Part 2 – Why Did the DOJ and FBI Execute the Raid on Trump – The Evidence Within the Documents

In Part One we explained who, what, when and why around the modern construct of the modern DC system {Go Deep}.  Now we move into Part Two, the targeting of President Trump and the specific trail of documented evidence that exists behind the targeting.

It is critical to understand that foundationally our corrupt political system is built upon a network of surveillance.  It is through monitoring information and people, together with intercepting risk, that operations can continue to maintain a corrupt administrative state; what some might call the Deep State.

Within the system information is key, and the actions taken by DOJ and FBI officials are an outcome of this information.  As Edward Snowden explained, the surveillance state is critical to power retention. President Trump carried documents that outlined how this process took place as it pertained to his entry into politics, thus the raid to retrieve them.

There is a common misconception about why the FBI and intelligence apparatus began investigating the political campaign of Donald Trump.

During the timeframe of December 2015 through April 2016 the NSA database was being exploited by contractors within the intelligence community, specifically within the FBI, doing unauthorized searches.

On March 9, 2016, oversight personnel doing a review of FBI system access were alerted to thousands of unauthorized FBI search queries of specific U.S. persons within the NSA database.

NSA Director Mike Rogers was made aware.

Subsequently NSA Director Rogers initiated a full compliance review of the system to identify who was doing the searches; & what searches were being conducted.

On April 18, 2016, following the preliminary audit results, Director Rogers shut down all FBI contractor access to the database after he learned FISA-702 “about”(17) and “to/from”(16) search queries were being done without authorization.

Thus begins the first discovery of a much bigger background story.

When you compile the timeline with the people involved; and the specific wording of the resulting NSA review, which was then delivered to the FISA court; and then you overlay the activity that was taking place in the 2016 political primary; what we discover is a process where the metadata collected by the NSA was being searched for political opposition research and surveillance.

Exposing this method of surveillance is where the Trump phrase, “they are not after me – they are after you, and I’m just in the way,” takes on a massive amount of clarity.  Because, in the final analysis, what Trump experienced as a target of this system actually pertains to anyone, not just him.

Tens-of-thousands of unauthorized and unlawful searches were identified by the 2017 FISA court as likely extending much further than the compliance review period: “while the government reports it is unable to provide a reliable estimate of the non-compliant queries since 2012, there is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015 [to] April 2016 period coincided with an unusually high error rate”.

In short, during the Obama administration access to the NSA database was continually used to conduct surveillance.  This is the critical point that leads to understanding the origin of “Spygate”, as it unfolded in the Spring and Summer of 2016.

It was the discovery of the database exploitation and the removal of access as a surveillance tool that seemed to create the initial problem for the FBI political unit in Washington, DC.  Here’s how we can tell.

In December 2015 there were 17 GOP candidates, all needing opposition research.

However, when Donald Trump won New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina the field was significantly whittled. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson remained.

On Super Tuesday, March 2, 2016, Donald Trump won seven states (VT, AR, VA, GA, AL, TN, MA) it was then clear that Trump was the GOP frontrunner with momentum to become the presumptive nominee.

On March 5th, 2016, DonaldTrump won Kentucky and Louisiana; and on March 8th Trump won Michigan, Mississippi and Hawaii.

The next day, March 9, 2016, is when NSA security alerts warned internal oversight personnel that something sketchy was going on.  This timing is not coincidental.

As FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer later wrote in her report, “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.”  Put another way: attributes belonging to a specific individual(s) were being targeted and queried, unlawfully.  Given what was later discovered, it seems obvious the primary search targets, over multiple date ranges, were political candidates, specifically Donald Trump.

There were tens-of-thousands of unauthorized search queries; and as Judge Collyer stated in her report, there is no reason to believe the 85% non compliant rate was any different from the abuse of the NSA database going back to 2012, the same year the FBI collocated a workspace within Perkins Coie.

As you will see below the NSA database was how political surveillance was being conducted during Obama’s second term in office.  However, when the system was flagged, and when NSA Director Mike Rogers shut down “FBI contractor” access to the system, the system users needed to develop another way to get access.

Mike Rogers shuts down contractor access on April 18, 2016.

Coincidentally, on April 19, 2016, Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson’s wife, Mary Jacoby visits the White House.  Immediately thereafter, the DNC and Clinton campaign contract Fusion GPS… who then hire Christopher Steele.  At the tail end of that enterprise Michael Sussmann (Perkins Coie lawyer) is delivering material to FBI legal counsel James Baker, and DOJ official Bruce Ohr is serving as a secondary conduit of information from Chris Steele to the FBI.

Knowing it was federal “contractors”, outside government with FBI access to the NSA system doing the unauthorized searches, the question becomes: who were the contractors?

The possibilities are quite vast. Essentially anyone the FBI or intelligence apparatus was using could have participated.  Crowdstrike was a known FBI contractor; they were also contracted by the DNC.  Shawn Henry was the former head of the FBI office in DC and later become part of Crowdstrike’s leadership team, a rather dubious contractor for the government and a politically connected data security and forensic company.

We know from the Michael Sussmann trial that electronic data was extracted by Neustar, a federal contractor.  The head of the organization, Rodney Joffe, then used cyber tech resources from Georgia Tech to assemble the data and deliver a false report to the Clinton campaign of Trump-Russia connections.

FBI Director James Comey’s special friend Daniel Richman was also an unpaid FBI “special employee” with security access to the database.  Nellie Ohr began working for Fusion-GPS on the Trump project in November 2015 and she was a previous open-source CIA contractor; and now that we know the FBI and Perkins Coie were in a collaborative relationship, we can also see the DNC law firm as FBI contractors with similar clearances and access.

On May 31st of this year, Representative Matt Gaetz (R-FL) made an explosive announcement as an outcome of a whistleblower providing information to him and Jim Jordan about the FBI having a collaborative relationship with the Clinton/DNC law firm Perkins Coie.  {Go Deep} Specifically, the explosive element surrounds the FBI having a workspace within the DNC law firm that would have given Democrats an open portal into FBI databases for use in opposition research.

