GCP12 said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Seems like I read this on another thread, but hadn't the CIA been using Page for counterintelligence operations prior to his work for Trump? If so, then of course he could have potentially had Russian contacts. Seems like in Page they found their very weak alibi to either begin or ratchet up surveillance of the Trump campaign. These scumbags should hang.

---

Consider the following scenario. The CIA plants page in the campaign. FBI plants Halper. Halper approaches page. Fbi uses Halper's info to "confirm" dossier for FISA warrant.

---

Any idea who in the Trump campaign helped him pick this foreign policy advisory team? The article says he was catching flack for not having the team in place like most candidates and that he was urging his staff to get it done. It would be interesting to know who made those recommendations to him.

Ag87H2O said:

---

GCP12 said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Seems like I read this on another thread, but hadn't the CIA been using Page for counterintelligence operations prior to his work for Trump? If so, then of course he could have potentially had Russian contacts. Seems like in Page they found their very weak alibi to either begin or ratchet up surveillance of the Trump campaign. These scumbags should hang.

---

Consider the following scenario. The CIA plants page in the campaign. FBI plants Halper. Halper approaches page. Fbi uses Halper's info to "confirm" dossier for FISA warrant.

---

Any idea who in the Trump campaign helped him pick this foreign policy advisory team? The article says he was catching flack for not having the team in place like most candidates and that he was urging his staff to get it done. It would be interesting to know who made those recommendations to him.

---

Sam Clovis

fasthorses05 said:

---

VegasAg86 said:

---

Swallowswell was on Tucker Carlson spewing more of his idiocy. Doubled and tripled down on the "Trump asked Russia to help get Hillary's emails" as evidence of collusion. Couldn't find it on YouTube yet. Starts about 15 minutes into the show.

---

Vegas, there are folks that take a little time for me to decide what kind of person they are, especially politicians who are often singing the tune of the party, or what they believe their constituents support, but Swallowswell is one that was easy to viscerally dislike---immediately.

---

Absolutely. First time I ever saw him was on Tucker Carlson earlier this year and had the same reaction.

I guess Swallowswell is trying to out-Schiff Schiff himself. Interestingly enough, we've heard nary a peep from Schiff in recent weeks.

Ag87H2O said:

---

Any idea who in the Trump campaign helped him pick this foreign policy advisory team? The article says he was catching flack for not having the team in place like most candidates and that he was urging his staff to get it done. It would be interesting to know who made those recommendations to him.

---

According to news reports, Carter Page first approached NY Republican Chairman Ed Cox for a recommendation ... then Cox obliged. Also, per news reports, Papadopoulos came from the Ben Carson campaign and then via Sam Clovis, the Trump campaign's co-chairman.

GCP12 said:

---

---

I like this Caputo. His first appearances he really was defeated and bitter (justifiably) and he was done with it all. I wonder if some money stepped up to help him, because now he is ready to go to war.

akm91 said:

---

I guess Swallowswell is trying to out-Schiff Schiff himself. Interestingly enough, we've heard nary a peep from Schiff in recent weeks.

---

Seems to be.

I love his "I've seen all the evidence, I think they did everything right" position. This from the guy that thinks Trump's joke about Russia and Hillary's emails is evidence. Thank you sir, but I place 0 value on your opinion.

akm91 said:

---

I guess Swallowswell is trying to out-Schiff Schiff himself. Interestingly enough, we've heard nary a peep from Schiff in recent weeks.

---

obviously you don't watch CNN or NBC, he's on there constantly

Here's his latest from MTP

Guilty! I don't really watch much TV actually.

Schiff is an expert on spewing nonsense.

I see no hope of anything being wrapped up before midterms. They wanted to make sure the water keeps boiling until then for sure. It will be. The dems (and the never trump repubs) have won that part of the war. This is not about justice, it's about power in DC.

That's great.

Wildcat said:

---

Did we ever get the source on the infamous 47% video?

---

Yes. Funny that this guy went to work for the United Steelworkers Political Department after he came forward. Also interesting that Mother Jones broke the story.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/03/scott-prouty-47-percent-video/

Is he a moron? That is the president's authority and right under the constitution.

benchmark said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Any idea who in the Trump campaign helped him pick this foreign policy advisory team? The article says he was catching flack for not having the team in place like most candidates and that he was urging his staff to get it done. It would be interesting to know who made those recommendations to him.

---

According to news reports, Carter Page first approached NY Republican Chairman Ed Cox for a recommendation ... then Cox obliged. Also, per news reports, Papadopoulos came from the Ben Carson campaign and then via Sam Clovis, the Trump campaign's co-chairman.

---

Interesting tidbit on Cox from Wikipedia. May not mean anything but here it is.

