It’s kind of a big Sunday for news—if you count talk as news. I do. Kashyap Pramod “Kash” Patel appeared with Maria Bartiromo this morning, and it was pretty much one bombshell after another from beginning to end of the 5:30 interview. Just a reminder of who Patel is.
Would love to see Kash go into next Trump Admin as Deputy AG under Ratcliffe, clean house at Justice then slide Ratcliffe over to DoD & have Kash as AG after a couple years. Let's hope Durham fills up a coupla Paddy-Wagons of names we know.
"Second, I was gratified to see Patel confirm my assessment, which I offered quite recently. I stated that, while Page and Strzok may have been big fish within the FBI, in the big scheme of this conspiracy they weren’t truly major players."
*****
repost from Durham Conspiracy Theory thread:
Peter Strzok is on the attack. Or at least active defense.
A remarkable piece from a real slippery character, a jaw dropping amount of self-serving half-truths and unrelated fluff. And the claim that Trump is still a national security threat!
FYI, the Lawfare blog is the belly of the Swamp beast.
"Late in the evening of Oct. 6, attorneys for former Department of Justice attorney and former Perkins Coie partner Michael Sussmann filed a motion for a bill of particulars relating to his indictment by Special Counsel John Durham. The indictment charges Sussmann with one count of making a false statement to the FBI in September 2016, in conjunction with providing allegations that computer systems connected to the Russian Alfa Bank had anomalous contact with an internet domain associated with the Trump Organization.
[Full disclosure, I had a minor role in the events in question, insofar as I transferred the material Sussmann gave to Jim Baker, the FBI’s general counsel at the time, to the personnel who ultimately supervised and looked into the allegations.] "
note the curious reference to DNC email dropped on wikileaks, "that was our guys" from unknown to FBI's Boone.
Unknown then talks about the emails Wikileaks put out "on Friday" (which would be the 22nd of July) getting the DNC woman fired.
Boone corrects unknown by noting she "respectfully resigned..."
This almost certainly coincides with <b>Alexandra Chalupa resigning from DNC in the wake of wikileaks DNC email drop in July.</b>
Unfortunately, there is no insight into what "that was our guys" refers to in regard to the DNC email drop by wikileaks on 22 July.
The $64K question re: Chalupa is why would Boone and unknown FBI personnel be familiar with Chalupa, and why would they take notice of her departure from DNC employment subsequent to the DNC emails dropping on 22 July via wikileaks? <b>Why is Chalupa on their "radar" at all at this time?</b>
She was instrumental, as I recall, in getting the fabricated Ukrainian "black ledger" into the hands of DOJ to use against Manafort.
Quote:
>> “A lot more coming down the pipe,” Chalupa wrote a top DNC official on May 3, 2016, recounting her effort to educate Ukrainian journalists and Isikoff about Manafort.
Then she added, “More offline tomorrow since there is a big Trump component you and Lauren need to be aware of that will hit in next few weeks and something I’m working on you should be aware of.”
Less than a month later, the “black ledger” identifying payments to Manafort was announced in Ukraine, forcing Manafort to resign as Trump’s campaign chairman and eventually to face criminal prosecution for improper foreign lobbying.
DNC officials have suggested in the past that Chalupa’s efforts were personal, not officially on behalf of the DNC. But Chalupa’s May 2016 email clearly informed a senior DNC official that she was “digging into Manafort” and she suspected someone was trying to hack into her email account. <<
Unfortunately, Techno Fog's comment is correct--impossible at our distance to tell what "our guys" really means. The fact that Chalupa was so instrumental in the DNC's Ukraine ops at the same time that the FBI was also looking into Ukraine matters may explain their familiarity with her.
To me it seemed as if Patel's musings were serving some kind of strategic purpose, or sending some kind of message, particularly the way in which he singled out Comey and McCabe and how he alluded to all those cooperators. Very FBI focused. But Comey and McCabe will surely have leverage with higher ups to make sure this goes nowhere. Comey briefed Obama et al recall, and part of the hoax effect was all kinds of unmasking by Obama admin, there's no way you carve out Comey and stop there.
