Yes, Horowitz of course couldn't find documentary evidence of intent. Did basically nothing.

Quote:

---

AG Bill Barr has to keep feeding the purveyors of investigative hope-pr0n as a method to keep the pitchforks at bay, while simultaneously trying to figure out how to do nothing of substance so he can preserve the institutions. Remember, the DC system operates on an entirely different legal principle when it comes to internal investigations within the bubble.

As a result we get AG Barr saying "if John Durham can find evidence of criminal conduct"; where "criminal" in DC is defined around a DC-exclusive legal theory of "intent" that doesn't apply anywhere else in the country. [examples: see Hillary Clinton; or see IG Horowitz saying he couldn't find intent.]

If John Q Public violated a law, the FBI would break down our door in a no-knock raid and use the violation as leverage to get us to break. The FBI would not sit around debating whether John intended to violate the law; they'd deal with that aspect after the raid and the pressure on us to fork over $250,000 in a legal effort to defend ourselves. [example: see Roger Stone]

But in the DC-tier of justice, where administrating the law is subject to the internal rules that don't apply outside the bubble, everything must be filtered through "intent". When intent is transparently obvious, the DC legal theory moves to the second filter where collateral damage to the institutions must be weighted. [example: see James Wolfe]

AG Bill Barr has no intention on prosecuting any former individual or entity, regardless of their political hierarchy and/or level of participation, in the matrix of the coup effort against Candidate/President Trump. unless the DC-exclusive legal hurdles are met.

---

Probably right, but I hope not

Sydney has been retweeting all 100 plus points.

John Solomon's 13 revelations undercutting the FBI's predicate for even opening an investigation of the Trump campaign in July 2016 (let alone never giving a defensive briefing). Caution, this is all infuriating to read;

Quote:

---

Here are 13 of the most important revelations that undercut the FBI's predicate for opening an investigation targeting the Trump campaign in July 2016, for obtaining a year's worth of FISA warrants to spy on former campaign adviser Carter Page and for seeking a special prosecutor, Robert Mueller, to take over and extend the probe.

1.) The FBI possessed information dating to 2015 in Steele's intelligence (Delta) file warning that he might be the victim of Russian disinformation through his contacts with Vladimir Putin-connected oligarchs. By 2017, the FBI was warned specific false information in Steele's dossier was planted by Russian intelligence, according to the declassified notes that became public from Michael Horowitz's report.
2.) Senior Justice Department official Bruce Ohr warned the FBI in August 2016 that Steele held an extreme bias against Trump (he was "desperate" to defeat Trump) and that his information was likely uncorroborated raw intelligence.
3.) Steele's work on the dossier was funded by Trump's rival in the election, Hillary Clinton's campaign, and the Democratic Party, through their opposition research firm, Fusion GPS. Ohr warned the FBI in August 2016 that Steele's work was connected to the Clinton campaign in some way.
4.) Steele told a State Department official in October 2016, 10 days before the FISA warrants were first secured, that he had leaked to the news media and had an election day deadline for making public the information he had shared with the FBI as a confidential human source.
5.) Steele was fired Nov. 1, 2016 for violating his confidential human source agreement by leaking to the news media.
6.) Information Steele provided to the government was proven, before the FISA warrants were granted, to be false and inaccurate. Specifically, he told State official Kathleen Kavalec in early October 2016 that he believed Russia was funding its hacking operations through its consulate in Miami. The Russians did not have a consulate in Miami, Kavalec reported in her notes.
7.) Steele was caught in October 2016 peddling a false internet rumor also being spread by a lawyer for the Democratic National Committee and a liberal reporter. That rumor claimed Trump and Putin might be communicating through mysterious computer pings at a server tied to Russia's Alfa Bank. The rumor was dismissed by the FBI as false.
8.) The FBI falsely declared to the FISA court it had corroborated the evidence in Steele's dossier used in the search warrant application, including that Carter Page had met with two senior Russians in Moscow in summer 2016. In fact, the Page meetings were never corroborated and a spreadsheet that reviewed every statement in the Steele dossier found most were either inaccurate, uncorroborated or information easily found on the Internet.
9.) The FBI interviewed Steele's primary sub-source in January 2017, who claimed much of the information attributed to him was not accurate, exaggerated or rumor.
10.) The FBI possessed statements of innocence from Page collected by an undercover informer in August and October 2016, including that Page denied meeting with the two Russians and did not play a role in changing a GOP platform position on Ukraine during the Trump nominating convention. The statements undercut two primary allegations made by the FBI in seeking the FISA warrants.
11.) The CIA alerted the FBI that Page was a friendly U.S. asset who had assisted the Agency on Russia matters and was not a stooge for the Russian government. The FBI altered a document to hide this revelation.
12.) The FBI possessed exculpatory statements made by Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos in which he told an undercover informer he and the Trump campaign were not involved in the Russian hacking of Clinton's emails and considered such activity to be "illegal." The FBI originally opened the probe of Trump campaign on suspicion Papadopoulos was somehow involved in the hacking.
13.) The FBI concluded in January 2017 that Trump national security adviser Mike Flynn was not being deceptive in his interviews with agents and likely suffered from a faulty memory and was not operating as an agent for Russia.

