Try to include a summary of findings at header of post, or tl;dr.

As a Suggestion:

Heading

Document ID

Name(s) of subject(s)

Key Points

Body of text snips or attachments (screen captures) of documents.

-–

EXAMPLE

Interview for Russia Investigation

CPRT-116-IG00-D075.pdf

Jefferson B. Sessions

Shifty skerred

--

Summarized briefs, or off bread links with summary can be posted to Q General linking here.

Additional suggestions (because 600 character minimum)

.Keep it as brief as possible to still make the point.

.Include page number(s) in summary.

.Simple is best, something that can be quickly scanned for the main point.

. Include articles or statements(public,archive first) that prove if lies are caught.

Godspeed Patriots

o7

A Conversation With Rudy Giuliani Over Bloody Marys at the

Mark Hotel.

"He made the case that the Ukrainian prosecutor fired for corruption, Viktor Shokin, was in

fact not corrupt and had been forced out by the Obama administration precisely because

he had the goods on the Bidens. He also claimed to have a secret source with documentary

proof that Hunter Biden had been paid off through a Cyprus bank in a transaction routed

through a Lithuanian bank. “When I got it” — that is, the document he claims shows this — “I

had already lost Lev, and so I had no translator. I translated it with my app,” he said. He took out his phone to show me how ….pg 7

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20191211/110331/HMKP-116-JU00-20191211-SD1339.pdf

>>Permanent Select Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

>>Interview Transcript Links

>>https://pastebin.com/4bufJn32

>>9087036

ThanQ anon

Added to dough if nb occurs

Permanent Select Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

Interview Transcript Links

https://pastebin.com/4bufJn32

>>9086708

Intel Committee Transcripts

We can get through all of them quickly, efficiently and thoroughly - we've done this before:

Call one out, review, then post your findings/notes with:

Witness name, link to file, notes with page #s, screencaps if you need to.

Copypasta TEXT from the transcripts will be most helpful to collating these notes, that way no one has to go through and find the screencaps and retype relevant parts.--

You can tag them to this post just like when nominating a notable (red text like so).

Witness name Notes

We want to produce something more than just a list of posts. In other words assemble the MEAT from each transcript for BOOM output.

If we are organized, WE CREATE THE BOOMS

Carrying over to keep track. ALL links off-thread

Witnesses already being read, notes to follow:

>>9084448 Erik Prince

>>9084121 Volker

>>9084095 Vindman

>>9084057 Clapper

>>9084161 >>9084334 Yates

>>9084180 Christopher Wylie

>>9084222 Roger Stone

>>9084237 Bannon

>>9084256 Podesta

>>9084297 Christopher Anderson

>>9084443 Lynch

>>9084551 Simona Mangiante (PapaD's wife)

>>9084581 Don Jr.

>>9085042 Samantha Powers

>>9085070 Mark Sandy

>>9085099 Nix and Wiley

>>9085301 Jennifer Williams

>>9085470 Michael Sussman

>>9085152 Tim Morrison

>>9086071 Podesta

>>9086297 Andrew Brown

>>9086410 Christopher Anderson

Transcripts completed:

>>9085244 Summary of Loretta Lynch

>>9084808 >>9084816 >>9084907 Summary of Erik Prince

>>9086147 Christopher Wylie

>>9086268 >>9086307 >>9086342 >>9086362 Walid Phares

>>9086297 Andrew Brown

>>9086589 Samantha Power

For anons having trouble accessing the pdfs

ARCHIVE LINK:

http://web.archive.org/web/20200508192412/https://docs.house.gov/Committee/Committees.aspx?Code=IG00

1. REMOVE THE ARCHIVE PART

http://web.archive.org/web/20200508192412/

1. You are left with a clean, working link:

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D003.pdf

This is Yovanovich. It works, I have it open. I have others open that people are having trouble with.

1. ???

2. Kill the DS.

Kind of a pain in the ass but it works. I have many open right now that others were having problems with.

If you would rather have the whole thing, this anon >>9086689 has combined them and uploaded them all in one file:

https://anonfile.com/98Z1q0x3oa/HPSCI_RussiaFiles_GOPCtrl_pdf

• Optimized and OCR'ed.

• 867 MB. Searchable.

When we work together we KICK ASS.

When we work together, we WIN.

I'm not tired of WINNING.

To help pinpoint needles in the haystack, I downloaded the PDFs for the following witnesses: Coats, Hicks, Lynch, McCabe, McCord, Rice, Podesta and Yates. Then I did a keyword search for the following terms. The following is a list of the keywords searched and the results. It may help anons with digs: (I have more but don't want to shit up the thread if OP doesn't want this here.)

tarmac

./yates.pdf:tarmac. I don't care about his decision not to charge. I mean, for purposes of

./rice.pdf:lnitially, we were led to believe that a chance meeting on the tarmac led him

./mccabe.pdf:sorry. And then of course there was the incident on the tarmac in

./mccabe.pdf:on the tarmac. Whether that was happenstance or not, it is not a great optic.

./mccabe.pdf:investigation. You've got the tarmac, and then you have the other issue that you

knowingly

./yates.pdf:they were being made knowingly, but that were being made by both Sean Spicer,

./hope.pdf:possible version of the truth, but I have never – I don't believe I've ever knowingly

./hope.pdf:being given. But I've never, to my knowledge, knowingly lied.

./hope.pdf:MR. SWALWELL: ls it your testimony, then, that if you've never knowingly

./hope.pdf:knowledge, knowingly lied on behalf of somebody. And, in terms of somebody else

McCain

./mccabe.pdf:version of the Steele reporting from Senator McCain who had come into custody of

./mccabe.pdf:recall- I got Senator McCain's name

./mccabe.pdf:So you have media inquiries. McCain was a

./mccabe.pdf:MR. MCCABE: I remember Senalor McCain came over and met with

Strzok

./mccord.pdf:Strzok, and then, I believe, Trisha Anderson from the general counsel's office,

./mccord.pdf:contact Pete Strzok at the Bureau, told him

./mccord.pdf:interested in would be available that afternoon, and he should contact Mr. Strzok

./mccabe.pdf:aware of it in working with it, Peter Strzok, Bill Priestap. And they could lead you

./mccabe.pdf:person to ask, and Peter Strzok,

./mccabe.pdf:MR. GOWDY: What role did SpecialAgent Strzok play into the

./mccabe.pdf:Strzok were involved in a relationship with one another?

./mccabe.pdf:idiot." And then we have Strzok saying, "God Hillary," here there's no

./mccabe.pdf:message written by Mr. Strzok on April 1Sth that provided, "l want to believe the

./mccabe.pdf:Mr. Strzok to Lisa Page, or from Lisa Page to Mr. Strzok?

./mccabe.pdf:Do you know what path Mr. Strzok is referring to that, I guess, Lisa Page

./mccabe.pdf:MR. SCHIFF: What is your experience with Mr. Strzok as an agent, his

./mccabe.pdf:I removed Pete Strzok from that

./mccabe.pdf:MR. GOWDY: Could it have been Peter Strzok?

./mccabe.pdf:MR. MCCABE: So it is definitely not Peter Strzok, because his name

./mccabe.pdf:headquarters. That is definitely not Peter Strzok,

./mccabe.pdf:MR. GOWDY: Then Strzok followed up, "l know it

./mccabe.pdf:MR. GOWDY: Was Mr. Strzok involved in all four of them?

./mccabe.pdf:Strzok. "l am riled up. Trump is an

./mccabe.pdf:Page, Mr. Strzok, and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe according to people

./mccabe.pdf:people close to either Miss Page or Mr. Strzok, or both, have said you were the

./mccabe.pdf:with Lisa Page or Pete Strzok about ramping up or tamping down the investigation

>>9087086

Will create a pastebin for dough and add some additional to it when it gets close.

That way if not around someone else can baker it.

Had to use index to create (always do).

SAMANTHA POWER Notes

>>9086589 pb

Samantha Power

(October 13, 2017)

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D067.pdf

>>9086589

Begins by outright presumption of Russian election interference, like all of the opposition. She was "basically trying to sound the alarm in advance of the election." Says the states were "penetrated," heh. No evidence cited.

Tons of BS about wearing muh dual hats (NSC & UN).

States "Russia is my prime obstacle." An extremely elevated view of her position in the world, consistent with her later reference to a gap between UN Ambassadors as an "interregnum." Really? Are you kidding? Queen eh?

Sooooo concerned about US security–that she was very concerned about ISIL, you know, the one her disgusting lord & master started up.

