Monday, March 26, 2018

The FBI caught lying

09:50 – Doesn’t Add Up. Never Has. Never Will. 09:50 The FBI Lied, Not Steele…

Senator Lindsey Graham appears on Fox News for an interview with Maria Bartiromo.  99.99% of the interview is country club Senator Graham repeating the same South Carolina white wine spritzer talking points he’s famous for.  That is to say lots of words amounting to nothing. The gastric equivalence of cucumber and mayonnaise triangle sandwiches on crust-less Wonder bread with a side of celery.
However, there is a reminder at 09:50 of a key and important point that tries to surface yet continues to get whacked down by the annoying duplicity of swamp creatures and a media that completely ignores the obvious.  Lindsey Graham claims Christopher Steele lied and told the FBI he never talked to media.
We do not know this to be true, and neither does he.
It is far more likely the FBI:… #1) Ignored Chris Steele talking to media because they needed his Clinton-Steele dossier for a false FISA application; and #2) the FBI later told congress they didn’t know about Steele talking to media, but they really did; and #3) the FBI falsified FD-302 reports of their interview with Chris Steele to cover their tracks.
Here’s how we know:
Christopher Steele had no motive to lie to the FBI about his media contacts.
The FBI had tons of motive to lie about their knowing Steele talked to the media.
It’s just common sense.
Christopher Steele wasn’t meeting in secret with the media, it was well known.  He was traveling around to meet them in August and September 2016.  Why would he lie to the FBI about such transparently well known action in October?  Answer: He wouldn’t.
Toward the end of December, the FBI provided the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, with FBI investigative documents (likely FD-302’s) from their contacts with Christopher Steele.  According to most reasonable timing we can discover Steele met with FBI officials sometime around October 1st, 2016.
From the U.K. lawsuit against Christopher Steele (pdf here), Steele admits to having shopped the Clinton-Steele dossier to U.S. media outlets “in person” in late September (New York Times, WaPo, New Yorker and CNN), and mid-October, 2016 (New York Times, WaPo, and Yahoo News), per instructions from Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS):
Additionally, in late October, 2016, Christopher Steele briefed Mother Jones via Skype.
According to the HPSCI intelligence memo, the FBI sought a FISA application based on the Steele Dossier on October 21st, 2016.  From the evidenced  UK court records at least two briefings with reporters, containing five outlets, took place prior to the FBI using the Clinton-Steele dossier in their FISA application.
The “late September” briefings with the New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo News, New Yorker and CNN took place prior to Christopher Steele meeting with FBI officials early October.
The implication therein is that the FBI had to know prior to their October 21st, 2016, court application that the information they were presenting to the FISA court was being heavily shopped to media outlets. This would be immediately disqualifying.
However, in the released HPSCI memo, it is noted that Christopher Steele lied to the FBI about those media engagements taking place.  See:
The HPSCI memo notes the FBI relationship with Christopher Steele was terminated after the FISA application (Oct. 21st, 2016), as a result of the Mother Jones article from October 30th, 2016.  Media contact by an FBI material witness is immediately disqualifying.

The question is: did the FBI submit the FISA application under false pretenses?  Did the FBI actually know Christopher Steele was shopping the dossier to the media prior to their FISA court submission?

The HPSCI memo gives the FBI the benefit of doubt by presuming the FBI were unaware or “lied to“.
The FD-302’s (FBI investigative interview notes), which appear to have been turned over to Senate Chairman Chuck Grassley, could contain the evidence to support the FBI being duped; – OR – show the FBI knew, and proceeded in using the dossier despite disqualifying knowledge of media involvement; – OR – the FBI could have manipulated the FD-302’s.
These important questions loom over the FBI classified documents behind the Grassley criminal referral.
In an effort to get the answer to those questions into sunlight; and with the understanding that Chairman Grassley has the FBI documents; Grassley produced a memo for declassification that facilitates understanding how the FBI claims it used the Clinton-Steele dossier during their investigation.
On January 5th, 2018,  The Grassley Memo approach surfaced. Grassley issues a statement on the reason for the criminal referral. He lets us know that he ALSO has a classified memo that he is trying to get released! Unlike Nunes he needs to go through DOJ:
January 24th, 2018, Grassley Speech: “Hiding From Tough Questions” – In his 17 minute speech Grassley reveals important details about his investigation into Steele and the FBI.
Thanks to the brilliant work of DaveNYviii we can walk through this carefully, and watch the outline in a logical sequence.
FIRST – The Criminal Referral:
SECOND – The Discrepancies:
“If those [FBI] documents are not true, and there are serious discrepancies that are no fault of Mr. Steele, then we have another problem—an arguably more serious one.”
The FBI, via Agent Peter Strzok, was already caught (text messages with his co-hort Lisa Page) admitting to falsifying FD-302 material during this exact time frame.
At first, the context behind the September 10th, 2016, message was elusive, however it is now clear.
On September 2nd, 2016, during the (pre-election) apex of the FBI providing the documents behind their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of her personal email, and the subsequent decision by FBI Director James Comey not to pursue criminal charges therein, the FBI released their investigative files:
September 2nd, 2016 FBI Press Release:
“Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter.
We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI’s electronic FOIA library.” (link)
The FBI was under pressure to release their investigative documents.  On Sept 2nd, 2016 the release included the FBI investigative notes (FD-302’s) from the questions and answers during Hillary Clinton’s interview.  This investigative release was big news at the time.
The 302’s are the specific FBI forms used to document interviews/interrogations. They detail questions asked and answers given as well as who was present during the interview.
Inside the September 2nd, 2016, FBI release were two files:
•One file was 47 pages (full pdf here) and includes a full summary of the Clinton email investigation.
•The second file is 11 pages (full pdf here) and is the actual FBI investigator notes during the Hillary Clinton interview.
This second file is the “FD-302” (embed at the bottom for reference).  This is the 302 file FBI Agent Peter Strzok is referencing in the text message to Lisa Page.  Remember, Peter Strzok was one of the FBI people who actually interviewed Hillary Clinton.
What FBI Agent Peter Strzok is admitting in the September 10th text message, is that there are details within the interview of Hillary Clinton that he (and others) intentionally withheld from the September 2nd, 2016, release.
Specifically, evidence withheld in the 302’s would be some of the FBI questions and some of the Hillary Clinton answers to those questions.   In essence, the FBI held back actually releasing the full account of the interview.
According to the Strzok text message, the reason for withholding some of the details of the Hillary Clinton interview is because there are “very INFLAMMATORY things” within it; and once congress finds out what was withheld the details will “absolutely inflame” them.
Peter Strzok then goes on to say when/if the full FOIA is released, presumably post-election, Jim, Trisha, Dave and Mike are going to have to figure out how to deal with the discrepancy:

…”I’m sure Jim and Trisha and Dave and Mike are all considering how things like that will play out as they talk among themselves.”

•”Jim” is likely James Baker, the disgraced Chief Legal Counsel for FBI Director James Comey.  He was busted out of a job right before congressional questioning.
•”Trish” is likely Trisha Beth Anderson, Office of Legal Counsel for the FBI.  [Anderson was hired for the DOJ, by AG Eric Holder, from Eric Holder’s law firm.]
•”Dave” was likely David Laufman the Deputy Asst. Attorney General in charge of counterintelligence.  Laufman sat in on the questioning of Hillary Clinton and resigned RIGHT AFTER these Strzok/Page text messages were released. [SEE HERE]
•And “Mike” was almost certainly Mike Kortan, the FBI Communications Director who also resigned right after the Nunes memo was released, when confronted by FBI Director Christopher Wray about an unauthorized FBI statement which attempted to undermine the HPSCI memo content. [See HERE and HERE]
So it would appear, James Baker and Trisha Anderson, the legal advisers at the top of the FBI leadership apparatus, in addition to Lisa Page the DOJ attorney assigned to the staff of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, were all legally aware the September 2nd, 2016, FOIA release was manipulated by the FBI to conceal part of Hillary Clinton’s questions and answers.
Perhaps now we can better understand the importance of this specific text message as it was released by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte.
This message by Strzok shows a team of FBI officials intentionally conspiring to withhold “inflammatory” Clinton investigation evidence, from congress. And the decision-making goes directly to the very top leadership within the FBI.
Peter Strzok justifies his knowledge of the intentionally withheld 302 interview material by claiming: “because they weren’t relevant to understanding the focus of the investigation”.  However, to evaluate the filter this investigative team are applying we only need to look at the wording of their public release which accompanied the material:
Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. (link)
They felt obligated only to release information about “classified” or “improperly stored or transmitted” information.   That’s a rather disingenuous investigation.
There’s no mention of any FBI intent to investigate action or conduct undertaken by Hillary Clinton or her team to hide the use of classified or improperly stored information; or any intent to look at a cover-up, scrubbing, or conduct that happened AFTER it was discovered that she unlawfully used a personal e-mail server during her tenure.
We can see from the wording of the FBI public release, and the overlay of the text message from interviewer Peter Strzok, a deliberate effort to inquire into only the surface issues of classified information transmission and storage.  There was no investigative intent to go beyond that, and no information released, intentionally, that might disclose any larger issues.
If the FBI was legitimately conducting an investigation, and providing the subsequent evidence from within that investigation,  the FOIA would include all material relevant to the investigation, which would include all 302 (essentially Q&A) pages. However, the set of questions and answers the FBI released on Sept. 2nd 2016 was not the full set of Questions and Answers. They withheld something, likely “inflammatory”, per FBI Agent Strzok.
FBI Agent Peter Strzok is outlining in this text message a deliberate intent to shape the Clinton interview, and then a deliberative process of filtering out only those aspects of the interview that would support their pre-determined outcome, delivered only days later.
Additionally, FBI Agent Strzok is admitting that a group of FBI officials including himself, James Baker, Trisha Anderson, Lisa Page, and likely others (McCabe, Comey) conspired together to intentionally withhold  information -derived from this interview- from congress and the American people.


File #1 of Document release – Investigation Summary:

File #2 – The Summary of Interview – The 302’s:


No comments: