting the Commission's mission."