Rooney probes hard for "collusion."

So concerned about those filthy dirty Russian diplomats, more 2 hats crapola.

She had "an eye to outfoxing the Russians." How'd that work out, peaches?

Claims she reads reports the size of Encyclopedia Britannica every day. Riiiiight.

Gowdy asks questions about unmasking. Calls her "the largest unmasker of U.S. persons in our country's history."

Gowdy wants to know her calculus for unmasking (deminimization). Never really answers, talks in circles, yadda blah. Schiff comes in and tries to give her cover.

Oh no, she's not political, she reps all Americans.

Says she can't recall 3 times, about Flynn talking to Russian Ambassador.

Strangely, says, "I never discussed it with another member of the human race."

She never leaked squat.

They try to get to how many she unmasked, she downplays the number without naming it.

Softball question about her UN staff.

Dodges question about how many times she requested info on Trump.

Admits she has no evidence of collusion while bobbing & weaving from Gowdy, who says she requested intel 217 times on weak grounds.

Claims no memory of US company she bird dogged.

Michelle Sison named.

SP implies that she is a military strategist, heh.

Swallowswell tries to get evidence of Russian interference, and she goes on about "shameless lying," something she would have no experience with, of course.

More circle jerk between Swallowswell & Power.

Stefanik fruitlessly tries to get numbers out of Power.

Swalwell wants her "opinion" of Trump, more circle jerk.

Conaway gets nothing pertinent out of her.

>>9087175

Thank you, appreciate it. If you make the next one, too, could you please make clear in the name what the documents are? Declassified Secret Transcripts from Intel Hearings or something descriptive like that? We did this with the FBI Vault of the Finders document dump. Accurate and draws eyes and help. What was that bastard Schiff hiding from us? We want to know and now we can!

In the meantime I'm gong to repost here what has been collected from the General threads so far, put into txt files I'm not going to type up screenshots though) with their corresponding original post numbers.

Thank you.

>>9087295

Will add to top of Dough:

#Current Docs

Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

Should show in catalog thumbnail.

Left name Generic in case additional releases such as OIG/DNI etc

>>9087356

No problem, appreciate the help! I think we can fill one thread with all of the notes -those are a lot of transcripts to get though and some are quite long. They were hidden for a reason.

Anyway, thank you.

LORETTA LYNCH TESTIMONY

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D057.pdf

>>9085244 (pb)

So I read the Lynch interview, 97 page document. Same crapola as when she repeatedly told Congress she couldn't recall. "Loretta Lynch “appeared to have amnesia” during her Congressional testimony in December one official told investigative reporter Sara Carter." We recall though, LL, your charade.

So this interview was a whole lot of the same. Starting with being asked if she made any changes to Holter's "rules and regulations" in United States Attorneys Manuals. The answer: "I don't recall whether I made any alterations or not." Sure, sure she didn't remember that eentsy weentsy detail. And on from there.

"I don't have any recollection."

"I don't recall with specificity."

"I am not able to pin that down with specificity."

"I don't recall the specificity of the language."

"I don't recall these discussions with specificity."

"I don't recall discussions about those specifics."

"I don't have a recollection of that being briefed up to me."

And when she did answer, she would sometimes throw in the weasel words, "I believe."

Meanwhile, the fellow weasel AS relentlessly tried to find any possible word, any angle, remotely suggesting Trump/Russia. Disgusting. With the constant premise hammered that the DNC was hacked.

Pretty clear what went on there. If she could not remember these things, then she had zero business being AG. Of course, she didn't have any business being AG, but unrelated to her amnesia bouts.

So a theoretical Q&A to Elephant Legs: Q: Did Slick Willie offer you SC? A: I don't recall.

ERIK PRINCE TESTIMONY

November 30, 2017)

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D068.pdf

>>9084808 part 1

>>9084816 part 2

>>9084907 part 3

Part 1

Present Conaway, King, LoBiondo, Rooney, Ros-Lehtinen, Turner, Wenstrup, Stewart, Crawford, Gowdy, Stefanik, Quigley, Swalwell, Castro, Heck, Hurd, Schiff, Himes, Speier.

Also, Rep Calvert.

Schiff keeps trying to get Prince to say he played a role in the Trump campaign. He didn’t. He knows Bannon and occasionally sent unsolicited papers on ME policy ideas.

Focus of interview on 1/11/2017 meeting Prince had in Seychelles.

“Reportedly” he went as an unofficial rep of Trump, to which Prince said he did not.

Met with UAE’s Prince Mohammed Bin Zayal at the Prince’s behest, who then suggested EP meet with Kirill Dmitriev, a hedge fund manager from Russia.

They met for 20min max at the behest of the Emeratis he just met with.

Prince’s entire reason for being called was due to a WaPo article that he represented POTUS team when meeting this Russian.

Prince then BTFO’s the committee with this…

“What really bothers me and what I would hope the Intel Com. Is doing is questioning why Americans that were caught up in waves of signals intel, why on Earth would the WaPo be running an article on any meeting that a private citizen, me, was having in a foreign country? That’s illegal. That is a political abuse of the intel infrastructure. And that is really dangerous, esp as this committee and the Congress thinks about reauthorizing very wide ranging intel authorities to dig into Americans’ electronic comms of any sort. That’s what I have an issue with.”

Then, Rep Rooney asks if Prince has any input about leaks of Classified intel that took place related to the Intel Community assessment of these matters, to which Prince BTFO’s them again…

“The only way the WaPo ran an article months after the meeting was because it was provided by someone in the govt to them. Okay? And there’s no valid reason for that. That is a leak of Intel info, signals info, of private citizens, Americans, moving around abroad. So there is no question, a leak of your intel to an outside party.

When asked if Prince knows who provided that leak…

“I’ve seen reports it was members of the Obama NSC.”

Schiff then takes over questioning and backs his own ass into a corner trying to get Prince to admit he spoke to Nunes to prepare for his hearing.

Kash Patel contacted Prince to meet with Nunes, but not to prepare for this hearing.

“I talked to Chairman Nunes… as part of the investigation into the UNMASKING of intel on Americans.”

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Part 2

Schiff- “So do you have records, from your stay in Seychelles to help us identify where you were staying?”

Prince- I don’t know. I think your friends at the WaPo reported it as the Four Seasons but I don’t even remember if that was correct.”

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

Schiff- “Is it your view that the presence of a Russian state banker was a mere coincidence? Or was this why the UAE invited you to the Seychelles?”

THIS STINKS LIKE A SET UP SIMILAR TO TT MEETING AND PAPADOPOULIS SET UP!

Schifty keeps pressing this as Prince being a Trump rep meeting a Russian which Prince debunks completely.

Seriously anons, this is hilarious.

Part 3

Schiff- “So you were headed to the bar to meet Mr Dmitriev. How did you identify him.”

Prince- “I remember Googling his name and found the guy that looked like the picture.”

Schiff- “What did the Prince tell you about him?”

Prince- “That he runs a hedge fund in Russia.”

Schiff- “And what did you learn when you Googled him?”

Prince- “That he ran a hedge fund in Russia.”

Schiff- “Is it state backed?”

Prince- “I don’t know. I just looked at the picture. I was roaming, so data roaming is expensive when you’re overseas.”

PRINCE IS WORTH $2.4 BILLION!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHA ROAMING DATA!!!!

Interview Transcript of Christopher Wylie

(April 25, 2018)

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D084.pdf

>>9086147 (pb)

WYLIE: The other advantage of having Cambridge Analytica in the United States was that, at least to my knowledge – so I am not a U.S. elections law or finance expert, so you need to consult an expert on that, but my understanding was that an advantage of having a company that services campaigns is that if you are the shareholder of that company, when you invest money into that company, it does - it's not counted in elections reporting as a campaign donation, because you are an owner of a company investing more resources or capital into that company.

So it created a vehicle whereby you could do a

lot of research and development, ultimately for the benefit of your preferred campaigns, but it wasn't a reportable campaign donation because when you're investing in a company you're an investor.

MR. QUIGLEY: So you've heard the expression "shell company," right?

MR. WYLIE: Yes.

MR. QUIGLEY: Would you refer to Cambridge as that?

MR. WYLIE: In a - so I'm not sure if that

word has a specifically legal meaning in the United States, but in the sort of general parlance sense -

MR. QUIGLEY: Right.

MR. WYLIE: - yes, I think that would be a

completely fair assessment.