There are many more revelations that expose flaws, lies and misconduct in the creation of a false Russia collusion narrative. But these 13 alone help explain why Barr made such a sweeping statement last week.

---

nortex97 said:

---

Yes, Horowitz of course couldn't find documentary evidence of intent. Did basically nothing.

Quote:

---

AG Bill Barr has to keep feeding the purveyors of investigative hope-pr0n as a method to keep the pitchforks at bay, while simultaneously trying to figure out how to do nothing of substance so he can preserve the institutions. Remember, the DC system operates on an entirely different legal principle when it comes to internal investigations within the bubble.

As a result we get AG Barr saying "if John Durham can find evidence of criminal conduct"; where "criminal" in DC is defined around a DC-exclusive legal theory of "intent" that doesn't apply anywhere else in the country. [examples: see Hillary Clinton; or see IG Horowitz saying he couldn't find intent.]

If John Q Public violated a law, the FBI would break down our door in a no-knock raid and use the violation as leverage to get us to break. The FBI would not sit around debating whether John intended to violate the law; they'd deal with that aspect after the raid and the pressure on us to fork over $250,000 in a legal effort to defend ourselves. [example: see Roger Stone]

But in the DC-tier of justice, where administrating the law is subject to the internal rules that don't apply outside the bubble, everything must be filtered through "intent". When intent is transparently obvious, the DC legal theory moves to the second filter where collateral damage to the institutions must be weighted. [example: see James Wolfe]

AG Bill Barr has no intention on prosecuting any former individual or entity, regardless of their political hierarchy and/or level of participation, in the matrix of the coup effort against Candidate/President Trump. unless the DC-exclusive legal hurdles are met.

---

---

nortex, do not forget what Horowitz is essentially an Internal Auditor, and Internal Auditors do not, repeat, DO NOT, pass judgement on their findings...that is for higher ups. And, the Auditing process, as well as the methodology employed, emphasizes cooperation in order to "fill in" the blanks.

Having been in Internal Audit, nothing is worse, nor more unproductive than to find an issue, which may or may not be serious, or "material" and speak to / interview a person who is part of the process being dissected / analyzed, say, "Look, Dude, this is a huge Cluster-frack, and it happened within your responsibility, so tell me why it happened." You will get zero cooperation, and probably lead to destruction of applicable records, and perhaps them quitting before they are found out.

So most interviews happen *before* error/issue detection, verifying comprehension of the process, procedures, methods, etc., by both the auditor and the interviewee. Once data is gathered and tested, and issues surfaced, it becomes a detective process...linking related processes, notes and deliverables to the issue. THEN, the auditor writes it up, without judgement, critique about "correct" or "incorrect"... it just is...

Following all the findings/data/linking/etc., the overall report is authored, sanctioned by higher-up Auditors, and distributed to the parties who were the target of the audit. They all have a period of review to comment, challenge, re-word, redact, etc. (although "redaction" in the private sector is not really a part of it.)

So, from my experience, I admire Horowitz. He has uncovered a LOT of crap, has placed the issues in front of those who CAN do something about it and even smartly put most of the issues in front of the Representatives and American People, separated the stuff that COULD be freely shared from the heavily redacted stuff ,by putting it into an "eyes only" section.

Horowitz is a player, caught between a rock and a hard place, who must always walk a fine line so that future audits can be conducted with trust from the lower level players, without them slitting their own throats, in order to keep their jobs, as well as maintain respect of their fellow employees. Higher ups bear responsibility for employment status of the participants. Give him the benefit of the doubt. Notice that Micheal Atkinson (ICIG) got politically beheaded becaused he was putting his finger on the scale of impartiality.