In 2007 and 2008, Cox chaired John McCain's presidential campaign efforts within the State of New York.

https://www.themarketswork.com/2018/05/21/john-carlin-the-former-nsd-head-who-enabled-the-fbis-carter-page-fisa-warrant/

Quote:

---

John Carlin The Former NSD Head Who Enabled the FBI's Carter Page FISA Warrant

...By law, the results of the IG's Report should have been immediately reported to the FISA Court by the NSD in January 2016.

The full IG Report along with notification of Rogers' ongoing review should have been included in Carlin's September 26, 2016 proposed Certification.

Carlin, the NSD and ODNI intentionally refused to disclose the FISA Abuses.

There is only one explanation that makes sense to me.

Carlin specifically didn't disclose his knowledge of FISA Abuse in the annual Section 702 Certifications for one reason. Carlin wanted to avoid raising suspicions at the FISA Court ahead of the Carter Page FISA Warrant.

The FBI and DOJ's NSD were quite literally racing against Rogers' Investigation in order to obtain a FISA Warrant on Carter Page.

Meanwhile, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper submitted a recommendation that Director Rogers be removed as NSA Head.

The move to fire Rogers which failed originated sometime in mid-October 2016. Exactly when Director Rogers was preparing to present his findings to the FISA Court....

---

This is an in-depth article on John Carlin, FISA abuse, Roger's investigation and Carter Page's FISA warrant application, including a detailed timeline. Without Carlin's intentional concealment of the ongoing FISA abuse from the FISA Court, it would not have been possible to obtain the FISA warrant on Carter Page. Carlin's effective resignation date was in mid October 2016, immediately prior to the submission of Page's FISA warrant application.

At this point, it's hard to keep track of all the criminals involved in this treasonous enterprise.

Comey
Rosenstein
Brennan
Clapper
Yates
Ohr
Lynch
Powers
Rice
Strzok
Priestap
Baker
Page
Carlin
Mueller (?)

Who is missing from the list?

Rybicki, Kortan and McCabe.

Crap, how did I forget McCabe????

akm91 said:

---

At this point, it's hard to keep track of all the criminals involved in this treasonous enterprise.

Comey
Rosenstein
Brennan
Clapper
Yates
Ohr
Lynch
Powers
Rice
Strzok
Priestap
Baker
Page
Carlin
Mueller (?)

Who is missing from the list?

---

https://www.themarketswork.com/2018/05/01/a-listing-of-participants/

Well, the list of 'participants' is humongous. Differentiating 'participants' from 'criminals' is problematic in many cases. Look over the extensive list of 'participants' above and you will see. For instance, Fusion GPS principals -- Simpson & his wife -- are they criminals? Nellie Ohr? How about Steele of dossier fame? Perkins Coie? DNC? The paid journalists on Fusion GPS's bankroll? How about Fusion GPS 'private contractors' performing illegal 702 Queries? Where are the boundaries of a RICO?

Just a general question given all that's been going on. If you're a worker on a campaign staff, I just consider you an American citizen and not necessarily a politician. Is it ok for a federal agency to secretly infiltrate and investigate you? What if you're running for mayor or city council and somebody comes up to you and starts asking unusual questions or starts feeding you information you didn't ask for? Are you going to have to stop and formally ask if that person works for a federal entity or on behalf of a federal entity? The can of worms that's being opened is enormous.

My guess that when it is all said and done, nothing will happen with the above individuals, maybe called out in a hearing, pensions removed, etc., but there will be no perp walk.

I was more focused on the DoJ/FBI personnel, who are responsible for law enforcement.

Rockdoc said:

---

Just a general question given all that's been going on. If you're a worker on a campaign staff, I just consider you an American citizen and not necessarily a politician. Is it ok for a federal agency to secretly infiltrate and investigate you? What if you're running for mayor or city council and somebody comes up to you and starts asking unusual questions or starts feeding you information you didn't ask for? Are you going to have to stop and formally ask if that person works for a federal entity or on behalf of a federal entity? The can of worms that's being opened is enormous.

---

Are you asking in general or for sone special exemption for political campaigns? Because it seems like the Feds can already do that to just about anyone.

https://spectator.org/john-brennans-plot-to-infiltrate-the-trump-campaign/

Quote:

---

John Brennan's Plot to Infiltrate the Trump Campaign

As Trump won primary after primary in 2016, a rattled John Brennan started claiming to colleagues at the CIA that Estonia's intelligence agency had alerted him to an intercepted phone call suggesting Putin was pouring money into the Trump campaign. The tip was bogus, but Brennan bit on it with opportunistic relish.