Additionally, remember the Sharyl Attkisson computer intrusions?  It’s all part of this same network of contractors.  Attkisson even named Shawn Henry as a defendant in her ongoing lawsuit.  Shawn Henry was in charge of the FBI field office and former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein was then head of the Virginia U.S. attorney office that was identified as part of the Attkisson targeting operation.

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 FBI 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 FBI and sister agency the CIA) would need to find another back-door to continue… Again, check the timing and actions become transparent.

Immediately after NSA flags were raised March 9, 2016, the same FBI and CIA 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 FBI 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 FBI 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 database extraction, likely 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”.

A DEEP DIVE – How Did It Work?

Start by reviewing the established record from the 99-page FISC opinion rendered by Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer on April 26, 2017. Review the details within the FISC opinion.

I would strongly urge everyone to read the FISC report (full pdf below) because Judge Collyer outlines how the DOJ, which includes the FBI, had an “institutional lack of candor” in responses to the FISA court. In essence, the Obama administration was continually lying to the FISA court about their activity, and the rate of fourth amendment violations for illegal searches and seizures of U.S. persons’ private information for multiple years.

Unfortunately, due to intelligence terminology Judge Collyer’s brief and ruling is not an easy read for anyone unfamiliar with the FISA processes. That complexity also helps the media avoid discussing it; and as a result most Americans have no idea the scale and scope of the Obama-era surveillance issues. So we’ll try to break down the language.

[scribd id=349542716 key=key-72P5FzpI44KMOuOPZrt1 mode=scroll]

.

For the sake of brevity and common understanding CTH will highlight the most pertinent segments showing just how systemic and troublesome the unlawful electronic surveillance was.

Early in 2016 NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was alerted of a significant uptick in FISA-702(17) “About” queries using the FBI/NSA database that holds all metadata records on every form of electronic communication.

The NSA compliance officer alerted Admiral Mike Rogers who then initiated a full compliance audit on/around March 9th, 2016, for the period of November 1st, 2015, through May 1st, 2016.

While the audit was ongoing, due to the severity of the results that were identified, Admiral Mike Rogers stopped anyone from using the 702(17) “about query” option, and went to the extraordinary step of blocking all FBI contractor access to the database on April 18, 2016 (keep these dates in mind).

Here are some significant segments:

The key takeaway from these first paragraphs is how the search query results were exported from the NSA database to users who were not authorized to see the material. The FBI contractors were conducting searches and then removing, or ‘exporting’, the results. Later on, the FBI said all of the exported material was deleted.

Searching the highly classified NSA database is essentially a function of filling out search boxes to identify the user-initiated search parameter and get a return on the search result.

♦ FISA-702(16) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (“702”); and the “16” is a check box to initiate a search based on “To and From“. Example, if you put in a date and a phone number and check “option 16” as the search parameter the user will get the returns on everything “To and From” that identified phone number for the specific date. Calls, texts, contacts etc. Including results for the inbound and outbound contacts.

♦ FISA-702(17) is a search of the system returning a U.S. person (702); and the “17” is a check box to initiate a search based on everything “About” the search qualifier. Example, if you put a date and a phone number and check “option 17” as the search parameter the user will get the returns of everything about that phone. Calls, texts, contacts, geolocation (or gps results), account information, user, service provider etc. As a result, 702(17) can actually be used to locate where the phone (and user) was located on a specific date or sequentially over a specific period of time which is simply a matter of changing the date parameters.

And that’s just from a phone number.

Search an ip address “about” and read all data into that server; put in an email address and gain everything about that account. Or use the electronic address of a GPS enabled vehicle (about) and you can withdraw more electronic data and monitor in real time. Search a credit card number and get everything about the account including what was purchased, where, when, etc. Search a bank account number, get everything about transactions and electronic records etc. Just about anything and everything can be electronically searched; everything has an electronic ‘identifier’.

The search parameter is only limited by the originating field filled out. Names, places, numbers, addresses, etc. By using the “About” parameter there may be thousands or millions of returns. Imagine if you put “@realdonaldtrump” into the search parameter? You could extract all following accounts who interacted on Twitter, or Facebook etc. The search result is only limited by the operators’ imagination and the scale of the electronic connectivity.

As you can see below, on March 9th, 2016, internal auditors noted the FBI was sharing “raw FISA information, including but not limited to Section 702-acquired information”.   Who were they sharing it with?  Perkins Coie?

In plain English the raw search returns were being shared with unknown entities without any attempt to “minimize” or redact the results. The person(s) attached to the search results were named and obvious. There was no effort to hide their identity or protect their 4th amendment rights of privacy; and database access was from the FBI network:

But what’s the scale here? This is where the story really lies.

Read this next excerpt carefully.

The operators were searching “U.S Persons”. The review of November 1, 2015, to May 1, 2016, showed “eighty-five percent of those queries” were unlawful or “non compliant”.

85% !! “representing [redacted number]”.

We can tell from the space of the redaction the number of searches were between 10,000 and 99,999 [six digits]. If we take the middle number of 50,000 – a non compliant rate of 85 percent means 42,500 unlawful searches out of 50,000.

The [six digit] amount (more than 10,000, less than 99,999), and 85% error rate, was captured in a six-month period, November 2015 to April 2016.  The timeframe of highest interest in the republican presidential primary.

Also notice this very important quote: “many of these non-compliant queries involved the use of the same identifiers over different date ranges.” This tells us the system users were searching the same phone number, email address, electronic identifier, repeatedly over different dates.  Put another way, specific person(s) were being tracked/monitored.

Additionally, notice the last quote: “while the government reports it is unable to provide a reliable estimate of” these non lawful searches “since 2012, there is no apparent reason to believe the November 2015 [to] April 2016 coincided with an unusually high error rate”.

That means the 85% unlawful FISA-702(16)(17) database abuse has likely been happening since 2012.