>>9087143

To do this search on multiple PDFs, do the following:

-On a Linux system, download the targeted PDFs into a dedicated directory.

-Run the following command but replace "keyword" with your search term:

find ./ -name '*.pdf' -exec sh -c 'pdftotext "{}" - | grep --with-filename --label="{}" --color "keyword"' \;

If anons have any other keywords to search post them here and I'll get to them as I can.

>>9087584

Figured you grep'd that

Pro tip for Windows users you can use grep too.

Powershell or Cygwin

Walid Phares testimony

CPRT-116IG00-D064

>>9086268 >>9086307 >>9086342 >>9086362

Only thing that really stood out to me was Fabien Baussart and Randa Kassis:

Fabien Baussart (25 January 1973) is the founder and president of the think tank Center of Political and Foreign Affairs (CPFA),[1][2] which organizes events and discussions on various geopolitical topics around the world[3][4] with prominent political figures such as Zbigniew Brzezinski, Kofi Annan, José María Aznar, Mohamed ElBaradei, and Al Gore.[5][6]

Randa Kassis (Arabic: ‎) is a Franco-Syrian politician and a leading secular figure of the Syrian opposition. She is the President of The Astana Platform of the Syrian opposition and the founder of the Movement of the Pluralistic Society.[1]

Q Do you know who a person named Fabien Baussert or, in French, Fabien Baussert is?

A Fabien Baussert? That name, I may have heard that name, but it doesn't bring me any recollection. Is he a lawyer?

Q He is married to a woman named Randa Kassis.

A That is from my region. The best of my recollection now is the names are not totally alien to me, but I don't recall where did I see him, see the names or else.

Q So the public reporting on this trip suggests that this organization, the Center for Political and Foreign Affairs, as well as the Movement for a Pluralistic Society –

A Movement for?

Q A Pluralistic Society. Invited Donald Trump Jr., the son of then-candidate Trump, in October, to speak in Paris, and this organization's primary focus until then had been on the Syria conflict.

A Of the Syria conflict. Okay.

Q Yes. So the Movement for a Pluralistic Society has been reported in the press at least to be, quote/unquote, "close to Russia," and there are questions about whether or not it also has either sympathies for or even possibly contacts with the regime of Bashar Assad. Does any of this ring a bell to you?

A Yes. The more we review, the more my memory starts to shed light on one name, Randa Kassis. That name, I can't tell you anything at this point in time because I don't recall, but that name came in the sphere of those who dealt with Syria, and I could check if you want for later to see if it's the sphere of Assad. That's why I was – when you mentioned the name, I have heard that name. But this is something I cannot report now.

Lines of questioning only delimited by the double spaces ##########

Q So the second page, which is written by Mr. Papadopoulos on March 24, 2016, was written to several members of what appear to be the foreign policy advisory team, including Carter Page, Sam Clovis, Keith Kellog, Berg Mizusawa, Chuck Kubic, Joseph Schmitz, and then which I believe is your email; is that correct? A That's correct. Q And Michael Glassner, and the title of email is: "Meeting with Russian Leadership, including Putin."

"Furthermore, Mifsud is good friends with the soon-to-be next Prime Minister of Vietnam. He asked for me to join him on a trip there to meet with the next leader. Perhaps this is of interest to the rest of the campaign team as well." So the first question I just have is, you mentioned that you may have records in your own personal email from George Papadopoulos. Do you believe this may be one of them?

A I do know this is one of them.

1/3

>>9087881

A Let me explain it, because I saw it – I was planning on explaining this email. You know, on AOL, if you receive emails, they stay dark thick if you don't open them, and they would become clear when you actually open them. This is an email that I read way after I received it. So it was because we were receiving emails and emails, and that was one among them, and there are others as well.But when I went back and read it, I realized that he had sent it before, but of course, now, I know that he had sent the email.

Q Do you know, roughly, when you would have read it and opened it for the first time?

A It should have been within weeks, but I don't remember exactly when.

Q But, presumably, after the meeting with the Candidate on March 31st?

A After March, yes.

Q And after your – so that would also be after the lunch that you mentioned after the meeting with the Candidate where you discussed –

A In the best of my recollection, it should have been because had I read all that email before, of course I would have seen him in a different lens. But these are all the best I can recollect, of course. From November 9 onward, to now, I have had no communications, neither with the transition team, nor with the administration, except, within the transition team, the media person, Bryan Lanza was in touch with us because we were in a transition ourselves, the former advisers, he would tell us, for example, that when you make those statements, although you are former advisers and you are not in the transition, keep in mind, basically, that if you would be asked to serve, keep in mind those statements won't be reflecting later on. But it had no effect on my statements.

Q Between December 13th and 19th, was there any reply or communication from either you or from Rebecca to Mr. Shevchenko (ph)?

A I can certainly check with Rebecca (ph) if she had answered in between those two dates. I don't have any recall myself that I have responded.

Q And the 19th includes – the email on the 19th addressed to Rebecca (ph) reflects: We're doing a request. This time it's to arrange a meeting between you and Alexi Skosyrev, S-k-o-s-y-r-e-v. Had you ever meet Alexi before?

A I don't remember, the best of my remembrance, I had met with him.

Q And between December 19th and December 29th, did either you or Rebecca (ph) make any reply or response to this offer?

A That, I can ask Rebecca (ph), because I am not aware of every detail

…. continued

A To the best of my recollection – and let's keep in mind that it was so intense, we were under the pressure of a lot of information coming in – I don't recall who informed me, but what I've learned is that he was in connection with Mr. Bannon to work on Orthodox communities in America.

Q You mean Orthodox Christian?

A Christian Orthodox communities.

Q Any idea what that means in practice?

A It that's now, I'm explaining, so –

Q No. No. Or what it meant in practice.

A Oh.

Q Like, what was this proposal? If you could flesh out, to the extent that you're aware?

A Well, the one sentence that I've learned was something like, not exactly the words, that George now is working with New York traveling to the inlands, to various places, to –

Q You mean within the United States?

A Within the United States, hinterland, to work with or on American Orthodox.

Q What would that mean, American Orthodox?

A Greeks, Slavs, Arab Orthodox, from these communities, for their votes. One minute.BY

Q For a get-out-the-vote campaign of some kind?

A That's correct.

Q Anything else that you became aware of regarding Mr. Papadopoulos' relationship with those in New York, specific individuals beyond Mr. Bannon he may have been in touch with?

A I don't have any information or recollection of anything beyond what I have mentioned.

Q Okay. Are you aware or were you aware of any other trips that Mr. Papadopoulos made during his tenure – or prior to the election of 2016, I should say? I mentioned, for example, press reports indicate he traveled to Israel.

A The same information that was published and then discussed among Gordon, Tera Dahl, and myself, that's the extent of what I've learned about his trips.

Q Okay. And anything about his relationship with Mr. Flynn? Were you told that he may be in touch with or conversed with Mr. Flynn?

A At this point, I don't recall any information about Mr. Papadopoulos'interaction with General Flynn.

2/3

>>9087881 Part 1

>>9087890 Part 2

Q During the entire tenure until the end of the election?

A Yeah, throughout the entire. Now, if I am shown, let's say, a group email where he mentioned I didn't pay attention, I could confirm or infirm (ph). But my memory doesn't tell me any matter about this issue.

Q Thank you for your help.

Q And would you classify each of those contacts you just laid out as in your role as an adviser to the campaign?

A I want to make a distinction here. Thank you for the question.

Q By all means.

A As a secretary general of the transatlantic group, it is my mission to engage with all these lawmakers. But there were some diplomats that we can get a list from, my assistant, who made a request to meet me as a foreign policy adviser but in the United States. And, for example, diplomats from South Korea, from Taiwan, from Japan, from Tunisia, during the campaign made an appointment with me to speak to me as a foreign policy adviser in Washington, D.C. So I could get you the list of those who requested that meeting.

[target aquired]

Then there were other names that I don't remember from New York. Then there was also Hope Hicks. She was part of that hierarchy. And at one point multiple points Mr. Dearborn was in touch with Mr. Manafort when he was the co – the manager or the executive director of the campaign.

Q Okay. Very helpful. If I can go back to the preparations for the meeting with the Egyptian President

A Yes.

Q in September. I'd like to produce as an exhibit an email exchange that ultimately included Jared Kushner, Mike Flynn, Steve Bannon, but it originates from an email from you.

A Oh. [The information follows:] INSERT 3-1 I communicated with General Flynn. I couldn't communicate with anybody else at the beginning. So I communicated with Flynn, and Flynn told me, okay, I'll talk with the team. I'll talk with the team. And from there on, he took it, he and Bannon and everybody else, so I was not following up.

Q And you returned to Washington, D.C.?

A I did, yes.

Q And had conversations about – with the Egyptian mission here, I presume, where it was disclosed to you by them that, in fact, Mr. Bannon and Mr. Papadopoulos were involved in coordinating this meeting? Is that correct?

A Let me clarify a little bit. I will consult my memoir, my memory. I am not sure if the Egyptians in Washington – I mean, in the States – informed me about the fact that there was another track actually working on it, if it was before the meeting between the two principals or after that. That I am not sure. But what happened is that I was in touch with the Egyptian diplomats who are my friends here, and they told me everything is being taken care of, we are in touch with everybody in New York. So there was that lapse of a time where between the embassy here and the government there, when they met me and said we don't have any information, I told them I'm not here on an official mission, but I can make that phone call and email to Flynn and the rest. I asked Ivanka if she likes the idea of her going to the Middle East and meeting with women, with Muslim women, because the image of our candidate was very negative, et cetera.

Q And the circumstances surrounding the meeting with the Egyptian President in late September of 2016, you mentioned Mr. Bannon, George Papadopoulos, Mr. Flynn being involved. Are you aware of Stephen Miller's involvement in that respect and possible interaction with Mr. Papadopoulos as part of that?

A I don't have a recollection about Mr. Miller being in that phase, the chapter of dealing with Egypt. I don't recollect. But I may be wrong if I see documents.

3/4

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D064.pdf

>>9087881 Part 1

>>9087890 Part 2

>>9087963 Part 3 (sorry text too long)

Q During the campaign, did you ever receive information about Hillary Clinton or any other individual related to the Democratic party or Clinton's political campaign from an unidentified source or a source you were not familiar with, either by email, by text message, by phone call, by other private direct message?

A Clarification.

Q Please.

A That somebody would have sent a loaded email to my website, I have no control knowing, and sometimes it will go into the trash. That is not what you're talking about?

Q No. It's to what extent are you aware or do you have knowledge of receiving any information? There have been public reports about contacts via direct message on Twitter, for example, or by unsolicited email, or an approach in person where there may have been an offer of information. Are you aware of any of that that may have occurred with you?

A Yes. On Twitter or any direct messaging way, I have not received any of the messages you are mentioning. And to the best of my recollection, I don't recall having received such messages through a website or even direct contact.

Q And in the course of your time on the campaign, did you ever gain knowledge of or hear from others on the campaign who may have discussed having been approached themselves by a third party claiming to have information of value to the campaign that may in some way relate to Hillary Clinton?

A To the best of my recollection, I do not remember hearing from others that either they know or they had received information that would be detrimental to Secretary Clinton during my tenure during the campaign.

I think that concludes the minority's questions.

4/4

>>9086708

DOUGH

https://pastebin.com/aFk4KTg7

>>9087738

It's more than grep, it requires the tool pdftotext. For Cygwin it requires installing the Poppler package:

Install apt-cyg to install and manage Packages:

$ wget rawgit.com/transcode-open/apt-cyg/master/apt-cyg

$ install apt-cyg /bin

Install poppler package:

$ apt-cyg install poppler

Create a dedicated directory for the PDF files:

$ mkdir pdf

$ cd pdf

Download the targeted PDF(s): (replace http link with the targeted PDF link)

$ wget http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D067.pdf

Now the pdftotext command should work: (replace "keyword" with your search term)

$ find ./ -name '*.pdf' -exec sh -c 'pdftotext "{}" - | grep --with-filename --label="{}" --color "keyword"' \;

On Cygwin you may get some errors, but that just means the search term isn't found in one of the PDFs.

Partial Summary Update Jennifer Williams Transcript

Pg 14 Jennifer William states she works closely with NSC colleagues LT Colonel Alex Vindman, which she describes as her counterpart, Dr. Fiona Hill, Tim Morrison. State Department contacts are Asst Secretary George Kent, Deputy Assistant Secretary Phil Reeken.

Pg 15 Jennifer Williams states she was not on the April 21 st., phone call President Trump had with President Zelensky. She did read a transcript of the call in preparation of V.P. Pence's call 2 days later on April 23rd. She stated it was a relatively brief call between POTUS and Zelensky focused on congratulating him on his victory in the Presidential Election which had taken place on that day. They spoke of looking foward to a good working relationship.

Pg 16 When asked if there where any discussions of investigations into Burisma, Bidens, Jennifer Williams stated "there was not" She stated she prepped V.P. Pence for his call with Zelensky which she did participate in, she stated that the phone call was simaliar to President Trump's call. They spoke of the importance of the Ukraine-U.S. relationship and how eager we were to see President Zelensky take steps to implement the agenda he ran on, which was focused on anti corruption. Also discussion of Trump & Pence attending his inauguration, but date had not been set.

Pg 17 Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, prepared President Trump's briefing papers for his call with Zelensky.

Pg 19 General Kellogg's role in preparing the calls: He was present for the call with V.P. Pence and well as the pre breifing and reviews the talking points that Jennfier Williams prepared. States that V.P. Pence speaks to General Kellogg quite frequently (daily) she is not often not there for those engagements. She also states that General Kellogg speaks with POTUS quite frequently though she has never been to the oval for those conversations.

Pg 22 She is only vaguely familiar with Abassador Yovanovitch, she participated in a couple of interagency policy committee meetings with her via video teleconference. She listened to her updates from the post. She has never met her directly. She states speaking with Fiona Hill and Vindman about her removal. She states it was more the opinion of Dr. Hill what a shame it was to remove her, as she had an upstanding career. Most of what she knew was from the media, she wasn't aware of any reason she would be recalled for cause. Seems that most of what she knows about Ukraine Corruption, comes from media..which she would leave for V.P. Pence to review.

Pg 38 Jennifer Williams states she was told by Marc Short (Pence COS) on April 21st, day of President Trump's call with Zelensky that he would be attending his inaugaration. On May 13th, (actual date still not set at that time) V.P. Pence was asked by President Trump, not to attend the Inauguration of President Zelensky, Jennifer Williams didn't know why. We do know that Lt. Col.Vindman was at the Inauguration as he is pictured there with him May 20th. Pg 39 Ambassodor Gordan Sondland (UK) also a delagate attended this event. Debreifing took place on May 23rd.'' Not clear if Vindman was in the Oval for it.

Pg 55 Okay. When did you first learn of the hold on Ukraine security assistance U.S. security assistance to Ukraine? I believe it was July 3rd, I saw an email or I suppose, a written update,electronically, that was drafted by Alex Vindman, responding – internally reporting that the State Department had notified him that OMB was not clearing the latest round of congressional notification documents to move the next tranche of security assistance for Ukraine. Distribution of the email was just within NSC Europe Team. The update indicated that OMB was holding the assistance in order to conduct a further review to ensure that the security assistance was still in line with administration priorities. Q And you said that email was in preparation fon a nightly update to the national security advisor? That's right. That's John Bolton? Correct.

This portion of the transcript is the Democratic Attorney questioning Williams

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D015.pdf

John Mifsud was a definite set up.

Not just by Deep State!

By Clinton’s. He admits he works for The Clinton Foundation!

Why was this not known before

YARED TAMENE WOLDE-YOHANNES

IT Director for DNC

HPSCI testimony

08/30/17

Counsel : Marc Elias, Graham Wilson - Perkins Coie

https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/ty54.pdf

SUMMARY

• FBI first contacted Yared in Sept 2015 asking to check on possible nefarious activity. Details were vague, and they found no evidence to corroborate the FBI, except for some phishing emails that never got through the spam filter.

• He had multiple conversations with the FBI agent over the next several months with the FBI eventually requesting 15 gigs of email metadata. FBI agent confirmed that he received info from other unnamed IC operatives.

• The day before they were to turn this material over to the FBI (Apr 28th), the DNC network was subject to its first overt attack looking for user passwords.

• A couple days later on May 1st, the IT team has a call with the DNC CEO and COO and the Perkins Coie legal team, incl. Michael Sussman & Marc Elias. It is at this point that the DNC engages CrowdStrike.

• Yared speaks to his FBi contact a couple days later who tells him that he has spoken with the CrowdStrike project manager and that the DNC is in good hands. All further contact with the FBI is done through CrowdStrike.