Out of Brennan's alarmist chatter about the bogus tip came an extraordinary leak to the BBC: that Brennan had used it, along with later half-baked tips from British intelligence, as the justification to form a multi-agency spy operation (given the Orwellian designation of an "inter-agency taskforce") on the Trump campaign, which he was running right out of CIA headquarters.

The CIA was furious about the leak, but never denied the BBC's story. To Congress earlier this year, Brennan acknowledged the existence of the group, but cast his role in it as the mere conduit of tips about Trump-Russia collusion: "It was well beyond my mandate as director of CIA to follow on any of those leads that involved U.S. persons. But I made sure that anything that was involving U.S. persons, including anything involving the individuals involved in the Trump campaign, was shared with the bureau."

But if his role had truly been passive, the "inter-agency taskforce" wouldn't have been meeting at CIA headquarters. By keeping its discussions at Langley, Brennan could keep his finger wedged in the pie. Both before and after the FBI's official probe began in late July 2016, Brennan was bringing together into the same room at CIA headquarters a cast of Trump haters across the Obama administration whose activities he could direct from Peter Strzok, the FBI liaison to Brennan, to the doltish Jim Clapper, Brennan's errand boy, to an assortment of Brennan's buddies at the Treasury Department, Justice Department, and White House.

---

Hmm. A couple of things that we have long speculated about here are coming back up in various sources.

1) Did Mueller give some kind of immunity to James Comey?

Quote:

---

As Special Counsel, by law Mueller is permitted to strike immunity agreements without having to get approval for [sic] the Attorney General of ]sic]anyone at Justice. Also he is not obligated as Special Counsel to inform Justice about who is under immunity.

But Justice Department sources said is Comey led a clandestine operation to spy on trump and leak intelligence to Hillary Clinton no immunity agreement would cover him from prosecution, especially one drafted by a career friend.

It's no secret Comey and Mueller are close friends, having worked together at Justice for years alongside Eric Holder. Comey has described Mueller, who also served as FBI director, as his one-time mentor. If someone in Congress cared enough to do something about it, there are no shortages of conflicts of interests at play here in what is supposed to be an impartial investigation. In fact, it's somewhat staggering.

---

Quote:

---

A refresher. First, Comey himself leaked at least one memo that actually sparked the Justice Department to appoint a Special Counsel. Then, from a pool of countless candidates to serve as Special Counsel, Mueller a close friend and long-time mentor of Comey just happened to get picked.Then, an immunity deal is agreed on which allowed Comey to speak carefree at his Senate hearing in June 2017, in his book and beyond.


Until now.


Comey's deal likely insulates him against prosecution for his role in:

• Leaking other government documents to third parties including the media
• Inconsistencies in testimony that rise to the level of perjury
• Any other crimes Comey may have committed during his tenure as FBI director, including his role in quashing the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
• His role in unmasking Trump, Trump insiders and other Americans from FISA warrant intelligence
• Any violations of FBI employment ethics that would nullify pension benefits.

---

LINK

Not sure I agree with all of that. Still think Mueller would need a judge to sign off on the immunity deal for it to be effective. Nor do I believe Mueller can grant immunity for Comey's violation of his employment contract that would nullify his pension benefits. That's an administrative proceeding not a criminal one.

In fact, I do not think Mueller has the power to grant immunity to Comey for any and all acts/crimes he committed during his entire tenure as FBI Director, particularly obstruction of justice in the Hillary email case. No judge would sign that. Too open ended and broad. Such breadth would take a Presidential Pardon and even that might be challenged in court.

But assuming for a moment there is some sort of immunity deal between Mueller and Comey, even if they both know it would likely partially fail, would the remaining applicable immunity create an Oliver North problem as to admissibility? The question would be raised but would be a losing proposition, in my view. Simply put, the evidence against Comey is not being gathered by Mueller, it is being gathered by the IG, Huber, the House and the Senate. Parallel construction.

IOW, Comey is FUBARed immunity or no immunity.

2) Did the Obama Administration apply for and obtain a Title I FISA warrant on Michel Flynn?

Quote:

---

Recently released documentsthe final House Intelligence Report and the trove of memos authored by former FBI Director James Comeycontain clues to support that suspicion. In his memo dated February 8, 2017, Comey relays this exchange at the White House with then Chief of Staff Reince Priebus:

He then said he wanted to ask me a question and I could decide whether it was appropriate to answer. He then asked, "Do you have a FISA order on Mike Flynn?" I paused for a few seconds and then said that I would answer here, but that this illustrated the kind of question that had to be asked and answered through established channels. I said the answer [redacted]. I then explained that the normal channel was from DOJ leadership to the WH counsel about such things.

The next sentence is redacted. Comey continues: "I explained that it was important that communications about any particular case go through that channel to protect us and to protect the WH from any accusations of improper influence."

---

Quote:

---

But speculation about whether Obama's Justice Department monitored Flynn is not new. During a March 2017 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) challenged former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates (who served briefly as acting attorney general before Jeff Sessions was confirmed) about the Flynn-Kislyak conversations.

"There's two situations where we would have found out what General Flynn said to the Russian ambassador," Graham began. "If there was a FISA warrant focused on him . . . was there?"

Yates turned momentarily toward former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who was also testifying, and then told Graham: "I think you know I'm not gonna answer whether there was a FISA warrant, nor am I gonna talk about whether General Flynn was talking to the Russians." Unfortunately, neither Graham nor his colleagues pushed Yates on why that answer would be classified.

---

Quote:

---

"The Department has withheld the Flynn-related documents since our initial bipartisan request last year, citing an ongoing criminal investigation," Grassley wrote. "With Flynn's plea, the investigation appears concluded." Grassley in the letter refers to the "reportedly intercepted calls," which could suggest he's not buying into the commonly held view that Flynn's call was picked up during routine surveillance of the Russian diplomat. (By the way, has any federal official confirmed that a FISA warrant existed on Kislyak during that time?) After 15 months of stonewalling, the Justice Department has until May 25 to cough up the transcripts.
This all seems to be leading up to the eventual revelation that Flynn was indeed spied on: the Democrats' handmaids in the media are already trying to soften the blow.

In its May 16 article exposing the FBI's "Crossfire Hurricane" operation into the Trump campaign, the New York Times reported that Flynn was among four associates eyed by the Obama Justice Department.

"The F.B.I. investigated four unidentified Trump campaign aides in those early months, congressional investigators revealed in February. The four men were Michael T. Flynn, Paul Manafort, Carter Page and [George] Papadopoulos, current and former officials said. Each was scrutinized because of his obvious or suspected Russian ties." Flynn was a subject, according to the Times, because he "was paid $45,000 by the Russian government's media arm for a 2015 speech and dined at the arm of the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin."

There is another reason the Obama Administration might have targeted Flynn: The former president despised him. In fact, during their first meeting in the White House after the 2016 election, Obama warnedTrump not to hire the former three-star general. Flynn was forced out as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2014 after reportedly clashing with none other than . . . James Clapper.

Flynn would go on to deliver a fiery speech at the 2016 Republican National Convention, where he blasted both Obama and Hillary Clinton. "We do not need a weak, spineless president who is more concerned about issuing apologies than in protecting Americans," he roared. "We do not need a reckless president who believes she is above the law." Flynn then led the crowd with the "lock her up" chant.

Operation Crossfire Hurricane began a few weeks later.

What's even more puzzling than the unanswered questions about if and how Flynn was spied on are the continued delays in Special Counsel Robert Mueller's case against him.

Shortly after Flynn pled guilty in December 2017, the judge who agreed to the plea was recused. Later reports emerged that the judge, Rudolph Contreras, had been appointed to the FISA court in May 2016; texts between FBI officials Peter Strzok (who interviewed Flynn in January 2017) and Lisa Page revealedthe pair was friendly with Contreras and schemed about how to connect with him just as the counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign was getting underway in the summer of 2016.

Some have speculated that the chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia removed Contreras from the case because he signed one of the FISA warrants against Carter Page. But is it possible he also approved a warrant against Flynn and concealed that from the court?

The new judge on the case has twice instructed Team Mueller to disclose any exculpatory evidence that might have been withheld from Flynn's lawyers during the investigation and the plea negotiations. On May 1, Mueller asked for another delay in Flynn's sentencing.

The reality of how Obama's intelligence and law enforcement powers were used to infiltrate the Trump campaign, after nearly two years of denials, is now coming into sharp focus. Next thing you know, we will be told that spying on Flynn was a good thing for all of us.

---

LINK

The efforts to leak such information to get ahead of the IG report was a bad move. They have already admitted to the acts by now. Just arguing over whether their "intent" was pure or impure.

Quote:

---

Now take the above article from April which implied CNN was 'colluding' with Comey/FBI about briefing Trump on the dossier & then publishing details about the dossier, based upon Comey's Memos...and combine it with the letter (see previous Page 394) from Senator Johnson concerning the just-revealed emails involving McCabe/Comey/Rybiki/etc, the 'sensitive matter team', and I think there is ample evidence to include CNN as a co-conspirator in the scheme.

---

One can only hope.

RE: CNN

This actually explains them going WAY off the deep end since the election. It was bad before, but now they are simply deranged in their "reporting". I think they are setting up some sort of insanity case for themselves - it's just the business model.