oysterbayAG said:

---

In view of the Barr & Durham traveling and all this stuff being uncovered, it seems plausible that :
(1) Giuliani has friendly contacts in the FBI feeding information
(2) There is a Deep Throat in the CIA
(3) Several losers in the FBI, DOJ & CIA Etc that have their fingerprints on Spygate are singing like Sarah
Brightman

---

Is all this stuff coming up about Giulliani because he has them by the... you know what in regards to Biden and others and they are trying to discredit or get to him before he can unleash what he has?

aggiehawg said:

---

drcrinum said:

---

That Mifsud possessed US government phones is probably the biggest bombshell to drop in a long time. Think about it for a minute. This fact completely destroys the entire Russian collusion narrative...Mifsud couldn't have been a Russian agent & somewhere in the FBI/CIA, there were people who knew this & hid it. Flynn & Papadopoulos were spied upon & set up. Mueller's toast as well. Kaboom!

---

"US personnel who lose their phones lie and say they were stolen and then the phones are rendered useless." /next talking point.

But doc? You and I are the ones who have been here day after day for much of this as it unfolded.

Somethings we got wrong, very wrong. But we have operated on a need to know basis which neither of us possess much less security clearances and connected dots and keep working our way through the insanity of it all.

So, if I haven't said it before, my friend,

---

It is pretty amazing what is in the public sphere in regards to information. And if you look in the right places and put enough puzzle pieces together it is mostly all there.

Only problem though is that only the people digging and wading through the muck really know what is going on and it leave the general populace still in the dark. But with the advent of social media, it allows the message to get out easier. But it also works both ways. A LOT of disinformation is out there all the time diluting the factual information.

Whats interesting to me is, how did Sidney Powell learn about the phones? And to have VERY specific information about said phones(IMEI, etc).

And the prosecution trying to pull a Weissman. "We will review and let you know if there is any exculpatory information". What he tried with Enron.

will25u said:

---

Whats interesting to me is, how did Sidney Powell learn about the phones? And to have VERY specific information about said phones(IMEI, etc).

---

Powell said that government only recently acquired them. How? Had to be Barr & Durham traveling to Italy to inquire about Mifsud. These were Mifsud's phones, so somehow he was able to give them to B & D...or it's possible the phones could have been in possession of the US Embassy in Rome where Michael Gaeta, FBI agent & assistant legal attache', had been stationed, & who was likely Mifsud's handler.

If Barr & Durham acquired these phones, then they would have immediately recognized their significance regarding the Russian Collusion narrative (Crossfire Hurricane) & especially how this had impacted both Papadopoulos & Flynn. Wouldn't it be the ethical thing to do to notify Flynn's defense team as well as the prosecution that a significant Brady discovery had just been made? Mueller's residual prosecution team won't want this to be known...but I've a sneaky feeling that Barr just might read them the riot act very soon. Sullivan may do the latter as well.

drcrinum said:

---

Sidney Powell responds.

---

Why did a Russian Agent (Per the Mueller Report) have US government provided phones?

http://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/rubriche/speciale-italygate-10-il-dipartimento-di-giustizia-usa-ha-due-telefoni-di-mifsud-e-la-difesa-del-generale-flynn-chiede-di-averli/

Google translation:

Quote:

---

.....The two phones used by Mifsud could contain evidence that exonerates Flynn, according to his lawyer, demonstrating that it was framed, or in any case "material relevant to the defense, with particular regard to the OCONUS lures (Outside Contiguous US lures, ed) and to the agents that Western intelligence used against him probably as early as 2014 to organize - unbeknownst to him - 'connections' with some Russians they would later use against him in their false accusations. Telephones that were used by Mr. Joseph Mifsud, "lawyer Powell writes in the petition presented Tuesday.

"If we determine that they contain information that is detectable or that is relevant to the conviction, we will provide it to you," the Justice Department responded.

The existence of 302 of talks with Mifsud and two of his telephones in the hands of the Department of Justice are important for the defense of Flynn because they show that the information of the Maltese professor ended up at the FBI, at the DOJ, while they claimed he was an agent Russian. Former FBI director James Comey called Mifsud a "Russian agent", while in his report the special prosecutor Mueller limited himself to presenting him as a person with Russian ties and contacts. If during the whole Russiagate investigation these elements were not shown, then, it was because we wanted to avoid that it turned out that it was, instead, a "provocative agent" and that these "agents" had been employed against Flynn already in 2014.

And now the questions that these latest developments raise in relation to our country's involvement. More than with Flynn, Mifsud's encounters and conversations with Papadopoulos are known, to whom he confided that the Russians were in possession of "dirt" material on Clinton, in the form of thousands of his emails. Since when does the US Department of Justice have two phones used by Mifsud? And how did you get them, from Mifsud itself already in 2016/2017? Or more recently through your lawyer or Italian authorities? Because if the DOJ is in possession of these phones, it cannot be excluded that they contain data or even recordings of those meetings, the first of which took place in Rome and the others in London. This would indicate an investigative and intelligence activity that should have been carried out with the collaboration of the Italian authorities (Rome Public Prosecutor's Office and services) and English, or at least to their knowledge, unless expressly authorized. Otherwise, these would be very serious crimes committed in our territory......

---

There's better coverage of SpyGate in Italy than in the US MSM. Look at the analysis regarding the discovery of Mifsud's phones above.

Note: Overseas FBI activities are coordinated via the FBI legal attache' in that country. With respect to Italy, this would have been FBI Agent Michael Gaeta who was stationed at the US Embassy in Rome (link to the State Department). Now Mifsud also operated out of London, so who was his source/handler there? We know that Gaeta traveled to London to meet with Steele, so was Gaeta covering the UK as well? I keep bringing up the State Department -- they were deep in this plot too.

It seems like they could find a money trail to Mifsud. Certainly he wasn't working for free.

SIAP: FBI Lovebirds!
Haven't had a chance to watch this yet, but the first few mins seem very promising.

That is more hilarious than most SNL skits.

VaultingChemist said:

---

That is more hilarious than most SNL skits.

---

Pretty low bar you've set there.

akm91 said:

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

That is more hilarious than most SNL skits.

---

Pretty low bar you've set there.

---

Yep.

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/play-fbi-officials-anti-trump-texts-video-internet

Quote:

---

The play's entire script was taken verbatim from the messages as well as Strzok and Page's answers to prolonged questioning in private congressional hearings.

---

I watched the whole thing...well done.
I wonder if a single Democrat will watch it though.

I could be wrong on this, but IMO, the State Department has more bent and corrupt folks than any other agency, although it appears the DOJ is vying for for the best corrupt agency in DC.

Since HRC was SOS, there were multiple, at least 15 to 20, reports, actions, investigations, and quality lying. There is either a small group of folks (about 10 to 15) at State who's job was to cover and support Clinton's actions at all costs, or, the entire agency knew it, and went along out of fear, or loyalty to the Dems!

fasthorses05 said:

---

I could be wrong on this, but IMO, the State Department has more bent and corrupt folks than any other agency, although it appears the DOJ is vying for for the best corrupt agency in DC.

Since HRC was SOS, there were multiple, at least 15 to 20, reports, actions, investigations, and quality lying. There is either a small group of folks (about 10 to 15) at State who's job was to cover and support Clinton's actions at all costs, or, the entire agency knew it, and went along out of fear, or loyalty to the Dems!

---

Not loyalty to the Dems, rather loyalty to the handlers that are paying them to do these things. Money talks and the Dems handlers must be paying big bucks to people high up in the DOJ, State Dept, Alphabet Agencies and other agencies to get the results they want and when they want them. So obvious, any normal person would have been prosecuted for covering up all this stuff and for sweeping this activity under the rug.

fullback44 said:

---

fasthorses05 said:

---

I could be wrong on this, but IMO, the State Department has more bent and corrupt folks than any other agency, although it appears the DOJ is vying for for the best corrupt agency in DC.

Since HRC was SOS, there were multiple, at least 15 to 20, reports, actions, investigations, and quality lying. There is either a small group of folks (about 10 to 15) at State who's job was to cover and support Clinton's actions at all costs, or, the entire agency knew it, and went along out of fear, or loyalty to the Dems!

---

Not loyalty to the Dems, rather loyalty to the handlers that are paying them to do these things. Money talks and the Dems handlers must be paying big bucks to people high up in the DOJ, State Dept, Alphabet Agencies and other agencies to get the results they want and when they want them. So obvious, any normal person would have been prosecuted for covering up all this stuff and for sweeping this activity under the rug.

---

Take the Iranian deal for example. That was in cash. How many State Department officials, Clinton Foundation, George Soros foundations and others got a cut of that?

And never forget that Sid Blumenthal was emailing Hillary about where all Qaddafi had hidden his gold and cash and how to get it. Think that money was repatriated to the people of Libya? Or did much of it wind up in Hillary's and Sid's off-shore accounts?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/schiff-pressed-volker-to-say-ukraine-felt-pressure-from-trump

Quote:

---

In a secret interview, Rep. Adam Schiff, leader of the House Democratic effort to impeach President Trump, pressed former United States special representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker to testify that Ukrainian officials felt pressured to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden's son Hunter as a result of Trump withholding U.S. military aid to Ukraine.