In year 2 of a possible 5 or 6 year case? There will be no country left.. the left know they are going down so they pulled all the stops a d know they have to take down america to get away with it.. they almost succeeded
No, Patel was giving misinfo. Durham started in April of 2017 as evidenced by testimony of James Baker I think. You can research it but I know Durham started much earlier.
It's clear that Durham started--in some capacity--well before he was designated a SC. In what capacity he began and exactly what he was targeting is not nearly as clear. Since we know that Mueller took a look at the Alfa hoax, I think we can assume that Durham didn't have any authority in that direction. Also, while Durham ultimately played a major role in the Flynn case, he would not have been active before Barr shut down Mueller. There's a lot we don't know.
Another thought Mark; what is the feasibility that the FISA's for Carter Page were actually a "decoy" process? Seems from what I've read the Halper reaching out to Carter Page started at the same time as the Alfa bank hoax work/plans? Halper was known to be aligned with the FBI. If the FBI (through Baker) was aware of Sussman/Simpson's plans is it possible a counter intel operation could have taken place to take the spotlight off of the true intent?
If memory serves, I think Carter blew his own cover. He posed off his handlers, so his joining Trump was opportunity to get revenge as well as dirt on Trump.
Rod was taking quite a chance doing this FISA stuff in Trump's admin...[they] thought Trump would resign and Pence would take over and then resume the 16 year plan? Just spitballen...or the this was the optics needed for DS?
What prevents the Biden Admin/Garland to call time on the Durham inquiry, before it gets too damaging to the Democrats? It would elicit some bad press from the right only for a few news cycles, the MSM would welcome it and promote it as the right thing to do, given that Trump installed him, and it will soon be forgotten, just like the successful Afghanistan "withdrawal"
In my view, a big tell will be if there are zero Twitter responses to the Patel interview by those he mentioned as likely targets. Seems like anyone who made such accusations in what now seems the distant past was carpet bombed by the accused or their surrogates on Twitter, or wrote editorials for the Times or the Post. At this point, silence on their part may well be as good an indicator we have on how far Durham has advanced the ball across the field.
"an indicator we have on how far Durham has advanced...."
Or, an indicator on how little that matters any more, given Biden's pardon powers.
Regarding all of these hoped-for "cooperators", I'll bet that Page, Strzok, Ohr, Prietsap, and Baker have had pardons dangled at them, and I'll be surprised if they say boo that matters.
Yes, I'd mentioned the pardon possibility in a previous post on this topic but saw no reason to keep beating on that horse today. But, should pardons be the route this administration takes to keep the guilty from facing punishment, that will be a revelation of its own. As more of the corruption is revealed the less standing these evil doers and those that would protect them will have - including the media.
And really, can we call it a revelation of it is not revealed? We all know the media will give them cover of non-reporting, and if they do report on it, the worst that may come is like Milley admitting to a treasonous act, but hey, Orange Man Bad...
Would love to see Kash go into next Trump Admin as Deputy AG under Ratcliffe, clean house at Justice then slide Ratcliffe over to DoD & have Kash as AG after a couple years. Let's hope Durham fills up a coupla Paddy-Wagons of names we know.
"Second, I was gratified to see Patel confirm my assessment, which I offered quite recently. I stated that, while Page and Strzok may have been big fish within the FBI, in the big scheme of this conspiracy they weren’t truly major players."
*****
repost from Durham Conspiracy Theory thread:
Peter Strzok is on the attack. Or at least active defense.
A remarkable piece from a real slippery character, a jaw dropping amount of self-serving half-truths and unrelated fluff. And the claim that Trump is still a national security threat!
FYI, the Lawfare blog is the belly of the Swamp beast.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/sussmann-indictment-human-source-handling-and-fbis-declining-fisa-numbers
"Late in the evening of Oct. 6, attorneys for former Department of Justice attorney and former Perkins Coie partner Michael Sussmann filed a motion for a bill of particulars relating to his indictment by Special Counsel John Durham. The indictment charges Sussmann with one count of making a false statement to the FBI in September 2016, in conjunction with providing allegations that computer systems connected to the Russian Alfa Bank had anomalous contact with an internet domain associated with the Trump Organization.
[Full disclosure, I had a minor role in the events in question, insofar as I transferred the material Sussmann gave to Jim Baker, the FBI’s general counsel at the time, to the personnel who ultimately supervised and looked into the allegations.] "
😁
Podcast on the above
https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fpodcasts.apple.com%2Fnl%2Fpodcast%2Fthe-lawfare-podcast%2Fid498897343%3Fl%3Den%26i%3D1000539611879%26fbclid%3DIwAR2nX1o_lzbJCJVj6UkdgZPpIrmHHzSxWnrGdCqxCPJoSYOI3HjEIs0794c&h=AT3v-YXsGpr0zoM76Dz4MJea8heVm_GfBkMAgUP5bDZuDgpq0ekA4xcZjfFW0oFz2z19shEBopcNyjhjSuOMrp289ECakYUbzY0paMwJStZU9ZgcqPzcpxlMlqVVEMc5yAAPnPodMv4
FusionGPS having a bad day:
>> https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/1445155907881644033 <<
I don't know what Laura Seago did at FusionGPS, but their lawyers sure seemed determined to prevent Alfa bank's lawyers from deposing her.
While we wait for more shoes to drop in Durham world, you and your readers might enjoy this tidbit via TechnoFog:
>> https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1334530153435820037 <<
note the curious reference to DNC email dropped on wikileaks, "that was our guys" from unknown to FBI's Boone.
Unknown then talks about the emails Wikileaks put out "on Friday" (which would be the 22nd of July) getting the DNC woman fired.
Boone corrects unknown by noting she "respectfully resigned..."
This almost certainly coincides with <b>Alexandra Chalupa resigning from DNC in the wake of wikileaks DNC email drop in July.</b>
Unfortunately, there is no insight into what "that was our guys" refers to in regard to the DNC email drop by wikileaks on 22 July.
The $64K question re: Chalupa is why would Boone and unknown FBI personnel be familiar with Chalupa, and why would they take notice of her departure from DNC employment subsequent to the DNC emails dropping on 22 July via wikileaks? <b>Why is Chalupa on their "radar" at all at this time?</b>
She was instrumental, as I recall, in getting the fabricated Ukrainian "black ledger" into the hands of DOJ to use against Manafort.
Quote:
>> “A lot more coming down the pipe,” Chalupa wrote a top DNC official on May 3, 2016, recounting her effort to educate Ukrainian journalists and Isikoff about Manafort.
Then she added, “More offline tomorrow since there is a big Trump component you and Lauren need to be aware of that will hit in next few weeks and something I’m working on you should be aware of.”
Less than a month later, the “black ledger” identifying payments to Manafort was announced in Ukraine, forcing Manafort to resign as Trump’s campaign chairman and eventually to face criminal prosecution for improper foreign lobbying.
DNC officials have suggested in the past that Chalupa’s efforts were personal, not officially on behalf of the DNC. But Chalupa’s May 2016 email clearly informed a senior DNC official that she was “digging into Manafort” and she suspected someone was trying to hack into her email account. <<
>> https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/441892-ukrainian-embassy-confirms-dnc-contractor-solicited-trump-dirt-in-2016 <<
Unfortunately, Techno Fog's comment is correct--impossible at our distance to tell what "our guys" really means. The fact that Chalupa was so instrumental in the DNC's Ukraine ops at the same time that the FBI was also looking into Ukraine matters may explain their familiarity with her.
To me it seemed as if Patel's musings were serving some kind of strategic purpose, or sending some kind of message, particularly the way in which he singled out Comey and McCabe and how he alluded to all those cooperators. Very FBI focused. But Comey and McCabe will surely have leverage with higher ups to make sure this goes nowhere. Comey briefed Obama et al recall, and part of the hoax effect was all kinds of unmasking by Obama admin, there's no way you carve out Comey and stop there.
In year 2 of a possible 5 or 6 year case? There will be no country left.. the left know they are going down so they pulled all the stops a d know they have to take down america to get away with it.. they almost succeeded
No, Patel was giving misinfo. Durham started in April of 2017 as evidenced by testimony of James Baker I think. You can research it but I know Durham started much earlier.
It's clear that Durham started--in some capacity--well before he was designated a SC. In what capacity he began and exactly what he was targeting is not nearly as clear. Since we know that Mueller took a look at the Alfa hoax, I think we can assume that Durham didn't have any authority in that direction. Also, while Durham ultimately played a major role in the Flynn case, he would not have been active before Barr shut down Mueller. There's a lot we don't know.