Trump, Barr, Durham, Nunes have access to all of the stuff; the easy, the free, the redacted. They are the ones that we must trust. Graham has that access, but I have come to doubt his fortitude again.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/13/footnote-350-declassification-puzzles-and-doj-intentions/

Sundance fills in the blanks on redacted portions of the recently released footnotes from Horowitz's report -- clearly it was to protect UK intelligence. He then provides a discourse that mostly agrees with the recent pessimistic posters on our thread.

Again, I'd like to agree with you. I get the limitations on an IG report, especially when dirtbags refuse to allow their clearances re-instated (because they are terrified of liability/prosecution as with Comey).

But, none of that obviates the clear fact that classification/redactions of data/stonewalling of Senate requests has overwhelmingly persisted. Yes, some tidbits were finally cleared but it is really very minor. Two points;

• The 'optimists' have yet to posit a reason why the Mueller scope memos at the very least haven't been made public. Any and all targets/subjects of Durham etc. are well aware of their contents and yet it is all forbidden from the public eye. Please correct me if I am wrong.
• Why has Barr, if this is all significant and he is seeking justice, allowed the Flynn sentencing to proceed for so ludicrously long?

Wray is the FBI director still today. Unless an administrative/legal equivalent of the Knights Templar wipeout is planned I've seen no reason to be...optimistic about prosecutions/real change.

nortex97 said:

---

Again, I'd like to agree with you. I get the limitations on an IG report, especially when dirtbags refuse to allow their clearances re-instated (because they are terrified of liability/prosecution as with Comey).

But, none of that obviates the clear fact that classification/redactions of data/stonewalling of Senate requests has overwhelmingly persisted. Yes, some tidbits were finally cleared but it is really very minor. Two points;

• The 'optimists' have yet to posit a reason why the Mueller scope memos at the very least haven't been made public. Any and all targets/subjects of Durham etc. are well aware of their contents and yet it is all forbidden from the public eye. Please correct me if I am wrong.
• Why has Barr, if this is all significant and he is seeking justice, allowed the Flynn sentencing to proceed for so ludicrously long?

Wray is the FBI director still today. Unless an administrative/legal equivalent of the Knights Templar wipeout is planned I've seen no reason to be...optimistic about prosecutions/real change.

---

Re,member the old farm joke abourt the young bull who wanted to "run down the hill to where the cows were all grazing", but the old bull said, well let's just walk down there...

I just don't think it is wise to scare up the whole covey, while we're sneaking up on them. Bringing home a bag full is better then getting just one.

I know, old platitudes don't satisfy..

Again, I feel your frustration, but it is not Horowitz' job to resolve the issues. It is entirely in the hands of Barr, Durham, Trump and others to take them out. And if not removing them now, makes it easier to remove them and MORE down the road; well, we have to wait...and trust.

They seem to want to keep the tool, but are aware it will be a temptation for abuse. The damn court itself should be working to help resolve some of this, but they at least superficially seem to be hoping this all goes away after revealing how complacent and incurious they have been with regards to their purpose of ensuring American civil rights are preserved in the intelligence gathering process. They let the PRESIDENT's rights get abused in the process.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

They seem to want to keep the tool, but are aware it will be a temptation for abuse. The damn court itself should be working to help resolve some of this, but they at least superficially seem to be hoping this all goes away after revealing how complacent and incurious they have been with regards to their purpose of ensuring American civil rights are preserved in the intelligence gathering process. They let the PRESIDENT's rights get abused in the process.

---

Again, having a separate guardian ad litem from another agency (not DOJ) to review the entire FISA application and supporting Woods file prior to application to the FISA court for a US citizen, would go a long way in addressing the abuse issues.

And that's where the FISC itself could lead the way, as you said. They could set up select attorneys with the requisite security clearances (like the pro bono system but with clearances) that are given that task. If those are employees of Article III institutions and not Article II, you remove the Executive Branch investigating itself problem, IMO.

aggiehawg said:

---

Again, having a separate guardian ad litem from another agency (not DOJ) to review the entire FISA application and supporting Woods file prior to application to the FISA court for a US citizen, would go a long way in addressing the abuse issues.