Volker denied that was the case, noting that Ukrainian leaders did not even know the aid was being withheld and that they believed their relationship with the U.S. was moving along satisfactorily, without them having done anything Trump mentioned in his notorious July 25 phone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

When Volker repeatedly declined to agree to Schiff's characterization of events, Schiff said, "Ambassador, you're making this much more complicated than it has to be."

The interview took place Oct. 3 in a secure room in the U.S. Capitol.....

---

The article goes on to give a rather detailed account of how Schiff kept badgering Volker and repeatedly tried to put words into Volker's mouth, but Volker steadfastly held his ground....no quid pro quo.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6479986-Disclosure.html


The flamboyant Eric Dubelier & Concord Management filed a new motion. Yes, he used the phrase "Whac-a-Mole" in his argument. Eric is claiming that the Government has strayed far from the path, & any correlation between the original grand jury indictment & what the Government is now claiming might be a coincidence.

More phones?

Just for review, Mifsud may be a primary UK intel agent rather than an Italian one:

https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/04/all-russiagate-roads-lead-to-london-as-evidence-emerges-of-joseph-mifsuds-links-to-uk-intelligence/

(Note: The above article contains a photo of Mifsud standing next to an important British intel figure that Devin Nunes recently was inquiring about on Twitter.)

Edit: I have assumed the phones requested by Powell were US government issued phones to Mifsud. It may well be that they were UK government issued phones since they have SIM cards. I sent an inquiry to Occhionero to clarify this point.

This ought to be good. Sondland was the one who tweeted to Taylor that there was no quid pro quo regarding Ukraine.

Quote:

---

The flamboyant Eric Dubelier & Concord Management filed a new motion. Yes, he used the phrase "Whac-a-Mole" in his argument. Eric is claiming that the Government has strayed far from the path, & any correlation between the original grand jury indictment & what the Government is now claiming might be a coincidence.

---

What a cluster. I guess Barr is letting the prosecutors here bury themselves and possibly get sanctioned by the judge before their termination.

The funny thing here is Concord Management is probably not squeaky clean, it is owned by a Putin bestie oligarch, after all but in their zeal to point the finger at some Russian and Russian entities, any Russians, Team Mueller manufactured a case that they never expected to try.

The moment Dubelier showed up in court on Concord's behalf and Team Mueller wouldn't accept their general appearance, which no prosecutor would ever do, I wondered when the case would fall apart.

I do like the whac-a-mole comment though.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6486433/10-17-19-Sondland-Opening-Statement.pdf

You can read Sondland's written remarks preceding his testimony above. No quid pro quo. Pertinent section:

Quote:

---

.....On September 9, 2019, Acting Charge de Affairs/Ambassador William Taylor raised concerns about the possibility that Ukrainians could perceive a linkage between U.S. security assistance and the President's 2020 reelection campaign.

Taking the issue seriously, and given the many versions of speculation that had been circulating about the security aid, I called President Trump directly. I asked the President: "What do you want from Ukraine?" The President responded, "Nothing. There is no quid pro quo." The President repeated: "no quid pro quo" multiple times. This was a very short call. And I recall the President was in a bad mood......

---

Quote:

---

I worked with Ambassador Yovanovitch personally during my first official visit to Ukraine in February 2019, and I found her to be an excellent diplomat with a deep command of Ukrainian internal dynamics, the U.S.-Ukraine relationship, and associated regional issues. She was a delight to work with during our visit to Odessa, Ukraine. I was never a part of any campaign to disparage or dislodge her, and I regretted her departure. Similarly, in my time working with Ambassador Taylor, I have found him to be an insightful, strategic, and effective representative of U.S. interests. He cares deeply about the future of Ukraine and is a dedicated public servant. The Ukraine Mission worked hand in hand with Special Envoy Kurt Volker, another experienced diplomat with a special remit to address the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea.

---

Sounds like diplo speech to me. Has always been a problem at the State Department wherein long term assignments results in diplomats seeing their roles as representing their host countries to the US instead of representing the interests of the US in the host countries.

Yovanonvitch and Taylor sound like that type of diplomats. Priorities get reversed.

They do shady stuff, but they didn't do the particular shady stuff they were accused of.

Good article by Margot Cleveland.

Quote:

---

On Tuesday, attorney Sidney Powell struck again, revealing yet another huge development in the Spygate saga between the lines of her latest motion. That motion, filed in the still-pending criminal case against Trump's former national security advisor, Michael Flynn, demanded exculpatory evidence from federal prosecutors.

But unlike her previously filed motion to compel, here Powell seeks evidence "that has only recently come into its possession." And the evidence sought? The data and metadata from two Blackberry devices used by Joseph Mifsud.

While Powell's latest motion barely equaled two pages, the implications are multi-pronged and monumental.

