The New York Times is confirming that Kevin Clinesmith is the “low-level lawyer” within the FBI who doctored evidence within the Carter Page FISA application.WaPoo today Watchdog finds political bias did not taint top officials running FBI’s Russia probe
As anticipated, the DOJ and FBI ‘small group’ leaks are from their individual review of a heavily compartmented IG report; and now they are being selectively shaped by the favorite ‘small group’ media network: NY Times, Washington Post, CNN, Politico et al.
Remember, each of the principals only was able to see the draft of the IG report specific to their outline therein. All principal reviews were very compartmented. No principal has any idea what the bottom line conclusions are from the totality of the assembled compartments. An example of this is in the very first paragraph.
The New York Times article is purposefully heavy on narrative engineering. However, given how the accountability trends are identified by the specifics of the narrative construction, that’s not a bad thing. As CTH outlined in anticipation of this phase, take the first wave of media justification with a grain-of-salt. There are two clear angles visible in the narrative assembly. First, here is the New York Times:
WASHINGTON — A highly anticipated report by the Justice Department’s inspector general is expected to sharply criticize lower-level F.B.I. officials as well as bureau leaders involved in the early stages of the Trump-Russia investigation, but to absolve the top ranks of abusing their powers out of bias against President Trump, according to people briefed on a draft.One can read that from the perspective of accountability and become frustrated. However, notice the construction closely: “to absolve the top ranks of abusing their powers out of bias against President Trump”… or put another way, there was an “abuse of power”, but that abuse cannot specifically be attributed to bias against the President. Key point: there was an “abuse of power”, it is in the motive for that abuse where narratives step in.
Secondly on this point… CTH has specifically, intentionally and repeatedly outlined how the “bias” issue was a foregone conclusion ever since the July 2018 IG report of FBI conduct in the Clinton investigation outlined the same position. If the IG report of the DOJ/FBI conduct in the “mid-year-exam” found no overarching political bias; and all of the principals were exactly the same in the 2019 report on the Carter Page surveillance issue; it stands to reason that same lack of bias conclusion would extend.
Instead, the most damaging findings seem directed at lower-level FBI employees, especially a lawyer who was part of the process to renew a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to monitor a former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page."Serious error in judgement", no doubt. PJ Media, Former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara: 'It Doesn't Get Much More Serious Than' Changing a Document to Get a FISA. No political bias, but, FBI Lawyer Who Sent Anti-Trump ‘Resistance’ Text Message Also Altered Russia Probe Documents: Report. (Chuck Ross, Da Caller) Just a coincidence, I'm sure. Greg Re at Fox, Horowitz reportedly finds FBI lawyer falsified FISA doc; WaPo stealth-deletes Strzok connection. Ace, Washington Post Stealth-Censors a Report on the FBI Lawyer Probed for Altering and Official Document, Removing Report That She Worked "Beneath Peter Strzok" Without Noting the Deletion or Explaining the Reason for It. And a reminder from John Solomon, Russia case agent Strzok cited for misconduct, security violation and ‘exceptionally poor judgment’ in FBI memos, so did Clinesmith do it because he was ordered to by Strzok, or because they were kindred spirits? Clinesmith needs to be threatened with a few years in the pokey to be certain, like Gen. Flynn.
As a part of the process to renew one of the later warrants, an FBI agent asked FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith whether Clinesmith could document a certain claim, people familiar with the matter said. Clinesmith, the people said, asserted that he could with an email from someone at another agency.
Before providing that email to the FBI agent, though, Clinesmith added text to it, the people familiar with the matter said. They said it was a serious error in judgment, though Horowitz’s report is not expected to allege that Clinesmith’s action was motivated by political animus. Clinesmith had previously provided a genuine copy of the email, without his addition, to a Justice Department lawyer, a person familiar with the matter said.
Clinesmith’s name was first reported by the New York Times. He did not respond to messages seeking comment.
Finally! I have been waiting for that answer ever since this screenshot... pic.twitter.com/nPnaF4qlHl— David Newman The Most High Austere 🖖👍 (@DavidNe99469223) November 22, 2019
For reference, Attorney #2 is Kevin Clinesmith.
