Quoted:
Eric Holder feels the heat, owns this page, and wants to keep the DOJ respecting "time tested norms" like gun running and stonewalling.

More DOJ norms being eroded. Trump-a SUBJECT of the investigation-wants access to material related to the inquiry. His Congressional supporters want evidence connected to an ongoing investigation. Time for DOJ/FBI to simply say no-protect the institutions and time tested norms.

Eric Holder  (@EricHolder) May 21, 2018

Quoted:
A little humor while we wait for the first IG report to drop.'

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DeuAzrsV4AIfKaC.jpg

Sources also say that investigators were particularly interested in whether anyone else in the congressional offices that all of these IT aides worked for was involved in alleged improper activity. This might include Rep. Wasserman Schultz, who was the Democratic National Committee (DNC) chair when she employed Awan. It might also include former Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., who employed Awan when Becerra was chairman of the House Democratic Caucus. Becerra is now California attorney general.

“The House Office of Inspector General tracked the Awans network usage and found that a massive amount of data was flowing from the (congressional) networks,” said Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa. “Over 5,700 logins by the five Awan associates were discovered on a single server within the House, the server of the Democratic Caucus Chairman, then Rep. Xavier Becerra of California. Up to 40 or more members of Congress had all of their data moved out their office servers and onto the Becerra server without their knowledge or consent.”

The U.S. Department of Justice is investigating a “former staffer” from the corrupt Senate Intelligence Committee.  There’s a strong likelihood the “former staffer” is Dan Jones, the senior staff aide to Senator Dianne Feinstein when she was Vice-Chair of the committee and Gang-of-Eight member.

Quoted:
Leak it

Quoted:
How many more times are you guys going to get your hopes up and think something is actually going to happen?  

Battered wife syndrome at it's finest......maybe, just maybe some low level staffer that no one outside of the inner circles in DC has ever heard of will take the fall for some low level crime and then be set up with a lifetime gig making 7 figures on K street.  Expecting anything else is just laughable.

Hell, it's likely no one will even lose their jobs over any of this, let alone be charged with a crime

Quoted:
No plea, no deal.  Let 'em hang.
Treason.  Plain and simple.

An FBI attorney who sent anti-Trump text messages — including one calling for “resistance” against Trump — took part in at least one interview last year with George Papadopoulos, the former Trump campaign adviser who has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.

The lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, was part of the FBI team that interviewed Papadopoulos on Feb. 16, 2017, a source familiar with the interview tells TheDCNF.

Quoted:
Once again.  Nobody will go to jail.  Hell, nobody will even be indicted.

Multiple reviews of whether FBI agents’ political bias affected the Russia-Trump collusion case remain in their infancy, but investigators already have unearthed troubling internal communications long withheld from public view.

We already know from FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok’s now-infamous text messages with his fellow agent and reported lover, Lisa Page, that Strzok — the man driving that Russia collusion investigation — disdained Donald Trump and expressed willingness to use his law enforcement powers to “stop” the Republican from becoming president.

The question that lingers, unanswered: Did those sentiments affect official actions?

Memos the FBI is now producing to the Department of Justice (DOJ) inspector general and multiple Senate and House committees offer what sources involved in the production, review or investigation describe to me as “damning” or “troubling” evidence.

They show Strzok and his counterintelligence team rushing in the fall of 2016 to find “derogatory” information from informants or a “pretext” to accelerate the probe and get a surveillance warrant on figures tied to the future president.

One of those figures was Carter Page, an academic and an energy consultant from New York; he was briefly a volunteer foreign policy adviser for the GOP nominee’s campaign and visited Moscow the summer before the election.

The memos show Strzok, Lisa Page and others in counterintelligence monitored news articles in September 2016 that quoted a law enforcement source as saying the FBI was investigating Carter Page’s travel to Moscow.

The FBI team pounced on what it saw as an opportunity as soon as Page wrote a letter to then-FBI Director James Comey complaining about the “completely false” leak.

“At a minimum, the letter provides us a pretext to interview,” Strzok wrote to Lisa Page on Sept. 26, 2016.