---

https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2019/f191017.pdf

It's beginning to sound like the FBI must operate a private discreet dating website for it's employees.
(This couldn't be Strzok & Page since she wasn't his subordinate.)

Quote:

---

Federal prosecutors have not said no to providing Mifsud's smartphone data, at least not yet. Instead, in response to Powell's request for the data, the government told her that "if we determine that they contain information that is discoverable or that is relevant to sentencing, we will produce them to you."

This response proves intriguing and triply so. First, the prosecutors speak of deciding, which suggests that they have not yet reviewed the smartphones. That raises an interesting possibilitythat Barr and Durham are controlling the investigation of the investigators and they had yet to see the smartphones or data.

Yet Powell knew about the phones, suggesting she has a well-placed source sympathetic to Flynn's plight, or outraged by the political and prosecutorial abuse on display in this case, or both.

Finally, the government's response indicates that federal prosecutors may be ignoring presiding Judge Emmet Sullivan's standing order. In that standing order, Sullivan ordered the government to produce to "any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant's guilt or punishment."

But in its response to Powell, the government speaks of only providing evidence "relevant to sentencing," and seemingly ignores the court's directive, which was to provide any evidence favorable to Flynn and material to either his guilt or his punishment (sentence).

---

I know Judge Sullivan has a full docket and this case isn't the only one on his plate but at which point will he say enough is enough and land hard on these OOC prosecutors for violating his Brady order?

Wish I had had such lenient federal judges when I was practicing.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

They do shady stuff, but they didn't do the particular shady stuff they were accused of.

---

Exactly. Plus I will add that moving the goal posts on what they are actually claiming Concord did wrong and straying far afield from the acts alleged in the indictment shows the prosecution is grasping at straws.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Federal prosecutors have not said no to providing Mifsud's smartphone data, at least not yet. Instead, in response to Powell's request for the data, the government told her that "if we determine that they contain information that is discoverable or that is relevant to sentencing, we will produce them to you."

This response proves intriguing and triply so. First, the prosecutors speak of deciding, which suggests that they have not yet reviewed the smartphones. That raises an interesting possibilitythat Barr and Durham are controlling the investigation of the investigators and they had yet to see the smartphones or data.

Yet Powell knew about the phones, suggesting she has a well-placed source sympathetic to Flynn's plight, or outraged by the political and prosecutorial abuse on display in this case, or both.

Finally, the government's response indicates that federal prosecutors may be ignoring presiding Judge Emmet Sullivan's standing order. In that standing order, Sullivan ordered the government to produce to "any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant's guilt or punishment."

But in its response to Powell, the government speaks of only providing evidence "relevant to sentencing," and seemingly ignores the court's directive, which was to provide any evidence favorable to Flynn and material to either his guilt or his punishment (sentence).

---

I know Judge Sullivan has a full docket and this case isn't the only one on his plate but at which point will he say enough is enough and land hard on these OOC prosecutors for violating his Brady order?

Wish I had had such lenient federal judges when I was practicing.

---

It might be too much to explain here, but...

I am not a legal anything, so my understanding of stuff like this is VERY minuscule.

I see y'all making arguments here and they seem plausible, and backed up by peoples research. Powell has submitted numerous requests for information and the government just flat out says no. Why would the judge not also be able to piece things together? Or why is he not allowing this evidence to be included?

The backstory here is Flynn's former attorneys were nearly criminal in their malpractice in their representation of Flynn both before and after his guilty plea. (With a large assist from Mueller toadie, Van Grack who is back at Justice and still on this case.)

Over the year plus since Flynn's guilty plea, the prosecution has on occasion submitted materials (evidence) under seal in ex parte proceedings. (Meaning the defense was not allowed to be present nor see the materials.)

Flynn's old attorneys did not object as strenuously as they should have which has put Sidney behind the 8 ball and playing catch-up. Unfortunately, the actions of Flynn's former attorneys are still binding on Flynn in the view of the Court.

I understand why Sidney is reluctant to just withdraw Flynn's guilty plea as such a move comes with risks. But the info from Mifsud's phones might be the smoking gun for her to finally do it.

drcrinum said:

---

More phones?

Just for review, Mifsud may be a primary UK intel agent rather than an Italian one:

https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/04/all-russiagate-roads-lead-to-london-as-evidence-emerges-of-joseph-mifsuds-links-to-uk-intelligence/

(Note: The above article contains a photo of Mifsud standing next to an important British intel figure that Devin Nunes recently was inquiring about on Twitter.)

Edit: I have assumed the phones requested by Powell were US government issued phones to Mifsud. It may well be that they were UK government issued phones since they have SIM cards. I sent an inquiry to Occhionero to clarify this point.

---