• It is CrowdStrike that identifies the Apr 28th attack as coming from “Fancy Bear” (APT-28) and identifies the intrusions that the FBI was noting (but were never discovered by the DNC IT team) as coming from “Cozy Bear” (APT-29). Both are allegedly affiliated with the Russian government.

• Yared addresses the Seth Rich ‘conspiracy theory’ by saying that a complete forensic analysis was done on almost all of the systems & devices and that they found no unauthorized access by DNC personnel. CrowdStrike was involved in this process.

• Yared notes that the DNC has “hundreds of” servers and that CrowdStrike identified 38 systems (incl. devices & laptops) that showed evidence of compromise. Out of those, 26 were selected by CS as needing further analysis. Yared mentions here that some or all of these 26 were requested by the FBI and that clones were made and given to CS who provided them to the FBI.

• HOWEVER, Yared mentions later on that ‘only one or two of the systems were cloned’. He states that CS made all the determinations & decisions as to which systems were compromised and which required cloning.

• He was not aware of what was turned over to the FBI, only that the FBI was given everything they asked for.

• Back in Apr 2016 before CS was engaged, FBI Agent gave Yared a script to use that they chose to not to place on the system. If they had, it would have alerted any adversaries that they were onto them.

WHAT’S NOT DISCUSSED ANYWHERE IN THE TESTIMONY - There is zero mention of any data transfers out of the network that would have been required for the published release of the DNC material by WikiLeaks. Like it never happened.

Testimony details found in bread #11639

>>9092830

>>9092858

>>9092895

INTERVIEW OF: DAVID J. KRAMER

Tuesday, December 19, 2017

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D052.pdf

>>9089589

'This is an interview focused on the Steele dossier, Steele passing it to David Kramer, who in turn gave it to NoName, who passed it to Corney. I was looking at testimony for events occurring between 11/22/2016 and 1/18/2017 per Q post #4155.

>>9082360

https://archive.vn/xPkdy#selection-15397.0-15405.12

Steele explained to Kramer that his work initially started as a Republican-sponsored initiative for research on Donald Trump. lt then changed into a Democratic-supported, funded initiative, and he did not tell Kramer who those individuals were.

The reports were produced between June 2016 up until December 2016.

Steele told Kramer he had been in touch with an FBI contact whom he knew from before, and he had contacted that individual in July 2016.

"And his explanation was that the contact with the FBl, I think, continued from July up until, I would say, roughly September, October of that year, 2016, but then it sort of came to a stop. And so his concern was that the FBI was not taking the same approach that it had when he initially broached this with them."

Kramer received a copy of the Steele report and took it to a meeting with John McCain on November 30, 2016.

McCain asked Kramer what he thought he should do. Kramer suggested bringing a copy of it to the Director of the FBI and the Director of the ClA.

McCain meet with Director Comey on December 9 and gave him a copy of the report.

Mr. Steele was interested in whether the senator had met with Mr. Comey.

Steele and Kramer were in touch fairly regularly by phone. Steele was trying to get a sense of what was happening with the report.

Kramer was concerned about Steele's safety after the Wall Street Journal named him.

They then went on to discuss BuzzFeed:

"Since the publication of the Steele dossier in BuzzFeed – by the way, do you know who gave the copy of the dossier to BuzzFeed?"

"I met with Ken Bensinger of BuzzFeed at Mr. Steele's request. He contacted me around Christmas of December 2016, explained that he had worked with BuzzFeed in the past when Orbis, Mr. Steele's firm, had done work on the FIFA

investigation, found them to be a reputable outlet to work with, and said that Mr. Bensinger had contacted Mr. Steele or tried to reach Mr. Steele and asked - Mr. Steele asked me, can I give Ken Bensinger your contact information?"

Bensinger went to Kramer's office. "McCain lnstitute was closed that week, but I was there. Came to my office. He had asked me before if he could see the document, and I did show him the document. He asked if he could take photos or images of it with his iPhone, and I asked him not to do that. I said – this may reflect my own lack of technological savvy - but I said, I worry that things on an iPhone can go places where you don't necessarily anticipate, either intentionally or not."

Kramer left Bensinger in his office for 30 minutes to read the report. Of course, Bensinger took photos of the doc.

The Kramer-Bensinger meeting happened on December 29 and the BuzzFeed publication went out on January 10th 2017.

Q: Do you know if – or do you know anything about Steele's sources or subsources?

Mr. Kramer has been responsive information to that question, but for a variety of reasons that I would hope I don't need to elaborate, he is not going to provide source – the names of sources. … The basis is that providing that information, in our view, creates danger for the witness.

I think it would put any sources I would name in danger as well.

There have been people suspected, whether they are or not, one of whom was found dead in the back of a car in late December 2016.

Several others have been arrested.

MR. SCHIFF: Are you able to tell us whether any of these sources, to your knowledge, are in the United States, or

are they all in Russia or outside the country?"

MR. KRAMER: At the moment I'm not aware of any that are in the United States.

MR. SCHIFF: You described the dossier as raw intelligence, which that's how it comes across. Did you and Mr. Steele discuss whether he was sharing this raw intelligence with MI5, with his old offlce?

MR. KRAMER: He had indicated that he had been in touch with his former colleagues.

The report goes on to discuss the contents of the dossier. The main highlights are the Republican-Democrat-NoName origins, the early FBI involvement with Steele, Steele's orchestration of the BuzzFeed meeting, and Kramer not wanting to answer questions regarding sources for fear that people would be killed.

ANATOLI SAMOCHORNOV

28 NOV 17

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D072.pdf

>>9089017

Nothingburger really. NO misspellings/Kerfing

Samochornov was an interpreter (English/Russian) for MS. VESELNITSKYA at Trump Tower Meeting on 9 JUN 16.

Samochomov worked very occasionally as an interpreter for Veselnitskya from 2015-2016. Veselnitskya was a Russian Lawyer and had a meeting with DJT JR, Paul MANAFORT, Kavaladze, Akhmetsin and possibly 2 others who he cannot recall on 9 Jun 16 for the purpose of informing the Trumps that she had discovered that while researching the Prevozan case, irregularities by ZIFF BROTHERS (who were known tax evaders in Russia) that they made contributions to either the DNC or HRC's Prez campaign. Veselnitskya spoke for less than 5 min about this issue and the entire meeting lasted less than 25 min.

No booms that I could find.

JEFF SESSIONS

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D075.pdf

>>9088231

pg 37.

MR. ROONEY: The third bullet is, what was the U.S. Government'sresponse to these Russian active measures, and what do we need to do to protectourselves and our allies in the future?AIIORNEY GENERAL SESSIONS: Well, we've got a number of things todo: One, plainly, is about the election process. I have urged, and the FBI isworking on – and our Deputy Attomey General is working on, assuring that there'sno system by which actualvote tallies can be manipulated. The FBI said theywere not in this last election.We need to set up a better software review system.

REDLINE ( description of voting software problem goes here )

So you could have software that has problems.. And then you've got the question of intervening some way through falseinformation, or disinformation to impact a campaign. So those are three thingsthat I believe we as a country need to focus on and do a better job about.

MR. ROONEY: I think – this is my opinion, but lthink the most importantof those is obviously the integrity of the ballot

>>9087582

CHRISTOPHER WYLIE addendum

>>9088206

Pages 39-40

MR. WYLIE: Cambridge Analytica used algorithms, the algorithms that I am talking about that were developed using the misappropriated Facebook data, up until the summer of 2016. They then claim that they stopped using it. The problem with that claim is that, in order to develop what they developed, it took several million dollars and months and months and months and months and months and months of work. And so it's like saying we had a house that we built, and then we knocked it down and the next day we rebuilt it in a day. It - from a technical perspective, their explanation does not make sense.

MR. QUIGLEY: So let me try to summarize real quick. The Cambridge Analytical people had to know what they were using was information at least derived from the original -

MR. WYLIE: Yeah.

MR. QUIGLEY: - poisonous tree.

MR. WYLIE: Yeah.

ALEXANDER NIX, CEO of Cambridge Analytica, and his legal counsel, Mr. Muskens

December 14, 2017

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D061.pdf

>>9093933

The majority of the 98 page testimony from Mr. Nix, CEO of Cambridge Analytica, and his legal, Mr. Muskens, was tense at times but no real bombshells IMO.

Starting on page 95, the lawyer reports in-the-moment leaking from the proceedings. Keep in mind that this testimony was done virtually andsomeone on the committee's team was leaking.