Within weeks, that “pretext” — often a synonym for an excuse — had been upsized to a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court warrant, giving the FBI the ability to use some of its most awesome powers to monitor Carter Page and his activities.

To date, the former Trump adviser has been accused of no wrongdoing despite being subjected to nearly a year of surveillance.

Some internal memos detail the pressure being applied by the FBI to DOJ prosecutors to get the warrant on Carter Page buttoned up before Election Day.

In one email exchange with the subject line “Crossfire FISA,” Strzok and Lisa Page discussed talking points to get then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to persuade a high-ranking DOJ official to sign off on the warrant.

“Crossfire Hurricane” was one of the code names for four separate investigations the FBI conducted related to Russia matters in the 2016 election.

“At a minimum, that keeps the hurry the F up pressure on him,” Strzok emailed Page on Oct. 14, 2016, less than four weeks before Election Day.

Four days later the same team was emailing about rushing to get approval for another FISA warrant for another Russia-related investigation code-named “Dragon.”

“Still an expedite?” one of the emails beckoned, as the FBI tried to meet the requirements of a process known as a Woods review before a FISA warrant can be approved by the courts.

“Any idea what time he can have it woods-ed by?” Strzok asked Page. “I know it’s not going to matter because DOJ is going to take the time DOJ wants to take. I just don’t want this waiting on us at all.”

Until all the interviews are completed by Congress and DOJ’s inspector general later this year, we won’t know why counterintelligence agents who normally take a methodical approach to investigation felt so much pressure days before the election on this case.

Were they concerned about losing a chance to gather evidence at a critical moment? Or maybe, as some Republicans long have suspected, they wanted to impact the election?

The agents got the Carter Page warrant in October and, within two weeks, Democrats in Congress such as then-Sen. Harry Reid (Nev.) and some media members were raising questions about the FBI withholding word of a probe that could hurt Trump. FBI agents monitored those reports, too.

The day after Trump’s surprising win on Nov. 9, 2016, the FBI counterintelligence team engaged in a new mission, bluntly described in another string of emails prompted by another news leak.

“We need ALL of their names to scrub, and we should give them ours for the same purpose,” Strzok emailed Page on Nov. 10, 2016, citing a Daily Beast article about some of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s allegedly unsavory ties overseas.

“Andy didn’t get any others,” Page wrote back, apparently indicating McCabe didn’t have names to add to the “scrub.”

“That’s what Bill said,” Strzok wrote back, apparently referring to then-FBI chief of counterintelligence William Priestap. “I suggested we need to exchange our entire lists as we each have potential derogatory CI info the other doesn’t.” CI is short for confidential informants.

It’s an extraordinary exchange, if for no other reason than this: The very day after Trump wins the presidency, some top FBI officials are involved in the sort of gum-shoeing normally reserved for field agents, and their goal is to find derogatory information about someone who had worked for the president-elect.

As the president-elect geared up to take over, the FBI made another move that has captured investigators’ attention: It named an executive with expertise in the FBI’s most sensitive surveillance equipment to be a liaison to the Trump transition.

On its face, that seems odd; technical surveillance nerds aren’t normally the first picks for plum political assignments. Even odder, the FBI counterintelligence team running the Russia-Trump collusion probe seemed to have an interest in the appointment.

These and other documents are still being disseminated to various oversight bodies in Congress, and more revelations are certain to occur.

Yet, now, irrefutable proof exists that agents sought to create pressure to get “derogatory” information and a “pretext” to interview people close to a future president they didn’t like.

Clear evidence also exists that an investigation into still-unproven collusion between a foreign power and a U.S. presidential candidate was driven less by secret information from Moscow and more by politically tainted media leaks.

And that means the dots between expressions of political bias and official actions just got a little more connected.    