2012 is an important date in this database abuse because a network of specific interests is assembled that also shows up in 2016/2017:

  • Who was 2012 FBI Director? Robert Mueller, who was selected by the FBI group to become special prosecutor in 2017.
  • Who was Mueller’ chief-of-staff? Aaron Zebley, who became one of the lead lawyers on the Mueller special counsel.
  • Who was 2012 CIA Director? John Brennan (remember the ouster of Gen Petraeus)
  • Who was ODNI? James Clapper.
  • Remember, the NSA is inside the Pentagon (Defense Dept) command structure. Who was Defense Secretary? Ash Carter

Who wanted NSA Director Mike Rogers fired in 2016? Brennan, Clapper and Carter.

And finally, who wrote and signed-off-on the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment and then lied about the use of the Steele Dossier? The same John Brennan, and James Clapper along with James Comey.

Tens of thousands of searches over four years (since 2012), and 85% of them are illegal. The results were extracted for?…. (I believe this is all political opposition use; and I’ll explain why momentarily.)

OK, that’s the stunning scale; but who was involved?

Private contractors with access to “raw FISA information that went well beyond what was necessary to respond to FBI’s requests“.

So, someone using the justification of FBI “requests”, was exploiting their access to the FBI portal; and they were searching for material “well beyond” the justification of “FBI requests” the used.  Doesn’t this exactly sound like someone in Perkins Coie using their FBI portal access?

And as noted, the contractor access was finally halted on April 18th, 2016.

[Coincidentally (or likely not), the wife of Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson, Mary Jacoby, goes to the White House the very next day on April 19th, 2016.]

None of this is conspiracy theory.

All of this is laid out inside this 99-page opinion from FISC Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer who also noted that none of this FISA abuse was accidental in a footnote on page 87: “deliberate decisionmaking“:

This specific footnote, if declassified, could be a key. Note the phrase: “([redacted] access to FBI systems was the subject of an interagency memorandum of understanding entered into [redacted])”, this sentence has the potential to expose an internal decision; withheld from congress and the FISA court by the Obama administration; that outlines a process for access and distribution of surveillance data.

Note: “no notice of this practice was given to the FISC until 2016“, that is important.

Summary: The FISA court identified and quantified tens-of-thousands of search queries of the NSA/FBI database using the FISA-702(16)(17) system. The database was repeatedly used by persons with FBI contractor access who unlawfully searched and extracted the raw results without redacting the information and shared it with an unknown number of entities.

The outlined process certainly points toward a political spying and surveillance operation; and we are not the only one to think that’s what this system is being used for.

Back in 2017 when House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes was working to reauthorize the FISA legislation, Nunes wrote a letter to ODNI Dan Coats about this specific issue:

SIDEBAR: To solve the issue, well, actually attempt to ensure it never happened again, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers eventually took away the “About” query option permanently in 2017. NSA Director Rogers said the abuse was so inherent there was no way to stop it except to remove the process completely. [SEE HERE] Additionally, the NSA database operates as a function of the Pentagon, so the Trump administration went one step further. On his last day as NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers -together with ODNI Dan Coats- put U.S. cyber-command, the database steward, fully into the U.S. military as a full combatant command. [SEE HERE] Unfortunately it didn’t work as shown by the 2018 FISC opinion rendered by FISC Judge James Boasberg [SEE HERE]

There is little doubt the NSA database system was used by Obama-era FBI officials and political allies, from 2012 through April 2016, as a way to spy on their political opposition.

Quite simply, there is no other intellectually honest explanation for the scale and volume of database abuse that was taking place; and keep in mind these searches were all ruled to be unlawful. Searches for repeated persons over a period time that were not authorized.

When we reconcile what was taking place and who was involved, then the actions of the exact same principle participants take on a jaw-dropping amount of clarity.

All of the action taken by CIA Director Brennan, FBI Director Comey, ODNI Clapper and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter make sense. Including their effort to get NSA Director Mike Rogers fired.

Everything that comes after March 9, 2016, had a dual purpose: (1) done to cover up the weaponization of the FISA database. [Explained Here] Spygate, Russia-Gate, the Steele Dossier, and even the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (drawn from the dossier and signed by the above) were needed to create a cover-story and protect themselves from discovery of this four-year weaponization, political surveillance and unlawful spying.

Even the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel makes sense. (1) Mueller was FBI Director when this began. And (2) they needed to keep the surveillance going.

The beginning decision to use FISA(702) as a domestic surveillance and political spy mechanism appears to have started in/around 2012. Perhaps sometime shortly before the 2012 presidential election and before John Brennan left the White House and moved to CIA. However, there was an earlier version of data assembly that preceded this effort.

Political spying 1.0 was actually the weaponization of the IRS. This is where the term “Secret Research Project” originated as a description from the Obama team. It involved the U.S. Department of Justice under Eric Holder and the FBI under Robert Mueller. It never made sense why Eric Holder requested over 1 million tax records via CD ROM, until overlaying the timeline of the FISA abuse:

The IRS sent the FBI “21 disks constituting a 1.1 million page database of information from 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” The transaction occurred in October 2010 (link)

Why disks? Why send a stack of DISKS to the DOJ and FBI when there’s a pre-existing financial crimes unit within the IRS. All of the evidence within this sketchy operation came directly to the surface in early spring 2012.

The IRS scandal was never really about the IRS, it was always about the DOJ asking the IRS for the database of information. That is why it was transparently a conflict when the same DOJ was tasked with investigating the DOJ/IRS scandal. Additionally, Obama sent his chief-of-staff Jack Lew to become Treasury Secretary; effectively placing an ally to oversee/cover-up any issues. As Treasury Secretary Lew did just that.

Lesson Learned – It would appear the Obama administration learned a lesson from attempting to gather a large opposition research database operation inside a functioning organization large enough to have some good people that might blow the whistle.

The timeline reflects a few months after realizing the “Secret Research Project” was now worthless (June 2012), they focused more deliberately on a smaller network within the intelligence apparatus and began weaponizing the FBI/NSA database. If our hunch is correct, that is what will be visible in footnote #69:

How this all comes together. 

Fusion GPS was not hired in April 2016 to research Donald Trump. As shown in the evidence provided by the FISC, politically motivated FBI contractors were already doing surveillance and spy operations. The Clinton campaign through people like Rodney Joffe (cutout) already knew everything about the Trump campaign. They were monitoring everything by exploiting their FBI relationship and the Perkins Coie location for portal access to the database.

However, after the NSA alerts in/around March 9th, 2016, and particularly after the April 18th shutdown of contractor access, the Clinton Team and DOJ/FBI needed Fusion GPS to create a legal albeit ex post facto justification for the pre-existing surveillance and spy operations. Fusion GPS gave them that justification in the Steele Dossier.

That’s why the FBI small group, which later transitioned into the Mueller team, were so strongly committed to and defending the formation of the Steele Dossier and its dubious content.  The Steele Dossier was used in lieu of the ‘Woods File‘, underpinning the justification for the Carter Page Title-1 surveillance warrant.

The Steele Dossier, an outcome of the Fusion contract, contains two purposes: (1) the cover-story and justification for the pre-existing FBI surveillance operation (protect Obama and Clinton); and (2) facilitate the FBI counterintelligence operation against the Trump campaign (assist Clinton and Perkins Coie).

An insurance policy would be needed.

The Steele Dossier becomes the investigative virus the FBI wanted inside the system. To get the virus into official status, they used the FISA application as the delivery method and injected it into a Title-1 search warrant against Carter Page. The FBI already knew Carter Page (he worked for the CIA); essentially Carter Page was irrelevant, what they needed was the FISA warrant and the Dossier in the system {Go Deep}.

The Obama FBI needed Fusion GPS to give them a plausible justification for already existing political surveillance and spy operations. Fusion-GPS gave them that justification and evidence for a FISA warrant with the Steele Dossier.

Ultimately that’s why the Steele Dossier was so important; without it, the FBI would not have the tool that Mueller needed to continue the investigation of President Trump.  In essence by renewing the FISA application in 2017, despite them knowing the underlying dossier was junk, the FBI was keeping the surveillance gateway open for Team Mueller to exploit later on.

Additionally, without the Steele Dossier the DOJ and FBI are naked with their surveillance (FISA-702) abuse as outlined by John Ratcliffe.

.

.

In this video NSA Director Mike Rogers explains how he was notified of what was happening and what he did after the notification. WATCH:

.

Knowing that Perkins Coie and the FBI were working together on this targeting operation, makes everything else make sense.

However, the involvement of official government agencies like NSA Admiral Mike Rogers, creates a paper trail.  Search query logs, notifications to Mike Rogers, notifications to the FISA Court, notifications to FBI officials of the suspension of contractor access, and subsequent FISA court opinions like the 99-pages from Rosemary Collyer, all of it creates an internal trail of government documents that tell the story.

It’s those documents that become a risk to the people who operate within the system.  In this example of government documents, the trail outlines the targeting of Donald Trump and that was what he continued to ask the ODNI, DOJ and FBI to release.

Frustrated by the lack of action, in March 2022 Donald Trump filed a massive civil lawsuit against the Clinton campaign and everyone involved in this targeting operation. [SEE LAWSUIT HERE]  “Acting in concert, the Defendants maliciously conspired to weave a false narrative that their Republican opponent, Donald J. Trump, was colluding with a hostile foreign sovereignty,” the president states.

“Under the guise of ‘opposition research,’ ‘data analytics,’ and other political stratagems, the Defendants nefariously sought to sway the public’s trust. They worked together with a single, self-serving purpose: to vilify Donald J. Trump,” says one segment of the lawsuit.

All of the claims within the filing are substantiated by documents outlining the history of the events.  I’m not sure any defendant is going to be successful getting themselves out of the target zone on the lawsuit.  The suit alleges “racketeering” and a “conspiracy to commit injurious falsehood,” among other claims.

The basis for the evidence against the entire crew?  That was likely part of the assembly of evidence, the declassified documents at the heart of the battle, that were targeted by the DOJ and FBI raid.   That’s where we enter, Part III.

Source

BREAKING, The FBI Maintains a Workspace, Including Computer Portal, Inside the Law Firm of Perkins Coie – The Ramifications are Significant

There is very little that surprises me, but this is completely stunning.  An FBI whistleblower came forth to inform Rep Jim Jordan and Rep Matt Gaetz that the FBI maintains a workspace inside the law firm of Perkins Coie.  {Direct Rumble Link}

In response to a letter sent by Rep. Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan, Perkins Coie, the legal arm of the DNC and Hillary Clinton, admitted they have been operating an FBI workspace in their Washington D.C. office since 2012.  Pay attention to that date, it matters.  WATCH:

This is a huge development.  Essentially, what is being admitted in this claim is that a portal existed into FBI databases within the law firm that represents democrats.  This means access to FBI database searches exists inside the office of the DNC and Clinton legal group.  Think about the ramifications here.

CTH has long claimed there was some kind of direct portal link between the Clinton campaign team and the FBI databases.  There were too many trails of extracted non-minimized research evidence in the hands of the Clinton team that CTH could not trace to a transferring FBI official.  If Perkins Coie operated a portal in their office that allowed them to conduct search queries of American citizens, then everything would make sense.  That access portal is exactly what is being claimed and admitted in this report.

The start date of 2012 is important for several reasons, not the least of which is FISA presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer criticizing the scale and scope of unlawful FBI database access going back to exactly 2012.  Keep in mind a FISA-702 search, is simply an unlawful FBI warrantless electronic search of an American (“702” represents the American citizen) into the central database -maintained by the NSA- that contains all electronic data and communication.

I have been in the deep hole of the FISA-702 database search query violations for so long I don’t even need a flashlight.

The report from Matt Gaetz about Perkins Coie access to FBI databases, is in direct alignment with Rosemary Collyer’s prior report on FBI abuses of the database, 702 violations.  Notice the dates and scope Judge Collyer references [Source Link].

Non-compliant queries since 2012.

85% of the FBI and contractor searches are unlawful.

Many of those searches involved the use of the “same identifiers over different data ranges.”  Put in plain terms, the same people were continually being tracked, searched and surveilled by querying the FBI database over time.

The non-compliant searches go back to 2012.  The same date mentioned for the FBI portal to begin operating inside the Perkins Coie office.

This specific footnote is a key.  Note the phrase: “([redacted] access to FBI systems was the subject of an interagency memorandum of understanding entered into [redacted])”, this sentence has the potential to expose an internal decision; withheld from congress and the FISA court by the Obama administration; that outlines a process for access and distribution of surveillance data.

Note: “no notice of this practice was given to the FISC until 2016“, that is important.

Summary: The FISA court identified and quantified tens-of-thousands of search queries of the NSA/FBI database using the FISA-702(16)(17) system. The database was repeatedly used by persons with contractor access who unlawfully searched and extracted the raw results without redacting the information and shared it with an unknown number of entities.

The outlined process certainly points toward a political spying and surveillance operation.  When the DOJ use of the IRS for political information on their opposition became problematic, the Obama administration needed another tool.  It was in 2012 when they switched to using the FBI databases for targeted search queries.

This information from Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz has the potential to be extremely explosive.

It will be interesting to see how the domestic intelligence community media (NYT, Politico, WaPo – in that order) respond to this Matt Gaetz report.

I wrote about these suspicions in depth throughout 2017, 2018 and eventually summarized in 2019:

Source

Elon Musk Announces Intent to Assemble Litigation Department of Hardcore Streetfighters, Saying “There Will Be Blood”

Elon Musk Announces Intent to Assemble Litigation Department of Hardcore Streetfighters, Saying “There Will Be Blood”

In a series of tweets today, Elon Musk, the Tesla/SpaceX CEO, world’s richest man and tech billionaire who recently announced he is voting republican, announced his intent to set up what he calls a “hardcore litigation department” filled with “hardcore streetfighters” because “there will be blood”:

This announcement is bookended by Elon Musk’s deal to purchase the Twitter social media platform, a resistant internal company ideological adversary, and a warning from the political left with Business Insider publishing an alleged sexual misconduct story.  Indeed, it does appear that Elon Musk is preparing for a war that will likely include the Fourth Branch of Government as an adversary.

Additionally, Elon Musk is drawing attention to the corruption in the 2016 election by spotlighting the trial of Hillary Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann.  Mr. Musk notes in his remarks that discovering the Trump-Russia collusion story was a hoax put together by the Clinton campaign, media and allies in government, “makes you wonder what else is fake.”

For CTH readers, and those who followed the series of events since 2016, the trial of Sussmann is not revealing anything we didn’t already know.  However, for people who did not follow the deeply corrupt construct, the Sussmann trial is creating a new awakening.

Musk notes he found out about it a month ago “and was blown away”:

We must remember the vast majority of people in the U.S. have no idea the scale of corruption that took place within the Trump-Russia and Spygate operations. This trial is becoming a vending machine for red pill distribution.

Also, perhaps keep in mind where you were a few years ago.  Imagine, as an example, all of these newly awakened people finally discovering and accepting the FBI are the bad guys.   It likely took many CTH readers multiple years and dozens of examples before that acceptance was grounded.

These are bitter pill acceptances, that eventually do lead to major changes in the social fabric and cohesion of a nation; but it’s a painful journey.

Final thoughts…  Do not dismiss the importance of what Elon Musk is doing.  In addition to introducing millions of Americans to something they are newly experiencing, this shift in cultural opinion is akin to Musk playing the role of John Galt and swinging the social control pendulum away from the government.

As we keep watching, do not forget to pause and notice there are many new social, cultural and political battles we are winning.

Be of good cheer, our assembly is growing, and we are gathering significant resources.

#ElonLegal

Source

Special Prosecutor Frames the Background of the Sussmann Case, The FBI Was Manipulated, Duped by Clinton Campaign

Special Prosecutor Frames the Background of the Sussmann Case, The FBI Was Manipulated, Duped by Clinton Campaign

New York Times narrative engineer Charlie Savage is tweeting from within a packed media center at the E. Barrett Prettyman courthouse in Washington DC for the government case against Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann. [TWEET THREAD]  The mentions and notations, while skewed toward the self interest of media, give us a good insight into what is taking place in the courtroom.

First things first. All media reporting of this case will be done through the prism of their own cooperation in the perpetration of the fraud.  The MSM knew along with everyone else inside and outside of government, that their efforts to create the Trump-Russia conspiracy and collusion narrative were based on fraudulent pretext manufactured by the Clinton campaign.  They all knew it. They all acted collaboratively and they all engaged purposefully.

As noted by Charlie Savage, prosecutor Deborah Shaw, a member of the Durham team, delivered the opening remarks to frame the government position in the case.

The telling remarks came early: “Shaw addresses “the elephant in the room” – tells jury their feelings about Russia, Trump, Clinton can’t play a role in the case. This is about “our FBI” which should not be used as a tool by anyone, Republicans or Democrats.”  In essence, prosecutor Shaw is telling the jury the FBI were duped into the Trump-Russia conspiracy investigation by outsiders connected to the Clinton campaign.

That’s a critical baseline from the government we must understand and accept.  That baseline now indicates that none of the DOJ and FBI operatives involved in the fraudulent scheme will be held accountable by the Durham team.  “Our FBI should not be used as a tool by anyone,” yet they were, so sayeth the United States Government.

There you have it folks.  For those who tried to avoid the uncomfortable reality of the situation. The Durham prosecution has set down the cornerstone establishing the DOJ/FBI was used and tricked.

The prosecution cannot later turn toward DOJ and FBI officials who were victimized by the Clinton outside group, reverse the predicate motive of the prior trial, and then hold the DOJ and FBI legally accountable.

That’s that.

The Durham accountability focus is now narrowed to the Clinton team, starting with Michael Sussmann.

This outcome was always visible when we accept the totality of the Robert Mueller probe as an overlay into this entire scenario.  Put into a question I have asked for two years:

How could John Durham hold DOJ and FBI officials accountable for participating in the Trump-Russia fraud, when those same DOJ and FBI officials were part of the Robert Mueller cover-up operation? 

Answer, they can’t.   If Durham were to connect the conspiracy of the outside government and inside government collusion, he would be penetrating an impregnable firewall that would take down multiple DC government institutions simultaneously.

Durham is being permitted to give the illusion of accountability, but he was not authorized or permitted to expose the Dept of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, or any other institution.