There’s no MAY about Strozk’s connections to CIA. He WAS CIA and merely tasked to FBI as the head of counter intelligence. Common practice.
Another thought Mark; what is the feasibility that the FISA's for Carter Page were actually a "decoy" process? Seems from what I've read the Halper reaching out to Carter Page started at the same time as the Alfa bank hoax work/plans? Halper was known to be aligned with the FBI. If the FBI (through Baker) was aware of Sussman/Simpson's plans is it possible a counter intel operation could have taken place to take the spotlight off of the true intent?
Exactly! How many "hops" were to be used for the Carter Page FISA? Also this whole fiasco ruined carter's cover for CIA operation in Russia..
So a real question could be...who were they really going after?
If memory serves, I think Carter blew his own cover. He posed off his handlers, so his joining Trump was opportunity to get revenge as well as dirt on Trump.
Zero. They really wanted that FISA, and they put themselves at legal jeopardy to go get it and to get it renewed 3x. That's no decoy.
The last request was by Rod Rosenstein....right?
yes
Rod was taking quite a chance doing this FISA stuff in Trump's admin...[they] thought Trump would resign and Pence would take over and then resume the 16 year plan? Just spitballen...or the this was the optics needed for DS?
Yes, most politicians - at least conservatives - resign due to the heat or "for the sake of the country."
They failed to factor that they were not dealing with a politician.
What prevents the Biden Admin/Garland to call time on the Durham inquiry, before it gets too damaging to the Democrats? It would elicit some bad press from the right only for a few news cycles, the MSM would welcome it and promote it as the right thing to do, given that Trump installed him, and it will soon be forgotten, just like the successful Afghanistan "withdrawal"
The new fiscal year started Friday and it appears that Durham is still funded. Patel would know if Durham had been shut down.
Mark, two questions:
1) What are the chances of Weissman or team Mueller getting subpoened?
2) What are the chances Stephen Somma gets charged and then flips?
Mark, I searched but could not find your “link above” to this morning’s Maria B interview. Only link seemed to be to Patel’s Wikipedia page. Help!
Patel video here:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/10/03/kash_patel_look_for_indictments_against_fusion_gps_and_glenn_simpson_for_perpetuating_trump-russia_fraud.html
I'll fix that. Meanwhile:
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6275368384001#sp=show-clips
Tx
In my view, a big tell will be if there are zero Twitter responses to the Patel interview by those he mentioned as likely targets. Seems like anyone who made such accusations in what now seems the distant past was carpet bombed by the accused or their surrogates on Twitter, or wrote editorials for the Times or the Post. At this point, silence on their part may well be as good an indicator we have on how far Durham has advanced the ball across the field.
"an indicator we have on how far Durham has advanced...."
Or, an indicator on how little that matters any more, given Biden's pardon powers.
Regarding all of these hoped-for "cooperators", I'll bet that Page, Strzok, Ohr, Prietsap, and Baker have had pardons dangled at them, and I'll be surprised if they say boo that matters.
Yes, I'd mentioned the pardon possibility in a previous post on this topic but saw no reason to keep beating on that horse today. But, should pardons be the route this administration takes to keep the guilty from facing punishment, that will be a revelation of its own. As more of the corruption is revealed the less standing these evil doers and those that would protect them will have - including the media.
Yeah, that will be a revelation of its own, but that may be a price that the DS is willing to pay, since much of it'll blow over, in many key circles.
Whereas, the drip drip, of years of busts, pleas, etc., may bring out too much w/ real, lasting impact.
And really, can we call it a revelation of it is not revealed? We all know the media will give them cover of non-reporting, and if they do report on it, the worst that may come is like Milley admitting to a treasonous act, but hey, Orange Man Bad...
The only one giving any pardons is going to be God.
"they would still have to testify about everyone else or face new perjury or obstruction of justice charges."
So?
If they refuse to testify, and are thereby charged, they'll get pardoned for that too. Rinse and repeat.
Face it, they're all Made Men (& Women), seeing as they all Paid their Dues, when it mattered (in sabotaging DJT).
And, when they defend their refusal to testify, "in order to protect the institutions", the Barrs, Mitchs, etc. will all-but give them a Standing O.