MARK ELIAS, ESQ. - For JOHN PODESTA:

PERKINS COIE POLITICAL LAW GROUP

December 13, 2017

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D041.pdf

>>9087901

[Marc Elias, the Perkins Coie attorney who retained the services of Fusion GPS in 2016 to produce the discredited anti-Trump dossier at the behest of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, is one of those lawyers…. Perkins Coie hired Fusion GPS, which in turn hired former British spy Christopher Steele to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump.]

MR. PODESTA: I think the hacks were conducted by the - by agents of Russian intelligence.

MR. ROONEY: What makes you think that?

MR. PODESTA: – by there has been a lot of forensics done, including by the U.S. Government, and, I think, 17 agencies to the U.S. lntelligence Community have included that the Russians were behind the hacks of both my emails and the DNC emails.

MR. ROONEY: Obviously, you implied that it was coordinated from Russia and Julian Assange. But was there anything that led you to believe other than, you know, an opinion that there was a coordination,between Russia, Julian Assange, and anybody from the Trump campaign?

MR. PODESTA: Well, I would say there are a couple of data points that are at least worth your exploring on this committee: One is that Mr. Trump, prior to the Wikileaks dump that occurred right before the Democratic convention, publicly asked the Russians to continue to hack Hillary Clinton's emails. And then shortly thereafter, I think in conjunction with when the Trump campaign fired Paul Manafort, he tweeted out that it will soon be John Podesta's turn in the barrel. I interpreted that to mean, particularly given the fact that he was going around speaking to different groups and arguing that Wikileaks was about to release damaging information, that those two things might be connected. I didn't know that, but that was like a reasonable suspicion on my part. I think he subsequently continued to kind of point towards release of documents that could occur throughout the period of September. And then, of course, the documents were released on October 7

>>9094242

MR. KING: There was no talk of an investigation at all?

MR. PODESTA: Are you talking about the FBI investigation?

MR. KING: Either the FBI or how about the Obama administration, so for the White House, anybody in the administration?

MR. PODESTA: No. The only person who I spoke with who was quite concerned, I think, about what was going on but was not specific in terms of what his level of information was was Senator Reid. I know that he had been briefed in August. I've subsequently read that he'd been briefed by the lntelligence Committee, but I knew that he had been briefed by the lntelligence Committee. He didn't tell me who he had been briefed by, didn't tell me the substance of the briefing, but he told me he was extremely concerned about the engagement and involvement. And I think in that conversation, we were talking about potential Russian interference in the election.

MR. KING: I didn't expect to be asking questions. I'm going off the top of my head with this one. I thought somebody, before the election or right afterwards, Mrs. Clinton made a reference that she'd been told that the Russians might be involved or look out for Russian involvement.

MR. PODESTA: By someone in the administration?

MR. PODESTA: I think - look, the first time the DNC leaks had – were reported, which was in June of 2016, by The Washington Post, after the forensic experts, who the DNC brought in to understand what had happened to their computers Crowd Strike yeah, Crowd Strike, had already identified, and there was a bunch of independent verification that two units of Russian intelligence, one from the FSB, one from the GRU had attacked the DNC computers. So she was certainly aware of that. But I don't believe – I am not aware that she was briefed by the U.S. Government about what they knew about what was going on.

MR. PODESTA: I think the one other fact, I guess, I would point the committee to and I'm not an expert on this, but I would point the committee to was the DCCC was also hacked. And certain information was dumped in the context of the Republican Florida primaries. Now, that - you know, someone – that, at least in my mind, raises the question of, you know, someone sitting in, you know, the former Soviet Union knowing what information to dump to take out a Democratic challenger to a Republican candidate in a House Florida race seems a high level of sophistication for Russian intelligence. But I don't know whether you're looking at that, but I would recommend that you – maybe somebody wants to take a look at that one.

MR. PODESTA: The DCCC was hacked in the Democratic primaries.

>>9087929

MR. SCHIFF: Yeah, and there's more on that we can go into. I think that there were opposition research files that were dumped also in a Florida race. But there were at least three vehicles used for the dumping of stolen emails. You had Wikileaks and Julian Assange. You had DCLeaks and you had Guccifer 2. The unclassified assessment - and I don't have the precise language, but essentially views Guccifer 2 and perhaps DCLeaks as more direct Russian cutouts as opposed to Wikileaks, which at least has either a complicit party, a useful idiot, or something in between. With respect to the more direct outlets of Guccifer 2 and DCLeaks, were there any aspects of the documents that they dumped, or the timing in which they dumped it that demonstrated a sophistication beyond what you would expect of a foreign intelligence service in terms of knowing the intricacies of the campaign and what would be most advantageous to the Trump campaign or disadvantageous to the Clinton campaign?

MR. SCHIFF: And I know it's impossible to say with precision, but in your view, is it at least possible, if not more than possible, that the combination of the daily dumping of emails and its commingling with the Comey letter and the email investigation ultimately proved to be a decisive factor in the loss?

MR. SCHIFF: I want to turn, if I can, to the issue of potential collusion, and go back over something that you mentioned at the outset. When did you first learn that your computer, your emails may have been hacked?

MR. PODESTA: We had some suspicion of that without full knowledge in early July, maybe late June or early July. [The murder of Seth Rich occurred on Sunday, July 10, 2016, at 4:20 a.m.] Because some of those some of the earliest dumps that were done by DCLeaks contained documents that didn't appear belonged inside the DNC and, you know, housed in the DNC. So it was clear they had hacked the DNC and they were putting documents out from the DNC, but there were some documents that involved internal deliberations, fundraising strategies, et cetera, other documents that appeared to come from people inside the campaign. And I think the campaign, at that point, identified some as perhaps coming from my Gmail account, coming from Ambassador Marshall's Gmail account, and, perhaps, from other Gmail accounts, including some of the younger staff on the campaign who were basically advanced people on the campaign. So there was some sense that there was a group of documents that didn't sort of seem like they belonged at the DNC, and so our suspicions were raised, but we weren't certain at that point what had happened. And I think the we were, of course, on guard and trying to ensure that the hacking was, you know, kept out of the campaign, but that was probably the first moment where we thought that they may have happened.

MR, PODESTA: Well, I had no role in the cybersecurity of the DNC. I was made aware of the hack shortly before it became public information. lf my memory serves me, the California primary was June 6, whatever the Tuesday WAS Shortly thereafter, a few days thereafter, I was informed that the DNC - this probably would have been late that week – that the DNC's computers had been hacked; that they had engaged a firm called Crowd Strike; and that they were going to brief the press that this had occurred and they were taking measures to remedy as best they could the problems that this was causing. I was briefed on that before it was reported, but by a matter of days. I think that would have been Thursday or Friday, and I think the story appeared on Monday.

I just saw this, Clapper interview admits to SCHIFF no collusion, also trying to spin unmasking. Lots of redactions, and of course a section where is just says Q instead of listing the name of person asking questions.

>>9094401

They also did not like Flynn challenging Hussein on the threat of ISIS

>>9094401

Could you possibly copy the text and paste it in a post? That way no one has to type it up and we can use it in articles, or graphics or even podcast/video output. Thank you.

>>9087945

MR. SCHIFF: 1Oth or 11th of June. I don't know if it's helpful, but June 14 is the date The Washington Post publicly reported that the DNC had been a victim of hacking.

MR. PODESTA: lt's just in advance of that.

MR. SCHIFF: So you would have learned about this for the first time just in advance of that?

MR. PODESTA: Yes

MR. SCHIFF: And are you in a position at all to comment on the allegations about whether the FBI or DHS sought the DNC server? Was that ever brought to your attention, that issue? So you can't comment on whether they ever sought it?

MR. PODESTA: No.

MR. SCHIFF: Director Comey testified that the FBI ended up getting the information they needed from Crowd Strike. Do you have any insight into that?

>>9094468

Roger

>>9094401

I trying the Clapper transcipt… The same shit as Sondland! It is all about muh I felt… Except when it comes to direct evidence… No!

And, of course, fucking redactions!

Documents from PSCoI (https://docs.house.gov/Committee/Committees.aspx?Code=IG00) that have Kerning (process of adjusting the spacing between characters in a proportional font) Issues:

A complete list by names (!! used to indicate search obfuscation, ** used for unsearchable)

Loretta Lynch

Marie Yovanovitch

Name Redacted

P. Michael McKinley

Gordon Sondland

!!Kurt Volker

William B Taylor

George Kent

Laura Katherine Cooper

Catherine Croft

Christopher Anderson

Brian McCormack

Charles Kupperman

T. Ulrich Brechbuhl and Russell Vought

Preston Wells Griffith

Michael Duffey

John Michael "Mick" Mulvaney

John Eisenberg

Michael Ellis

Mark Sandy

!!LtC Alexander S Vindman

Sally Yates

Samantha Power

Jake Sullivan

Felix Slater

John Podesta

Mary McCord

Fiona Hill

Tim Morrison

Jennifer Williams

Jared Kushner

Philip Reeker

Stephen Bannon

John Carlin

James Clapper

Dan Coats

Michael Cohen

Mark Elias

Evelyn Frakas

Shawn Henry

Hope Hicks

Andrew McCabe

**Carter Page

Benjamin Rhodes

Susan Rice

Michael Sussmann

Jefferson B Sessions

Matthew F Tait

**https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D001.pdf

>>9095702

Carter Page is now searchable with OCR. Thnx, anon.

DIA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PDF

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D001.pdf

now with searchability thanks to OCR

RE Sussmann transcript:

Here's some notes I've posted in QResearch thread, continuing to take notes & will make more succinct summary after making notes.

>>9097315(lb)

>>9097355(lb)

>>9097404(lb)

>>9098000

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D078.pdf

p. 7

-Sussmann came to Perkins Coie after 12 yrs at US DOJ, was a 7 yr prosecutor in the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section there

-Deals w/companies that have had data breaches or with various cybersecurity needs

-Firm has biggest practice for compliance with 3rd party providers, facilitating the legal process

-He worked as a prosecutor of some computer hacking cases, chaired the US delegation to the G-8 subgroup on high-tech crime, did various work on European Commission and other international bodies

p. 8

-His work led him to engage with political parties, including the DNC, began representing them in April 2016

-A colleague at the firm told him that an IT Vendor for the DNC had been in touch w/the FBI for some time about ‘potential threats to the DNC’, cyber threats and that the FBI had made a request for some data. Sussmann was asked to speak to the IT vendor and speak w/the FBI, and provide advice to the client as to how they should proceed. Graham Wilson was the colleague who provided info & made request to Sussmann.

pp.11-13

-FBI was wanting DNC logs to ascertain who has or had not been accessing the DNC computer network

-Logs would show authorized users’ activity and ‘could show a variety of unauthorized users’

-490 authorized users, 500 users on the network, 10 users to reverse-engineer understanding of their unauthorized access

>>9098000

Sussmann con't

p. 15-19

-in 2016 there was follow up communications

- “there was an early call with Crowdstrike, the forensic vendor ‘we’ brought in, to coordinate with them and introduce them to the FBI. We had several meetings over the course of my representation with the FBI on this matter with, various times, DNC leadership.”

- DOJ meeting RE their ‘criminal and intelligence investigation into the computer hacking’, guessing in Oct. 2016, where 10 people could have been there, including “WFO and the San Francisco office, and various AUSAs from other places”

- reported various incoming threats during course of Presidential campaign that he was a source to report to the FBI on

- met with Jim Trainer, then asst director for cyber

- Sussmann and Shawn Henry called Jim to “let him know that the story involving the DNC intrusion was going to be publicly reported and to just give him a heads up and let him know beforehand, and just to touch base.” They all 3 decided to have a future meeting.

-some meetings just w/FBI and one in Oct. was w/FBI & DOJ, one with FBI and DNC leaderhship

- at first meeting FBI informed hack was state-sponsored, and attackers were Russians, FBI had been following them a long time. Discussion of sharing info that Crowdstrike “was collecting with them, developing - you know, developing, ensuring open lines of communication. Things of that nature.”

- 2nd meeting Ms. Ruemmler (Sussmann’s attorney) said is classified

- Met w/FBI in mid-June of 2016 with Asst. Director Traynor and said the FBI could have any info that Crowdstrike was developing or had, & could deal with Crowdstrike directly, “So I know that sharing was going on.”

>>9098000

p. 20

-Sussmann received along with the client (DNC) a report from Crowdstrike, and it was shared with the FBI

- Sussmann was asked how the engagement with CrowdStrike came about, for them to be retained on behalf of the DNC, “So it was my recommendation, but the decision was the DNC’s”

- CrowdStrike officially retained on the last Friday in April of 2016

-shortly thereafter Sussmann on a call w/DNC, they found an intruder on the network, and he learned for the first time that “we” the DNC “had evidence that there, in fact, was an intruder on the network”. Sussmann then recommended that DNC immediately get the services of a security professional, and “I also recommended that they retain Shawn Henry and CrowdStrike”

Reposting this for the thread:

Side by side: Transcript of "Witness Name Redacted" is FBI Agent Michael Gaeta?

From pages 10 and 11 in the transcript of "Witness Name Redacted"

A…: "So Chrislopher Steele was one of these individuals. I met him with Bruce. The first time, I believe, was the spring of 2010, was when I met Christopher Steele.

Q: Prior to that meeting in – your first meeting with Christopher Steele

in spring of 2010, had you had any communications with Mr. Steele?

A: No.

Q: Just Mr. Ohr told you about him?

A He had told me about him in lead up to the introduction and the meeting, which happened in London. Again, I think it was April. I don't know exactly the date. But spring of 2010.

Q: But it was in London?

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. Anyone else there, just you and Mr. Steele?

A: Mr. Steele, myself, Bruce Ohr. I can't recall if there were - I can't recall if anyone else was there.

Q: You don't remember. It's pretty easy. What happened at this meeting in London in April of 2O1O?

A: So at this meeting I was induced to Christopher Steele

https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/wnr56.pdf

Buried in IG Report: How an FBI Team in Rome Gave Steele Highly Guarded Secrets

It was in the context of the FIFA investigation that Steele met FBI agent Michael Gaeta in 2010. Gaeta was in charge of a team fighting Russian organized crime. When the bureau’s reliance on the Steele dossier first became public in 2017, press reports claimed that Steele’s contributions to the soccer probe proved he was reliable. However, the IG report summarizes the views of a case agent and a prosecutor who said, “Steele did not have any role in the [FIFA] investigation itself, he did not provide court testimony, and his information did not appear in any indictments, search warrants, or other court filings.”

Nonetheless, between 2014 and 2016, Steele collected $95,000 from the bureau for his work on the FIFA case and reports on corruption in Russia and Ukraine.

His paymaster was Gaeta, referred to in the Horowitz report as “Handling Agent 1.” So when Steele and Simpson decided to approach the FBI to promote a conspiracy theory about Trump and Russia, Gaeta was the natural contact. Steele met with Gaeta in London on July 5, 2016 and presented him with a tantalizing preview of the “dossier.” This first installment included the lurid “pee tape” story – the salacious rumor that Trump had paid Russian prostitutes to urinate on a Moscow hotel bed the Obamas had slept on.

By September Steele had given the FBI the bulk of his Trump-Russia reports. That led to the meeting in Rome on October 3 between Steele and several agents from the Crossfire Hurricane team, as the IG report describes them: “Case Agent 2,” a “Supervisory Intel Analyst,” and an “Acting Section Chief,” together with Gaeta.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/02/13/buried_in_ig_report_fbi_gave_steele_highly_protected_secrets_122394.html

I assume 99% of police are patriots too.

http://womenandpolicing.com/violenceFS.asp#notes.

>>9098000

Here's a pastebin with my notes on the Sussmann transcript:

https://pastebin.com/6w87ba9Z

Will work on writing a succinct & brief summary.

Questions that come to mind after reading the transcript & taking the notes:

• Was Sussmann part of the play in laundering info between agencies, news, between litigation proceedings? (likely given what's in this transcript)

• Even though Obama was reported to have dismissed evidence of Russian interference, he was ordering an investigation into it & was this 'investigation' the cover under which the coup that was taking place and continuing into the beginning stages of President Trump's 1st presidency? (likely given what's in this transcript)

-How often (like the Mueller investigation) are bad actors using litigation proceedings as cover for criminal acts so they can claim 'attorney-client privilege'? (is this rhetorical, kek)

Interview Transcript of Christopher Wylie (April 25, 2018)

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D084.pdf

Pages 152-155

MR. WYLIE: So after Cambridge Analytica got set up, so in the spring of 2014, Palantir staff started showing up in the office…One of the things that I found slightly disconcerting about that, which is why it sticks in my head, was that we were all instructed that when we were

dealing with anybody from Palantir on the staff list, they had pseudonyms. So they had fake names, and that there was at least one time where I saw a staff member being paid in cash. I'm not sure exactly what that was.

REP. SCHIFF: So it wasn't clear why they were

there or what they were doing, and they had these pseudonyms?

MR. WYLIE: Yes. So some of the emails I have

are from the personal accounts, personal email

accounts, of staff members, and then some of the emails I have come from pseudonyms, but some of the emails they signed off on their actual name and forgot that they were using a pseudonym….

REP. SCHIFF: But any guess as to what the

deal was? Was this an effort to avoid foreign

nationals working on a British campaign or any reason? I mean, is there any rational expression for why all of the skullduggery?

MR. WYLIE: So I don't – I shouldn't

speculate. I don't think I should speculate.

Kurt Volker

Transcribed Interview of Ambassador Kurt Volker on October 3, 2019 [PDF] Added on 11/5/2019

now with search capability thanks to OCR and hand checking

note that Volker was using whatsApp for secure chats

many Ukrainian names spelled creatively and I did not change anyone's typos in text.

Interview Transcript of Christopher Wylie (April 25, 2018)

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D084.pdf

Page 163

REP. SCHIFF: Well, let me ask it this way

then. Are you aware of use of Proton accounts to hide things that were unethical and potentially unlawful?

MR. WYLIE: I'm aware of people at Cambridge

Analytica or SCL Group using technologies like

ProtonMail or simply going and deleting things that may have been potential evidence that would have been relevant to an investigation.

REP. SCHIFF: Would you rather provide that to

us in documentary form?

MR. WYLIE: Yes.

>>9110657 (o/b)

John Podesta admitted under oath that the DNC and the Hillary Campaign split the cost of the Trump-Russia dossier.

—

(pgs 16 & 17)

[Marc Elias] - Said the same thing in his testimony when being questioned by: (Trey Gowdy).

—

MR. GOWDY: All right. Whose money were you spending?

MR. ELIAS: Right. so I was spending the campaign's and the DNC's.

MR. GOWDY: Right. And my question to you was, were you authorized up to a certain dollar amount to consult no one other than yourself?

MR. ELIAS. I now understand. So with respect to this particular project, I consulted with Robby Mook, who was the campaign manager, to get budget approval to be able to spend money in order for me to retain consultants. This was the consultants that I retained, but I didn't need to consult on the identity of the consultants.

MR. GOWDY: All right. And how much money did Robby Mook approve you to spend?

MR. ELIAS: I'm going to do the best I can by memory here. lt is all on FEC reports. But my recollection is that initially it was a total of $60,000 split between the campaign and – $60,000 split 30 and 30 between the campaign and the DNC. And then there additionalexpenses associated with that, that changed month to month, were relatively modest initially and grew larger as the campaign drew on.

MR. GowDY: Now, were you paying, was that 30-30 split for work that had already been done by Fusion GPS? was that a retainer for them to do additional work? What was the 60,000?

MR. ELIAS: lt was to provide the information that I requested or needed in order to do what I needed to do

—

campaign's = HILLARY FOR AMERICA

(pg 7)

we have conferred with Mr. Elias's clients, Hillary for America and the Democratic National committee, and they have not waived the privilege with respect to Mr. Elias' testimony today.

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D041.pdf

>>9110868

(continued)

Hillary for America and the Democratic National Committee - Paid [Peter Fritsch & Glenn Simpson. - Fusion GPS] Thru [Marc Elias - Perkins Coie] for = Dirty Russia Dossier.

[Tom Perez & Jessica O'connell of DNC] - Named in testimony.

[Marc Elias] - Testimony questing by: Trey Gowdy

(Continued)

(pgs 23 - 25)

MR. GOWDY: But it doesn't get much bigger than Presidential. And you hired a firm you'd never hired before, based on a meeting where they said they have quote, "research." And we've defined research as bankruptcies and court filings that you could have hired a law clerk to go find.

MR. ELIAS: So as I said, it was based on their reputation in the community, recommendations, and -

MR. GOWDY: Recommendations from whom?

MR. ELIAS: One of my partners had recommended them to me as a firm that had done good work in his experience and that they had a good reputation.

MR. GOWDY: All right. So I think we're up to $60,000. What is the total amount of money that Perkins Coie paid Fusion GPS?

MR. ELIAS: I know it's in the letter we I don't remember the

MR. GOWDY: lwon't hold you to it. Just give me a ballpark. More than $60,000?

MR. ELIAS: I think it was well, it was l'm sorry, $60,000 a month. MR. GOWDY: $60,000 a month.

MR. ELIAS: I'm sorry, yes. lt was 30 and 30 per month.

MR. GOWDY: So $60,000 a month, What was the duration of - MR. ELIAS: And then plus expenses.

MR. GOWDY: What was the duration of that agreement or could either party -

MR. ELIAS: lt was it was - it was from and you said you're not going to hold it to me : hold me to it.

MR. GOWDY: I'm not looking for any more investigations to start than we already have.

MR. ELIAS: lt was some time in the spring.

MR. GOWDY: OkaY.

MR. ELIAS: I want to say maybe April, but that could be off a month one

way or the other. And it ended in - at the end of October.

MR. GOWDY: So May, June, July, August, September, October'

MR. ELIAS: I think April, I think April. I don't know, maybe.

MR. GOWDY: All right. so 7 months times $60,000. l'll let you help me

with the math there.

MR. ELIAS: I went to law school.

MR. GOWDY: $400,000 and something, Himes, is that close? MR. HIMES: lt's close.

MR. GOWDY: Alt right. So we're not quite close to the million. MR. ELIAS: Right.

MR. GOWDY: Where is the other half of it, those expenses?

MR. ELIAS: Yes.

MR. GOWDY: And did you get a detailed summary? Do they fill out billing sheets like lawyers do where they say 0.7 hours spent opening a letter?

MR. ELIAS: Fortunately for the rest of the world, nobody fills out time sheets like lawyers do.

MR. GOWDY: What were those expenses they incurred?

MR. ELIAS: So the expenses were and, again, by category if I had to guess, but it's an educated guess, I would bet that the largest expenses Were probably copying and court expenses, you know, getting copies of transcripts, getting copies of files. Getting, like - getting a complete case file for a major piece of complex litigation, the copying cost to the courthouse could be $10,000, $20,000.

MR. GOWDY: Did they provide monthly updates to you on what they were

finding?

MR. ELIAS: Yes. More than monthly.

MR. GOWDY: ln writing or orally or both.

MR. ELIAS: Typically orally. Typically it was orally, more often than

monthly, though.

MR. GOWDY: When did you first hear the name Christopher Steele? MR. ELIAS: When did I first hear the name Christopher Steele? To the

best of my recollection, I first heard the name Christopher Steele in July.

MR. GOWDY: From whom?

MS. RUEMMLER: You can answer that.

MR. ELIAS: lt would have either been Peter or Glenn. I would guess

Peter.

MR. GOWDY: What was the nature of what you were told?

MS. RUEMMLER: As stated, that question calls for information that's

protected by applicable privileges and I would instruct the witness not to answer. MR. GOWDY: And this is where I'm trying to figure it out. You're a law

firm that hired nonlawyers to do work for you. These nonlawyers are reporting back to you. You're the client, you're not the lawyer.

So will you waive attorney-client privilege and tell me what your client said to you?

(continued)

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/CPRT-116-IG00-D041.pdf

VINDMAN TRANSCRIPT

OCR'd and now searchable

Looks like hadn't added this one the other night. Simona points us directly to the source for the Mifsud/CF open source link.

Complete notes:

Bread: 11628

>>9084551 Interesting that she specifically brought this up -- Simona previously worked on cases of international child abduction

Bread: 11629

>>9084745 good job here p.50 slipping this in – Now I am glad I chose to do Simona -- Mifsud is Clinton Foundation

Open source link:

https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2017/11/01/news/russiagate_mystery_professor_joseph_mifsud_speaks_out_dirt_on_hillary_clinton_nonsense_-179948962/?refresh_ce

>>9085261 Swalwell is a buffoon; then Simona describes London Centre as very disorganized/unprofessional, possibly a front for something else, that Mifsud and the Centre were supposedly bankrupt, and nobody had any idea how Mifsud was maintaining his lifestyle, etc. (cut-out)

>>9085328 Simona describes the shady Link Campus "University of Malta" (known spook training grounds)

Open source link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_Campus_University

>>9085397 This is a big Red Flag here. Looking more like the London Centre is/was a trafficking front.

Open source link on Mifsud/London Centre/Link Campus:

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/05/26/the_maltese_phantom_of_russiagate_.html