As you can see, the early reports from leaks, not from Horowitz, but likely from suspects who have been given the report to attempt to rebut claims the Inspector general's 'investigate the investigators' inquiry into Trump-Russia probe will NOT condemn James Comey and Peter Strzok, report claims—as FBI attorney facing criminal probe for 'altering email' is revealed to be anti-Trump texter. Ace, NYT Claim: Horowitz Report Is a Whitewash; Will Claim That DOJ Only Made "Sloppy" Oopsie Accidents, But Did Not Act With Bias
Spin? But if it's spin, why lower expectations which can later be easily exceeded?
Who knows. These people are not intelligent. They do a lot of stupid things, as stupid people tend to do.
Some video's from sundance (I won't embed), Former AAG Matthew Whitaker Discusses Upcoming IG Report on FISA Abuse and Trump Campaign Surveillance… and President Trump Extensive Phone Interview Discussing FISA Report Developments and Coup Effort…For those wondering what Democrat media up to right now: they are creating preemptive justifications for their audience to ignore the IG report’s actual findings when it’s released. Their “reporting” is nothing but a smokescreen to obscure reality w/in their audience’s bubble.— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) November 22, 2019
Meanwhile, "Bull Durham" continues working (Gateway Pundit), AG Barr’s US Attorney John Durham Reportedly Took a Third Trip to Italy and Is Now Investigating Pentagon in His Russia Collusion Probe. Still digging into Mifsud?
Dr John at Flopping Aces, Drop The Chalupa On Obama/Hillary – DNC Ukraine Operative Visited WH 27 Times. Won't her Senate testimony by fun? Matt Vespa at Town Hall, Trump-Ukraine Fiasco: CNN Peddles Fake News About Devin Nunes and He’s Now Seeking Legal Action
Gee—this story sounds so familiar, maybe it’s a throwback to that fabricated story about Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen being in Prague when he wasn’t. The liberal media clown show never ceases to amaze (via CNN):As she does almost everyday, Peggy Noonan Reminds Us Why Trump Won
A lawyer for an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani tells CNN that his client is willing to tell Congress about meetings the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee had in Vienna last year with a former Ukrainian prosecutor to discuss digging up dirt on Joe Biden.To Recap, the ‘Cohen in Prague’ story was fake news. And this appears to be total trash as well, with Nunes announcing that he will be slapping CNN with a lawsuit. Daily Wire has more, including a lengthy history of CNN being an abjectly terrible network that can’t seem to stop peddling fake news about Republicans and President Donald Trump. You already know that, but a friendly reminder never hurts (via Daily Wire):
The attorney, Joseph A. Bondy, represents Lev Parnas, the recently indicted Soviet-born American who worked with Giuliani to push claims of Democratic corruption in Ukraine. Bondy said that Parnas was told directly by the former Ukrainian official that he met last year in Vienna with Rep. Devin Nunes.
Bondy tells CNN that his client and Nunes began communicating around the time of the Vienna trip. Parnas says he worked to put Nunes in touch with Ukrainians who could help Nunes dig up dirt on Biden and Democrats in Ukraine, according to Bondy.
That information would likely be of great interest to House Democrats given its overlap with the current impeachment inquiry into President Trump, and could put Nunes in a difficult spot.
Bondy tells CNN his client is willing to comply with a Congressional subpoena for documents and testimony as part of the impeachment inquiry in a manner that would allow him to protect his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.
Bondy suggested in a tweet on Friday that he was already speaking to House Intel though the committee declined to comment.
House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA) announced Friday night that he is filing a lawsuit against CNN over a report that they published the same evening that alleged an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani was willing to testify to Congress that Nunes met with a former Ukrainian prosecutor last year to discuss digging up dirt on former Vice President and current Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden.