The vehicles of our justice institutions are rusted and broken.

Bill Barr was the Bondo application.  John Durham is the spray paint.

The question asked two years ago is answered.

Source

Durham Prosecutors Provide Evidence of Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Lying to FBI

Durham Prosecutors Provide Evidence of Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Lying to FBI

CTH begins every outline of the ongoing Durham investigation with the following disclaimer:  How is John Durham going to reveal everything that is possible about the deep state Trump targeting operation, and simultaneously handle the involvement of Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and the Special Counsel team who were specifically appointed to cover it up?

The short answer is, Durham can’t.  He’s not allowed to.

Durham can only outline the external participants in the corrupt activity of the U.S. government. No internal participants of government, legislative or executive, are allowed to be investigated.

In the latest court filings against Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, the prosecution drops some significant discoveries outlining how the external participants lied to willfully blind FBI officials.  Technofog has all the details:

On September 19, 2016, DNC/Clinton Campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann met with FBI General Counsel James Baker, where Baker was provided with data and “white paper” purporting to show covert communications (since proven to be bogus) between Russian Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization.

Special Counsel John Durham has just provided evidence that the night before – on September 18, 2016 – Sussmann sent Baker this text:

As it turns out, Sussmann was billing the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Alfa Bank hoax. This text from Sussmann to Baker is damning for Sussmann’s case, proving Sussmann’s efforts at deceiving a top official at the FBI about his clients, and demonstrating how Sussmann tried to convince Baker he was there to supposedly do the right thing. (read more)

This 2016 meeting between Sussmann and FBI Counsel James Baker took place in the lead up to the FBI and DOJ filing for the FISA warrant against the Trump campaign through Carter Page in October.  Sussmann has legal exposure for his lying to the FBI about the purposes of the manipulated information that came from Rodney Joffe (Tech Executive-1 in the Sussmann indictment).   As Technofog notes, Joffe also has legal exposure, however, he has not yet been charged.

While Sussmann was pushing fraudulent information into the open hands of the FBI, another Clinton campaign contractor, Fusion GPS, was pushing similarly constructed fraudulent information -including the Christopher Steele dossier- into the media, DOJ (Bruce Ohr) and FBI.

At the same time (September 2016), CIA Director John Brennan was briefing Barack Obama about the intentions of the Clinton campaign, and feeding information to Gang of Eight member Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid (now dead).  Harry Reid was using his position in the Senate to weaponize the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence who became an active participant in the overall attacks against candidate Donald Trump.

After they failed to defeat Trump in the November 2016, election, all of the participants in the scheme shifted the focus of the Trump-Russia construct from defeating Trump to now removing Trump from office.

The SSCI retained their critical role as newly installed Vice-Chairman Mark Warner worked closely with the FBI to get a special counsel appointed.   The Special Counsel, Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann, would then be used to take over the DOJ for two years and protect all of the participants.

During a period in February, March and April of 2017, the DOJ became less useful for the operations against Trump, as various DOJ officials from the Obama team exited Main Justice.  The legislative branch, specifically the Senate Intelligence Committee, desperate to keep the attack against Trump in place, worked almost exclusively with the FBI team, Deputy Comey, Asst. Deputy McCabe and FBI Counsel James Baker during this phase.

It was during February and early March when FBI Director James Comey was falsely telling President Trump he was not under FBI investigation.  However, despite Comey’s statements to Trump, the FBI Director would not make those statements public, because they were not true.  Comey was manipulating Trump to retain the false premise underlying the investigation.

In early March 2017, the Democrats in the legislative branch were desperate to get a special counsel installed who would assist them in hiding all of the activity that took place prior.  The collective effort was to flood the media with speculation, rumors and innuendo that Donald Trump was under FBI investigation.  This collaborative effort between the SSCI, FBI and media would ultimately help the goal of getting a special counsel appointed.

On March 17, 2017, SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner asked the FBI for a copy of the FISA application used against the Trump campaign, with the intent to leak it to the media (James Wolfe to Ali Watkins).

Warner could not ask the DOJ, because by that time Jeff Sessions was in place (recused March 2nd), and Acting Deputy AG Dana Boente was not considered as strong for the SSCI/FBI intents of the Trump removal effort.

FBI Director James Comey was schedule to testify to the House Intelligence Committee on March 20, 2017, where he would make the first public statement about President Donald Trump being under an active investigation.

Mark Warner coordinated with FBI leadership (Comey, McCabe) to receive the FISA application, so that he could leak it to the media in support of a push for the special counsel appointment.  The March 17th leak of the FISA application was timed to support the testimony by Comey a few days later on March 20th.

During this critical phase, Main Justice (Sessions, Boente, et al) was carved out of the political planning effort, and the SSCI worked directly with the FBI.

James Comey gave his testimony (3/20/17), SSCI Security Director James Wolfe did as he was told and leaked the FISA application (3/17/20), and with major stories of Trump now officially under investigation in the public – and all of the manipulated evidence (including an unredacted version of the FISA application) now in the media vaults for exploitation – the piranha pool was full of blood and the media frenzy began.

As soon as Rod Rosenstein was confirmed as Deputy AG (early April), and with Jeff Sessions purposefully recused from anything Trump-Russia, the FBI shifted slightly and began the pressure campaign toward Main Justice to appoint the special counsel.   The SSCI and FBI worked together to generate additional leaks to the media to get Robert Mueller appointed.

All of that internal activity is what John Durham is not permitted to look at, or else his investigation will be shut down.  Hence the disclaimer “How is John Durham going to reveal everything that is possible about the deep state Trump targeting operation, and simultaneously handle the involvement of Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and the Special Counsel team who were specifically appointed to cover it up?”  The short answer is, he won’t.

Bill Barr was the Bondo…  John Durham is the spray paint.

The corrupt and weaponized DOJ, FBI and SSCI government institutions remain unfazed.

That’s the rub.

Source

Durham Prosecutors Provide Evidence of Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Lying to FBI

Durham Prosecutors Provide Evidence of Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Lying to FBI

CTH begins every outline of the ongoing Durham investigation with the following disclaimer:  How is John Durham going to reveal everything that is possible about the deep state Trump targeting operation, and simultaneously handle the involvement of Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and the Special Counsel team who were specifically appointed to cover it up?

The short answer is, Durham can’t.  He’s not allowed to.

Durham can only outline the external participants in the corrupt activity of the U.S. government. No internal participants of government, legislative or executive, are allowed to be investigated.

In the latest court filings against Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, the prosecution drops some significant discoveries outlining how the external participants lied to willfully blind FBI officials.  Technofog has all the details:

On September 19, 2016, DNC/Clinton Campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann met with FBI General Counsel James Baker, where Baker was provided with data and “white paper” purporting to show covert communications (since proven to be bogus) between Russian Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization.

Special Counsel John Durham has just provided evidence that the night before – on September 18, 2016 – Sussmann sent Baker this text:

As it turns out, Sussmann was billing the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Alfa Bank hoax. This text from Sussmann to Baker is damning for Sussmann’s case, proving Sussmann’s efforts at deceiving a top official at the FBI about his clients, and demonstrating how Sussmann tried to convince Baker he was there to supposedly do the right thing. (read more)

This 2016 meeting between Sussmann and FBI Counsel James Baker took place in the lead up to the FBI and DOJ filing for the FISA warrant against the Trump campaign through Carter Page in October.  Sussmann has legal exposure for his lying to the FBI about the purposes of the manipulated information that came from Rodney Joffe (Tech Executive-1 in the Sussmann indictment).   As Technofog notes, Joffe also has legal exposure, however, he has not yet been charged.

While Sussmann was pushing fraudulent information into the open hands of the FBI, another Clinton campaign contractor, Fusion GPS, was pushing similarly constructed fraudulent information -including the Christopher Steele dossier- into the media, DOJ (Bruce Ohr) and FBI.

At the same time (September 2016), CIA Director John Brennan was briefing Barack Obama about the intentions of the Clinton campaign, and feeding information to Gang of Eight member Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid (now dead).  Harry Reid was using his position in the Senate to weaponize the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence who became an active participant in the overall attacks against candidate Donald Trump.

After they failed to defeat Trump in the November 2016, election, all of the participants in the scheme shifted the focus of the Trump-Russia construct from defeating Trump to now removing Trump from office.

The SSCI retained their critical role as newly installed Vice-Chairman Mark Warner worked closely with the FBI to get a special counsel appointed.   The Special Counsel, Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann, would then be used to take over the DOJ for two years and protect all of the participants.

During a period in February, March and April of 2017, the DOJ became less useful for the operations against Trump, as various DOJ officials from the Obama team exited Main Justice.  The legislative branch, specifically the Senate Intelligence Committee, desperate to keep the attack against Trump in place, worked almost exclusively with the FBI team, Deputy Comey, Asst. Deputy McCabe and FBI Counsel James Baker during this phase.

It was during February and early March when FBI Director James Comey was falsely telling President Trump he was not under FBI investigation.  However, despite Comey’s statements to Trump, the FBI Director would not make those statements public, because they were not true.  Comey was manipulating Trump to retain the false premise underlying the investigation.

In early March 2017, the Democrats in the legislative branch were desperate to get a special counsel installed who would assist them in hiding all of the activity that took place prior.  The collective effort was to flood the media with speculation, rumors and innuendo that Donald Trump was under FBI investigation.  This collaborative effort between the SSCI, FBI and media would ultimately help the goal of getting a special counsel appointed.

On March 17, 2017, SSCI Vice-Chairman Mark Warner asked the FBI for a copy of the FISA application used against the Trump campaign, with the intent to leak it to the media (James Wolfe to Ali Watkins).

Warner could not ask the DOJ, because by that time Jeff Sessions was in place (recused March 2nd), and Acting Deputy AG Dana Boente was not considered as strong for the SSCI/FBI intents of the Trump removal effort.

FBI Director James Comey was schedule to testify to the House Intelligence Committee on March 20, 2017, where he would make the first public statement about President Donald Trump being under an active investigation.

Mark Warner coordinated with FBI leadership (Comey, McCabe) to receive the FISA application, so that he could leak it to the media in support of a push for the special counsel appointment.  The March 17th leak of the FISA application was timed to support the testimony by Comey a few days later on March 20th.

During this critical phase, Main Justice (Sessions, Boente, et al) was carved out of the political planning effort, and the SSCI worked directly with the FBI.

James Comey gave his testimony (3/20/17), SSCI Security Director James Wolfe did as he was told and leaked the FISA application (3/17/20), and with major stories of Trump now officially under investigation in the public – and all of the manipulated evidence (including an unredacted version of the FISA application) now in the media vaults for exploitation – the piranha pool was full of blood and the media frenzy began.

As soon as Rod Rosenstein was confirmed as Deputy AG (early April), and with Jeff Sessions purposefully recused from anything Trump-Russia, the FBI shifted slightly and began the pressure campaign toward Main Justice to appoint the special counsel.   The SSCI and FBI worked together to generate additional leaks to the media to get Robert Mueller appointed.

All of that internal activity is what John Durham is not permitted to look at, or else his investigation will be shut down.  Hence the disclaimer “How is John Durham going to reveal everything that is possible about the deep state Trump targeting operation, and simultaneously handle the involvement of Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and the Special Counsel team who were specifically appointed to cover it up?”  The short answer is, he won’t.

Bill Barr was the Bondo…  John Durham is the spray paint.

The corrupt and weaponized DOJ, FBI and SSCI government institutions remain unfazed.

That’s the rub.

Source

Igor Danchenko Now Represented by Hillary Clinton Lawyers

Igor Danchenko Now Represented by Hillary Clinton Lawyers

This is weirdly revealing (Hat Tip Technofog).

In a court filing today by Special Counsel John Durham [pdf here] it’s noted that previously indicted Igor Danchenko, the primary sub-source for Christopher Steele’s fraudulent dossier against Donald Trump, is now represented by the same lawyers representing Hillary Clinton’s legal interests.  John Durham is asking the court to evaluate the legal conflicts:

(pdf Here)

Why would the legal firm representing Hillary Clinton (to the Durham probe) step-in to represent Igor Danchenko in his criminal indictment?