And that's where the FISC itself could lead the way, as you said. They could set up select attorneys with the requisite security clearances (like the pro bono system but with clearances) that are given that task. If those are employees of Article III institutions and not Article II, you remove the Executive Branch investigating itself problem, IMO.

---

Human Behavior Rule #1 ... never trust ANY organization (gov or corp) to self police itself.

15 minute radio with Joe diGenova. Interesting. He thinks it's a big deal that the FISA Court judge asked for the names of the targets in those FISA applications that were riddled with errors. Were they all Republicans? Expects the names will eventually be leaked.

i wish i could get excited about anything Joe diGenova says.

ruddyduck said:

---

i wish i could get excited about anything Joe diGenova says.

---

Agree. He's been crying wolf and sensationalizing things for way too long.

BTW, where's Rudy? Seems he's gone radio silent. (Which is a good thing.)

ruddyduck said:

---

i wish i could get excited about anything Joe diGenova says.

---

Me too.

Right now, based on the information we have obtained here, I'm convinced all four FISC judges are bent in some form, and Roberts believes all attorneys WANT to be good attorneys.

And, despite my misgivings, Boasberg seemed to be okay until he asked the FBI to deliver a report full of "fixings", which I''m sure will have plenty of synonyms for "great", "wonderful", and it wasn't our fault.

Well this just sucks.

This looks like turn in the right direction.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/492405-ag-barr-just-signaled-that-things-are-about-to-get-ugly-for-the-russia

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a "report" from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: "And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted."

'Imperator Rex' is back until the Left drives him off Twitter again.

That is good news. CTH has a good updated summary piece up of the abuses the Obama admin and their contractors were engaged in to build up/gather dirt on US opponents and of course the Steele Dossier (including the laughable error about Michael Cohen going to Prague.) They obviously got very sloppy...

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/15/a-common-misconception-about-the-origin-of-spygate-political-surveillance-in-the-era-of-president-obama/

Quote:

---

Remember the Sharyl Attkisson computer intrusions? It's all part of this same network; Attkisson even names Shawn Henry as a defendant in her ongoing lawsuit.

All of the aforementioned names, and so many more, held a political agenda in 2016.
It seems likely if the NSA flags were never triggered then the contracted system users would have continued exploiting the NSA database for political opposition research; which would then be funneled to the Clinton team. However, once the unauthorized flags were triggered, the system users (including those inside the official intelligence apparatus) needed to find another back-door to continue Again, the timing becomes transparent.

Immediately after NSA flags were raised March 9th; the same intelligence agencies began using confidential human sources (CHS's) to run into the Trump campaign. By activating intelligence assets like Joseph Mifsud and Stefan Halper the IC (CIA, FBI) and system users had now created an authorized way to continue the same political surveillance operations.

When Donald Trump hired Paul Manafort on March 28, 2016, it was a perfect scenario for those doing the surveillance. Manafort was a known entity to the FBI and was previously under investigation. Paul Manafort's entry into the Trump orbit was perfect for Glenn Simpson to sell his prior research on Manafort as a Trump-Russia collusion script two weeks later.

The shift from "unauthorized exploitation of the NSA database" to legally authorized exploitation of the NSA database was now in place. This was how they continued the political surveillance. This is the confluence of events that originated "spygate", or what officially blossomed into the FBI investigation known as "Crossfire Hurricane" on July 31.

If the NSA flags were never raised; and if Director Rogers had never initiated the compliance audit; and if the political contractors were never blocked from access to the database; they would never have needed to create a legal back-door, a justification to retain the surveillance. The political operatives/contractors would have just continued the targeted metadata exploitation.

Once they created the surveillance door, Fusion-GPS was then needed to get the FBI known commodity of Chris Steele activated as a pipeline. Into that pipeline all system users pushed opposition research. However, one mistake from the NSA database extraction during an "about" query shows up as a New Yorker named Michael Cohen in Prague.

That misinterpreted data from a FISA-702 "about query" is then piped to Steele and turns up inside the dossier; it was the wrong Michael Cohen. It wasn't Trump's lawyer, it was an art dealer from New York City with the same name; the same "identifier".

---

law-apt-3g said:

---

This looks like turn in the right direction.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/492405-ag-barr-just-signaled-that-things-are-about-to-get-ugly-for-the-russia

The AG then ominously stated that he is not interested in simply receiving a "report" from Durham. He expects him to focus on possible criminal violations: "And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted."

---

About time.....Brennan, Comey, Clapper, Strzock, Page, McCabe and Priestap need to be held accountable.

Never heard of the website, but seems to be well written. And it may be common knowledge to most everyone here, but to me, it was straight forward and easy for me to understand.

https://trendingrightwing.com/govt-stall-takes-general-flynn-case-down-a-very-dark-path/

Quote:

---

The way that Justice Department prosecutors are trying to stall for time, in the case to overturn General Michael Flynn's ill advised guilty plea, shows a blatant attempt to lead the court down a dark and dangerous path through Deep State treachery. Instead of coming up with answers, government prosecutors are dragging their feet with one of the oldest tricks in the legal book, blame the delay on someone else.

Government stall blamed on former lawyers

Last week, DOJ prosecutors asked for a delay, moving the scheduled April 3 status hearing to April 24. The stall seems calculated specifically to give prosecutors more time to think of something to tell presiding Federal Judge Emmet T. Sullivan. They need to convince him to keep their case alive. Former National Security Advisor Flynn's new legal team is asking for a dismissal on the grounds that the government is illegally hiding crucial evidence.

Instead of asking for more time to find the missing documents that the government is supposed to produce, they blame the delay on newly discovered evidence just turned over by Flynn's former legal team. Apparently, it had been laying around unnoticed. The DOJ needs three extra weeks for their team of paralegals to read a box of records. It will take that long because they claim they need to use a magnifying glass to make it out.

---

I don't know that site either but it does seem straightforward/credible. Once again, if Barr were serious about getting rid of corruption related to spygate there's no way he'd let his underlings continue with this charade;

Quote:

---

One interesting discrepancy to note is that the "voluminous" records, that the DOJ needs a three week stall to sift through, may not be as extensive as the Justice Department wants the court to believe. It looks like they're seriously exaggerating. A note from the previous lawyers that came along with the missing materials paints a totally different picture.

"We have found emails and two pages of handwritten notes that were not previously transferred to successor counsel," former lawyers Robert Kelner and Stephan P. Anthony wrote. "With respect to the emails, this appears to have resulted from errors in the process of collecting and searching electronic materials that were not contained in the working case file. The two pages of notes appear to have been inadvertently missed during the file transfer process."

---

Even on a government attorney's schedule, that doesn't take 3 weeks to decipher. The DoJ is still just a fraud.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/15/newly-declassified-papadopoulos-transcript-exposes-crossfire-hurricane-corruption/

Good read from Professor Cleveland. The Crossfire Hurricane team viewed Papadopoulos's denial in Halper's recorded transcript about Trump Campaign involvement in the DNC hack/Wikileaks as being a rehearsed, canned answer as extensively outlined in Horowitz's Report. However, when the same denial surfaced in the recently released Confidential Human Source 3 recorded transcript, the same Crossfire Team couldn't recall it. This latter transcript & how it was totally ignored becomes very damning for the schemers.

How did they know about Page's upcoming travels? Was this via the CI investigation launched in August 2016 against him, or was this from the 'incidental data collection' going on in Brennan's domain? There must be something nefarious in this regard because why was this footnote previously partially redacted?

Grenell is declassifying some material. First some footnotes from the Horowitz Report. Now this.

starting to get good...

sad there aren't more likes/retweets on the above. pretty significant stuff starting to filter out.

Long thread. iG report footnotes unredacted!

Here's the threadreader on the Undercover Huber tweet thread:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1250583371538927617.html

Article by Margot Cleveland about the declassification of the IG Report footnotes.

https://thefederalist.com/2020/04/16/9-key-points-from-newly-declassified-report-details-on-fisa-abuse/

Quote:

---

1. The U.K. Consented to Steele's Cooperation
2. There Was Potentially A Lot More Spying on the Trump Campaign
3. U.S. Intelligence Lacked Derogatory Information on Joseph Mifsud
4. More Questions About the Predicate
5. More Evidence That Steele Colluded With Russians Than That Trump Did
6. More Evidence of Russia Disinformation
7. Did Russian Oligarch 1 Know of Steele's Work for Clinton?
8. Bill Priestap Pinkie-Promised To Keep Steele's File Clean
9. No, Your Beer-Drinking Buddies Aren't a Network of Sources

---

Perhaps she will slow her roll on Twitter now.....