Good morning all.
Hope your weekend was a great one.
Smoking gun: Comey told Clapper FBI unable to 'sufficiently corroborate' Steele — then signed FISA
In January 2017 email to intel chief coughed up under court order, the former FBI director contradicted sworn avowal to FISA court that Steele dossier was verified.
The very day in January 2017 that then-FBI Director James Comey signed a FISA surveillance warrant application declaring content from Christopher Steele's dossier had been "verified," he wrote President Obama's outgoing intelligence community chief with a very different assessment of the British spy's intelligence on Russia collusion, a newly released memo shows.
"We are not able to sufficiently corroborate the reporting," Comey wrote in a Jan. 12, 2017 email to then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper that was declassified and made public through an open records lawsuit by the Southeastern Legal Foundation.
The memo recounts an internal debate inside the U.S. intelligence community during one of the most delicate moments in the FBI's then six-month old Crossfire Hurricane probe.
CIA officials had already informed Comey's FBI that the target of the FISA warrant, Carter Page, wasn't a Russian spy but rather an asset helping U.S. intelligence. The bureau had received warnings about Steele and the reliability of his source network, including that it might have been compromised by Russian disinformation. Agents had also just recommended on Jan. 4, 2017 shutting down the probe's inquiry into incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn for lack of evidence.
The FBI had been warned the previous summer that Hillary Clinton's campaign may have planted the false Russia collusion story as a way to "vilify" Trump and distract from her email scandal, and agents were about to interview Steele's primary sub-source, who would discount much of the information in the dossier attributed to him as bar talk and unconfirmed rumor not worthy of official intelligence.
And the larger intelligence community had decided it did not want to vouch for the Steele dossier in its official Intelligence Community Assessment about Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election.
It was in that environment in the final days of the Obama administration that Clapper had written Comey earlier on Jan. 12, 2017 to inform the FBI that Clapper had decided to release a public statement declaring that the Steele dossier was only mentioned in an appendix to the intel community's report because the "IC has not made any judgment that the information in the document is reliable."
Comey tried to push back, suggesting Steele was deemed reliable (he actually had been terminated by the FBI for leaking by that time) and that his network included sources that might be in a position to know things (although the key source had already disavowed the information attributed to him in the dossier).
"I just had a chance to review the proposed talking points on this for today," Comey wrote Clapper. "Perhaps it is a nit, but I worry that it may not be best to say 'the IC has not made any judgment that the information in the document is reliable.' I say that because we HAVE concluded that the source is reliable and has a track record with us of reporting reliable information; we have some visibility into his source network, some of which we have determined to be sub-sources in a position to report on such things; and much of what he reports in the current document is consistent with and corroborative of other reporting included in the body of the main IC report.
Then Comey added the line that undercut his argument: "That said, we are not able to sufficiently corroborate the reporting to include it in the body of the report."
You can read the full memo here:
https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2021-02/ComeyClapperMemo1-12-17.pdf
Cont.
The email exchange does not reflect whether Clapper responded again.
A report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz that sharply criticized Comey's FBI for misconduct in the Russia probe — including falsifying a document and submitting erroneous information to the courts — revealed that the very same day as the Clapper exchange Comey signed the first application to renew a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant, thus extending the spying on Page for another three months. The IG concluded the Jan. 12, 2017 application contained erroneous information.
"The FBI filed three renewal applications with the FISC, on January 12, April 7, and June 29, 2017. In addition to repeating the seven significant errors contained in the first FISA application and outlined above, we identified 10 additional significant errors in the three renewal applications," Horowitz's IG report said.
The Jan. 12, 2017 application signed by Comey was marked "verified," representing to the FISA court that allegations from Steele's dossier that Page had met two sanctioned Russians in summer 2016 and had tried to change the GOP platform to help Moscow had been substantiated. In fact, they had not been verified. To the contrary, the FBI had intercepted Page talking to an informant denying he had met the Russians or been involved in the platform change, two facts the FBI hid from the court.
The fact that Comey was telling the head of intelligence that Steele's information was not sufficiently corroborated while telling the court Steele's information in the FISA application was verified raises grave concerns, according to the chief counsel for the Southeastern Legal Foundation.
"After a multiyear court battle led by Southeastern Legal Foundation, this memo proves what we already suspected — those at the highest levels of our government misled and lied to the court to get permission to spy on the Trump campaign, plain and simple," attorney Kimberly Hermann told Just the News.
Comey's response to Clapper suggests he was either unfamiliar with key revelations his agents had made or trying to gloss them. For instance, Comey claimed Steele was "reliable." In fact, the FBI had terminated Steele two months earlier for violating the terms of his confidential informant agreement by leaking to the news media. The FBI had also had been warned by the CIA since 2015 that Steele was susceptible to Russian disinformation because he was too involved with oligarchs.
And the FBI had interviewed in November 2016 one of Steele's former MI6 bosses, who warned agents that Steele had overstated his seniority during the time he served in British intelligence. "Steele's former employer told the FBI in November 2016 after the first application was filed that Steele had served in a 'moderately senior' position and not a 'high-ranking position' as Steele had suggested," one memo from the probe shows.
Likewise, Comey argued to Clapper that the FBI had some visibility into Steele's network of sources and those sources were in a position to possibly know information. In fact, the FBI had by that time received multiple warnings from CIA that Steele's network was likely compromised.
For instance, in early October 2016, before the first FISA warrant was secured, the FBI team leading the Russia investigation codenamed Crossfire Hurricane was told that one source used by Steele and known as Person 1 was tied to Russian intelligence — yet failed to disclose this to the FISA court.
"According to a document circulated among Crossfire Hurricane team members and supervisors in early October 2016, Person 1 had historical contact with persons and entities suspected of being linked to RIS," the acronym for Russian Intelligence Services, one footnote in the Horowitz report revealed. "The document described reporting [redacted] that Person 1 was rumored to be a former KBG/SVR officer."
The FBI also failed to disclose to the FISA judge that the source known as Person 1 was under a separate counterintelligence investigation by the FBI, the IG report footnotes show.
In fact on Jan. 12, 2017, the very day Comey signed the FISA and engaged with Clapper, the FBI had received clear warnings in a report that some of Steele's dossier information about Trump lawyer Michael Cohen was "part of a Russian disinformation campaign to denigrate U.S. foreign relations," according to another declassified footnote from the IG report.
In other words, Comey's representations to Clapper and sworn avowals of verification to the FISA court had already been directly undercut by his bureau's own evidence.
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/comey-told-intel-chief-steele-dossier-was-not
Trump Lawyer: Hillary Clinton Could Face Impeachment Under Precedent Set in Trial
Now that Democrats have set their new and historic impeachment standard, it's wide open for Republicans to begin impeaching former Democrat officeholders.
Hillary Clinton could face impeachment as a private citizen and prohibition from running for office ever again under the precedent set during the trial of former President Donald Trump, his lawyer said Friday.
“This could happen to … the former secretary of state,” lawyer Michael van der Veen told senators, according to the Washington Times. “It could happen to a lot of people. That’s not the way this is supposed to work.”
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) asked if Trump’s impeachment trial “would create a new precedent” for former officials such as Clinton.
“Is it not true that under this new precedent, facing calls to ‘lock her up,’ a future House could impeach a former Secretary of State and potentially disqualify her from any future office?” Rubio questioned.
“If you see it their way, yes,” van der Veen stated, in reference to House Democrat impeachment managers.
Lead impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) commented that the hypothetical question “has no bearing on this case.”
“This official was not impeached in office for conduct while in office,” he said, but did not reference Clinton’s name.
In a tweet Friday, Clinton urged officials to convict Trump:
However, the Senate voted Saturday to acquit Trump of charges that he incited an insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, Breitbart News reported.
“The Senate voted 57-43, meaning that the chamber failed to clear the 67-vote threshold necessary to convict Trump of the charge that he incited an insurrection on January 6, when Congress was certifying the 2020 presidential election,” the article read.
Trump celebrated his second impeachment acquittal after the trial concluded and asserted Democrats moved forward with the “witch hunt” because almost 75 million Americans voted for his re-election.
“This has been yet another phase of the greatest witch hunt in the history of our Country,” he wrote. “No president has ever gone through anything like it.”
“Our historic, patriotic, and beautiful movement to Make America Great Again has only just begun,” Trump continued, adding that he had much to share in the coming months.
“I look forward to continuing our incredible journey together to achieve American greatness for all of our people,” he concluded.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/02/14/trump-lawyer-hillary-clinton-could-face-impeachment-precedent-set-trial
Happy President’s Day to our President Donald J Trump
Home of Trump impeachment lawyer vandalized as trial ended
Michael van der Veen’s law office also targeted for protests.
The suburban Philadelphia home of attorney Michael van der Veen, who defended former President Donald Trump in the Senate impeachment trial, has been vandalized, police said.
Detective Scott Pezick of the West Whiteland Township Police Department told The Associated Press that the vandalization occurred Friday evening when a person spray-painted “traitor” in the driveway of van der Veen’s home.
Meanwhile, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that a group of protesters also targeted van der Veen’sPhiladelphia law office, chanting, “When van der Veen lies, what do you do? Convict. Convict.”
No arrests have been made
https://justthenews.com/nation/crime/home-trump-impeachment-lawyer-vandalized-trial-ended
UK Petition: ‘Do not rollout Covid-19 vaccine passports’ surges to 130,000
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/569957
Wow over 130,000 Britons have now signed this petition against vaccine passports. I imagine it’ll reach many many more by the expiring of this petition.
https://twitter.com/RaheemKassam/status/1361312489804345351
Petition -
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/569957
Word
Parler resumes social media app after securing new computer servers
Acting CEO Mark Meckler says platform will remain true to its free-speech roots and has insulated itself from future cancel culture.
Parler, the upstart social media platform silenced last month by big-tech censorship, said Monday it is resuming operations under new leadership and with new computer servers.
Parler moved to a new computer server farm, and the 20 million users on the platform when Amazon Web Services shut off the social media platform on Jan. 11 can begin using their old app and logins Monday, Interim CEO Mark Meckler told Just the News.
Some existing users were already live on Monday morning and the rest should have access by midday after the new servers propagated across the internet. New users should be able to sign up for the service within a week or so, Meckler said.
“We are off of the big tech platform, so that we can consider ourselves safe and secure for the future,” Meckler said in an interview.
Meckler said the platform is using artificial intelligence and human editors to police for illegal speech that violates its service agreement but otherwise is remaining true to its free speech, no censorship roots.
“Cancel culture came for us, and hit us with all they had. Yet we couldn’t be kept down. We’re back, and we’re ready to resume the struggle for freedom of expression, data sovereignty, and civil discourse. We thank our users for their loyalty during this incredibly challenging time,” said Dan Bongino, a prominent Parler user and shareholder.
Meckler is an attorney, entrepreneur, and free speech advocate who created two large conservative grassroots organizations, the Tea Party Patriots and the Convention of States.
He was appointed interim CEO to help guide Parler through its relaunch and search for a new, permanent chief executive.
https://justthenews.com/nation/culture/welcome-back-parler-resumes-social-media-app-after-securing-new-computer-servers
Bannon predicts Trump will be very active in 2022, 2024 elections
https://radiopatriot.net/2021/02/15/bannon-featured-in-boston-herald-interview/
Kevin Sorbo
@ksorbs
So California is requiring signature verification for Gavin Newsom’s recall, but didn’t require it for the mail in ballots. How strange
https://twitter.com/ksorbs/status/1361309195660853249
Rudy W. Giuliani
@RudyGiuliani
Astonishing! It appears the Democrat party could up and down be called the party of Hypocrites.
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1361342056220807169
Andy Ngô
@MrAndyNgo
“Unmasked: Inside Antifa’s Radical Plan to Destroy Democracy” has debuted as the no. 1 nonfiction best seller on The Seattle Times best sellers list. Get your hardcover, digital or audio book here: https://centerstreet.com/titles/andy-ngo/unmasked/9781546059585/
https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1361340990896889857
Kamala’s new office
GOP lawmakers demand answers from Pelosi on Jan. 6 security decisions
House Judiciary GOP
@JudiciaryGOP
#BREAKING:
@RodneyDavis
@Jim_Jordan
@RepJamesComer
@DevinNunes demand answers from Speaker Pelosi on her security decisions surrounding January 6th.
https://twitter.com/JudiciaryGOP/status/1361360429784600577
GOP lawmakers demand answers from Pelosi on Jan. 6 security decisions
Four Republican lawmakers are demanding answers from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over her role in making security decisions on January 6, the day of the Capitol riot.
Reps. Rodney Davis, IL, Jim Jordan, OH, James Comer, KY, and Devin Nunes, CA sent a letter Monday, requesting the answers to the following five questions:
When then-Chief Sund made a request for national guard support on January 4th, why was that request denied?
Did Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving get permission or instruction from your staff on January 4th prior to denying Chief Sund’s request for the national guard?
What conversations and what guidance did you and your staff give the Sergeant at Arms leading up to January 6th specific to the security posture of the campus?
What conversations did you have during the attack on the Capitol and what response did you give security officials on January 6th when Chief Sund requested National Guard support that required your approval?
Why are your House Officers refusing to comply with preservation and production requests to turn over request materials relevant to the events of January 6th?
The members allege that when the National Guard was requested ahead of January 6, Pelosi failed to act. Further, on the day of the attack, Pelosi, they wrote, took over an hour to respond to then-Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund’s request for approval of the National Guard.
“It has been widely reported and confirmed by multiple sources that when Chief Sund requested the National Guard be activated ahead of the January 6th Joint Session of Congress, the response from the SAA, acting on your behalf, was that the ‘optics’ of having the National Guard on-site were not good and the intelligence didn’t support the move,” the lawmakers wrote.
“The request was not approved. Furthermore, on January 6th in the middle of the on-going attack of the Capitol, Chief Sund again notified the SAA of his request for approval to authorize the National Guard. It took over an hour for his request to be approved because the SAA had to run the request up the chain of command, which undoubtedly included you and your designees.”
On January 7, Pelosi called for Sund’s resignation, saying he didn’t contact “us since this happened.” However, Sund’s February 1 letter claimed he briefed the Speaker on the situation twice on January 6.
Cont.
Pelosi has since appointed General Russel Honoré as Counsel to conduct a security review of the Capitol attack. However, that appointment, according to the letter, was purely partisan.
“While there is wide-spread support to conduct an independent security review of the campus, General Russel Honoré was appointed solely by you, without consultation of the minority,” the Republicans wrote. “To the General’s credit he has reached out to several Republicans to brief on his work to date.”
“We are hopeful his review will result in beneficial recommendations that are not influenced by political motivations. However, it is easy to understand why we and our Senate counterparts remain skeptical that any of his final recommendations will be independent and without influence from you.”
Moreover, the lawmakers expressed concern over Pelosi’s “obstruction and inability to procure and preserve information from your House Officers when requested.” That information, the letter adds, includes correspondence, videos, audio, and additional records relevant to conducting a thorough and complete investigation of the Jan. 6 riot, some of which was allegedly provided to Democrats, but denied to Republicans.
“In multiple cases, your appointees, acting on your behalf, have denied requests to produce this information. The response we received was: ‘We regret to inform you that given the scope of the information requested and the concerns implicated by the nature of the request… we are unable to comply with the request at this time.‘ Even more troubling is despite your House Officers refusal to comply with the request we have recently learned that some of the same material we requested was provided to the House Judiciary Committee on a partisan basis. This is unacceptable. Madam Speaker, that direction could only have come from you.”
The letter concludes, “Lastly, your hyperbolic focus on fabricated internal security concerns has taken critical resources away from the real threat, which is from outside the U.S. Capitol. Your decision to install magnetometers around the House Chamber is yet another example of this misdirection and misappropriation of House resources, which could be better used to protect members, staff, and official visitors from real, confirmed threats. Tellingly, Madam Speaker, you have failed to comply with this requirement yourself. End this political charade, and work with us to protect the Capitol and those who work here every day.”
https://saraacarter.com/gop-lawmakers-demand-answers-from-pelosi-on-jan-6-security-decisions/