During the hearing, Special Agent Jeffrey Pfeiffer provided limited testimony based upon his recollection of the meeting. In referring to his notes concerning statements made by government officials to the Associated Press reporters, Special Agent Pfeiffer had no present recollection. (Tr. of June 29, 2018 Motions Hearing at 35). Indeed, he was asked if he recalled “at the conclusion of the meeting, the AP reporters asked if we would be willing to tell them if they were off base or on the wrong track, and they were advised that they appear to have a good understanding of Manafort’s business dealings.” ( Id. at 34–35.) Agent Pfeiffer said he had norecollection of that being said. (Id.) However, based on documents provided only last Friday at the Court’s hearing, also present at the April 11 meeting was Supervisory Special Agent (“SSA”) Karen Greenaway, who also prepared an electronic communication (“EC”) relating to the substance of that meeting (see Exhibit C). SSA’s Greenaway’s EC is considerably more detailed than Special Agent Pfeiffer’s EC and italso includes specific DOJ statements to the AP reporters that are not contained in Agent Pfeiffer’s EC (see Exhibit D):
-The meeting was arranged by Andrew Weissmann;

- Andrew Weissmann directed the AP reporters to ask the Cypriot Anti-MoneyLaundering Authority (“MOKAS”) if they had provided the U.S. Department of Treasury with everything to which they had access or only provided what they were legally required to provide;

- When the AP reporters inquired about FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act)violations, DOJ attendees confirmed that they were prosecutable; and

- When the AP reporters asked if DOJ would tell them if they were off base or on the wrong track, government attendees confirmed that the AP reporters appeared to have a good understanding of Manafort’s business dealings in Ukraine.  

Quoted:
John Podesta Met With Fusion GPS Founder After Trump Dossier Was Published

http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/11/john-podesta-met-with-fusion-gps-founder-after-trump-dossier-was-published/

Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta met with the founder of the opposition research firm behind the Trump dossier just after the dirty document was published earlier this year, according to a new report in The New York Times.

The revelation is significant because Podesta, a longtime Democratic operative, recently told the Senate Intelligence Committee that he did not know who paid the research firm, Fusion GPS, to produce the dossier, which BuzzFeed published on Jan. 10.

An associate of Podesta’s told The Times that he met with Glenn Simpson, the founding partner of Fusion GPS, to compare notes about Russia’s meddling in the election.

Podesta’s associate told The Times that Simpson was considering whether his firm should continue its investigation of Trump’s alleged ties to Russia.

The Times report does not say whether Podesta and Simpson discussed the Clinton campaign’s involvement in the dossier project.

It was reported last month that Perkins Coie, the law firm that represented the Clinton campaign and DNC, hired Fusion GPS in April 2016 to investigate Trump. Fusion hired former British spy Christopher Steele that June to investigate Trump’s activities in Russia.

Perkins Coie paid Fusion GPS just over $1 million for its work on the project. Fusion paid Steele $168,000.

Nobody on the Clinton campaign has come forward to acknowledge that they knew about the dossier project prior to the salacious report being published. Hillary Clinton herself has said she did not know of Fusion’s involvement until it was reported this January. Campaign manager Robby Mook hinted in a recent interview that he was vaguely aware of an opposition research project and received briefings on some information about Trump. But he said that he did not know of Fusion’s and Steele’s involvement. (RELATED: Robby Mook Opens Up About The Trump Dossier)

Podesta testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee before it was publicly revealed that the Clinton campaign and DNC had hired Fusion GPS. In that interview, Podesta denied knowing anything about who paid for the investigation.

Podesta was joined in the interview by Marc Elias, his attorney and the general counsel for the Clinton campaign and DNC.

Elias, a partner at Perkins Coie, was directly involved in hiring Fusion GPS. But according to CNN, he did not acknowledge in the Senate interview that he was involved in paying Fusion.

Quoted:

All roads lead to Perkins Coie.

Quoted:

BREAKING: The CrowdStrike analyst who ran the forensics on DNC servers worked for Mueller at FBI and in fact was personally promoted by Mueller

— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 18, 2018

Quoted:
thread on C. page FISA warrants

http://magaimg.net/img/5s2u.png

Quoted:
Declassify it and print it in full context with no gaps or redacted BS.

Quoted:

The entire House gets access, what are the odds it gets leaked?

I can see the Congress Critters literally racing for the door to be the first.

Quoted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOVJMsFUuWI

Looks like some senators are gonna get a pass for leaking fisa documents through a staffer.