The only logical reason would be for Danchenko to represent a legal risk to the interests of Hillary Clinton, likely through the direct association between Hillary Clinton and Charles Dolan, Danchenko’s collaborator and the liaison to Chris Steele from the Clinton campaign.

As a result of the Durham indictment, we know Igor Danchenko was working closely with Democrat Party public relations executive Charles Dolan to funnel the fabricated source material to Chris Steele.  The Clinton team’s communication and contact with Charles Dolan would represent a legal risk to Hillary Clinton.

If Charles Dolan and Hillary Clinton were in communication, it seems like that would be the motive for Clinton’s lawyers to want to control Danchenko’s legal status and any statements to John Durham or the court.  More than likely, the people in/around Hillary Clinton are the ones paying the law firm to represent Igor Danchenko.

Source

Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Indicted For Lying to FBI While Spreading The False Alfa Bank Trump-Russia Collusion Conspiracy on Behalf of Clinton Campaign

Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Indicted For Lying to FBI While Spreading The False Alfa Bank Trump-Russia Collusion Conspiracy on Behalf of Clinton Campaign

U.S. Special Counsel John Durham has released an indictment [pdf here] of Perkins Coie lawyer Michael Sussmann for lying to federal investigators in 2016 about the people and motives behind his FBI contact.  He failed to tell them his intent was to spread a false Alfa Bank conspiracy theory on behalf of the Clinton campaign.

Working for the Perkins Coie law firm, while under contract with Hillary Clinton’s campaign, partner Michael Sussmann contacted FBI Legal Counsel James Baker to pitch evidence that a Russian bank was in digital communications with servers in Trump Tower.  The Alfa Bank allegation was one of the key components for the ridiculous Trump-Russia narrative put together by the Hillary Clinton campaign.  Sussmann wanted the FBI to investigate Donald Trump, so that Hillary Clinton could push a political fabrication about Donald Trump working with Russians to steal the presidential election.

According to the indictment, Sussmann failed to tell the FBI that he was giving them this information on behalf of the Clinton campaign.  The FBI investigated the claims and found nothing; however, it was the appearance of the investigation that Clinton needed in order to leak/push the Trump-Russia story to the media and stir up the controversy.  There had to be something to the “Trump-Russia” story, because the FBI was investigating it.  That fabricated smear served its intended purpose, and the media ran with it.

With the indictment now public, The New York Times also now admits Michael Sussmann was their source for stories they wrote about Alfa bank:

New York Times – […] In early September, the indictment said, Mr. Sussmann met with a New York Times reporter who would later draft a story about Alfa Bank, and also began work on a so-called white paper that would summarize and explain the researchers’ data and analysis, billing the time to the Clinton campaign.

On Sept. 12, the indictment said, Mr. Sussmann called Mr. Elias, the Clinton campaign lawyer, and spoke about his “efforts to communicate” with the Times reporter about the Alfa Bank allegations. Both billed the call to the campaign. And three days later, Mr. Elias exchanged emails with top campaign officials about the matter. (read more)

[…] Mr. Sussmann also continued to push the Alfa Bank story to reporters. A month before the election, as Times editors were weighing whether to publish an article the reporter had drafted, Mr. Sussmann told him he should show the editors an opinion essay saying the paper’s investigative reporters had not published as many stories regarding Mr. Trump as other media outlets, the indictment said.  (read more)

(Indictment pdf Source)

Perkins Coie is “law firm-1”.  Mark Elias is “campaign lawyer 1”.   The “US Investigative Firm” is Fusion GPS.   “Tech Executive-1” is likely Shawn Henry of Crowdstrike, although there are other possibilities.

In March 2016, Fusion GPS approached Perkins Coie to discuss potential engagement in the development of opposition research on Donald Trump, fully aware that Perkins Coie represented both the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign.

In April 2016, Perkins Coie retained Fusion GPS on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Towards the end of the month, on April 29, Perkins Coie partner Michael Sussmann contacted Shawn Henry of CrowdStrike Services to hire the organization for the Democratic National Committee after a series of phishing e-mails started to affect their employees.

Before June 14, 2016, Sussmann, CrowdStrike Services and the Democratic National Committee carefully crafted a damage control story with regards to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, which Dmitri Alperovitch and Shawn Henry released to Ellen Nakashima at The Washington Post.

On June 14, 2016, Nakashima, with contributions from Tom Hamburger, published the article “Russian government hackers penetrated DNC, stole opposition research on Trump” in The Washington Post.

After the article’s publishing, a number of bipartisan computer scientists — which included “John McCain Republicans” — started to search for Russian infiltrators. The members of the group were scattered across America and were numerous (there were at least nine members). To search for the infiltrators, they used the Domain Name System (DNS).

In late July 2016, a member of the bipartisan computer scientist organisation, known by the alias “Tea Leaves”, discovered potential malware moving from the Alfa Bank server to the Trump Organization server. The information “Tea Leaves” discovered was then circulated among his colleagues.

“Tea Leaves himself told The Intercept that he had to keep his identity and methods a secret because, ‘I run a cybersecurity company and I do not want DDOS and never have we been DDOS, nor do I want other attention.’” — The Intercept

“I also spoke with academics who vouched for Tea Leaves’ integrity and his unusual access to information. ‘This is someone I know well and is very well-known in the networking community,’ said Camp. ‘When they say something about DNS, you believe them. This person has technical authority and access to data.’” — Franklin Foer, Slate

October 31, 2016, Franklin Foer published the article, “Was a Trump Server Communicating With Russia?”, in Slate. This article was then retweeted by Hillary Clinton in a tweet which read: “It’s time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia.”

This was soon followed by a statement from Jake Sullivan, tweeted through Hillary Clinton’s account: “Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank.”

At the same time, days before Election Day 2016, the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee ceased funding Fusion GPS’s research. Fusion GPS then passed Steele’s reports to Marc Elias at Perkins Coie.

The rest, as they say, is history….

Here’s the Indictment:

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)