Noonan’s focus on her subjective disapproval of the Republicans’ unmannerly response to what is in effect an illiberal political show trial, replete with secret hearings, leaks to the press, and pre-coaching of witnesses, ignores the substantive consistency of the Democrats’ despicable and desperate attempts to invalidate the results of an election and disenfranchise 63 million American voters.Impeachment quote of the day via Michael Anton at Claremont Review of Books, The Empire Strikes Back
[J]ust wait until the public realizes that this brouhaha is about the president delaying foreign aid payments to Ukraine. There’s nothing more sacred in the eyes of American voters than our national duty to pay foreign aid promptly.At CNN, Yang says impeachment may not help the Democrats in 2020. AP, Analysis: Lots of impeachment evidence but one thing missing
None of the witnesses could personally attest that Trump directly conditioned the release of the $400 million in military aid on a Ukrainian announcement of investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.At Da Fed, Sean Davis: Anti-Trump Impeachment Theater Is ‘Watergate Cosplay’ For Democrats
“I think we learned that the Democrats are quite convinced they need to keep going with this Watergate cosplay in Washington,” Davis said. “We learned no new facts. We heard the same stuff we’ve heard over and over again. We saw the same playacting.”Newsbusters, Turley Tells Disappointed CBS Hosts: Impeachment ‘Designed to Fail’ Breaking up is hard to do.
. . .
“That’s the central crime of Donald Trump’s presidency, is he had the audacity to beat Hillary Clinton when she was supposed to be ordained and coronated,” he said. “They said they were going to impeach him on day one. The day he was inaugurated they said, ‘Now impeachment begins.’”
Whether this is intentional or not, it seems designed to fail in the Senate. I don’t think you could prove a removable offense of a president on this record even if the Democrats were in control. This thing is too narrow, it is – it doesn’t have a broad foundation, and it’s an undeveloped record. There are a lot of core witnesses that were not called. And the question is why? They said, “We want a vote by December. We want to vote before Santa.” Why? Why – why would you – why would you be pushing this instead of calling these critical witnesses?AllahPundit sighs, Report: White House Lawyers Think House Dems Might Not Impeach Trump After All. Wouldn't that be the bomb?
But at the Atlantic, Democrats Know Trump Won’t Be Removed. They’re Still Amped About Impeachment, Yahoo! Democrats Leave Trump in Suspense on Where Impeachment Goes Next, and from Politico, Impeachment is about to get a Robert Mueller reprise "Now that the Ukraine hearings are over, Democrats want to hold at least one Mueller-related impeachment hearing on Trump's possible obstruction and perjury." and MSN, Schiff isn't ruling out more impeachment hearings. Because their polling is looking so good? David Harsanyi at NR, The Impeachment Hearings Have Been Useless. But it's riveting uselessness, like the Kardashians.A source familiar with the White House legal team says they are not convinced that the House of Representatives will ultimately vote to impeach the president (in addition to believing that it shouldn’t, and that impeachment is not in the interest of the American people).— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) November 22, 2019
At Fox, Judge Napolitano: Enough Evidence 'To Justify About Three or Four Articles of Impeachment' “The evidence of his impeachable behavior at this point, in my view, is overwhelming," says the Fox News analyst.
At Da Beast, John Bolton complains White House Took My Twitter Account Hostage. Because he has so much trouble getting the press to listen to him without it? And how hard is it to set up a new Twitter account? John Alter at Time, If John Bolton Keeps Refusing to Testify, Congress Should Arrest Him. Maybe they fear his testimony.
MSN citing NYDN, Giuliani associate Lev Parnas claims to have 'hard evidence' of wrongdoing for Trump impeachment inquiry. Yeah, we've heard that 100 times before. It's always the next one, and RUDY GIULIANI SAYS FIONA HILL IS MAKING 'FALSE ALLEGATIONS' AGAINST HIM: 'IT WILL ALL BE REVEALED VERY SOON'. Maybe, maybe not.
Linked at Pirate's Cove in the weekly Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup and linkfest and by EBL in Iron Bowl 2019: University of Alabama vs Auburn University 🏈📣🐅🐘 Final: Roll Tide 45 and Auburn 48, The Making of One of the Greatest Christmas Movies Ever 🎅🎄🤯🔥, Pulp: Disco 2000, Avalon: "You cut the turkey without me?" 😢😠🦃, The Irishman: A Review, What's Happening in Sweden?: Meet Midia Moloudpoor 🇸🇪🇮🇷, Eugène Henri Paul Gauguin 🎨, and A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood: A Review
EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Giuliani reacts to impeachment inquiry after series of hearingsReplyDelete