The real 28th Amendment

Hi!

This is an open letter to user Gryphon66, in reply to a post in a thread which was closed for review. The user and I were having a nice conversation, but after I had awoken, worked, and checked, the thread had been locked. I began composing this reply as a DM, and I had intended to tranfer it back to the public forum once the thread reopened. Then it got really long. I want to give credit where credit is due, I find Gryphon66 to be a flexible mind, with wit, candor, and when necessary, edge. I also happen to think their info pane is well designed. I would have chosen a less neon color for the text, but I have a proclivity for earth tones and cowardice.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I think that in the coming weeks and months this will become clear to you. The interests of some in the Ukrainian government would have been aligned with the presidency of HRC. So certain elements in the Ukrainian government sought to influence the 2016 US election by leaking the notorious "black ledger" that didn't sink directly, but ultimately lead to the sinking of the SS Paul Manafort. A 'consultant' of the DNC named Alexandra Chalupa, fed info to the DNC regarding Manafort's former work for Viktor Yanukovych, the deposed former president of the Ukraine, and Chalupa went so far as soliciting the assistance of the Ukrainian Embassy at the behest of the DNC. It is unclear whether they complied. But who do you suppose carried out the bulk of the opposition research regarding Manafort? None other than Fusion GPS, read: Nellie Ohr, wife of Bruce Ohr, former associate deputy attorney general at the US DOJ.

This is the connect to the Steele Dossier, and the FISA warrants taken out against Carter Page.

a reply to: Zelun

I hope whatever "it" is becomes clearer to all of us with access to actual facts and so forth in court.

You're asserting the Steele Dossier provided information on Manafort who was Trump's campaign manager.

Further, you're claiming that this information provided one basis for FISA warrants.

Was the info good on Manafort and or Page? (i.e. factual, relevant, etc.).

Which law/laws do you think Barr-Durham will argue were broken?

Okay, good questions, thank you for asking. The Steele Dossier did in fact include assertions regarding Paul Manafort, namely that Manafort was sort of "quarterbacking" the Trump Campaign's collusion with the Kremlin, and that Page had come up with the idea to launder the DNC's emails through Wikileaks. You can read a pretty good writeup on the SD here. Now, as the Mueller investigation concluded that the Trump campaign did not collude with Russia, you can interpret those assertions as you like.

Fusion GPS, the oppo research firm stealthily contracted by the DNC to find dirt on Trump, were the ones who hired Christopher Steele, a "former" British intelligence analyst, to draft the now famous Steele Dossier(SD.) That Dossier found its way into the hands of the FBI, and was submitted as evidence to the FISA court(FISC) when the FISA warrant for Carter Page was due for renewal. In that FISA application["the Application"] it was acknowledged that Christopher Steele's association with the FBI had been terminated due to his contact with the media, i.e. leaking. Despite this disclosure, the warrant application was approved up through the whole chain of eyes that get put on these things before they hit the FISC, and was ultimately extended.

Now, the SD first entered the public sphere via an article published by David Corn on MotherJones.com on October 31st, 2016. That's eight days before election day. This is pretty clearly an attempt at a counter-October Surprise, in response to Comey's weird letter to congress on the 28th.

However, there was an earlier article, written by Michael Isikoff dated September 23rd, 2016, which clearly is written in reference to the SD. This article was actually cited in the FISA extension, approved a redacted day in June, 2017. Examine page 25 of the Application, and compare the cited content and description of the author to Isikoff's article. It's the one.

Indirect citation:

#3962, Wikileaks: You saw this, right?

Democratic National Committee
202-863-8148 - [email protected] - @MiraLuisDC

From: Chalupa, Ali
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 11:56 PM
To: Miranda, Luis
Subject: Re: You saw this, right?

A lot more coming down the pipe. I spoke to a delegation of 68 investigative journalists from Ukraine last Wednesday at the Library of Congress - the Open World Society's forum - they put me on the program to speak specifically about Paul Manafort and I invited Michael Isikoff whom I've been working with for the past few weeks and connected him to the Ukrainians. 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.

Since I started digging into Manafort these messages have been a daily occurrence on my yahoo account despite changing my password often:

The screenshot she's referring to is a notification from her email client that they suspect her account is the target of state actors. You can see it in the attachments tab.

But now we have a connect between Isikoff, having been cited in a FISA application corroborating the SD, to Chalupa, in direct communication with Luis Miranda, former DNC Comms Director, which in turn connects them all to Fusion GPS, having hired Steele to produce the SD.

Page 17 of the Application:

[redacted]in or about October 2016, the FBI suspended its relationship with Source #1 due to Source #1's unauthorized disclosure of information to the press. Notwithstanding the suspension of its relationship with Source #1, the FBI assesses Source #1 to be reliable as previous reporting from Source #1 has been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings.

What criminal proceedings, you might ask? The 2015 FIFA corruption case. In it Steele's investigation implicated Igor Sechin, Russian Deputy Prime Minister, of having rigged the bidding for the World Cup to be hosted in Russia. This is the same Igor Sechin that the SD says Carter Page met with in Romania.

Now, in this Indictment of one James A. Wolfe, the defendant was charged with having revealed the identity of confidential informant "MALE-1' as Carter Page, while acting as the Director of Security for the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence(SSCI). On or about March 17th, 2017, the defendant leaked the identity of Page as an informant in the ongoing investigation into Victor Podobny's, Igor Sporyshev's and Evgeny Buryakov's Russian Statecraft.

cont...

cont...

Fun fact: U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara was the one who oversaw this investigation and was also the one who approved a U.S. Visa for Natalia Veselnitskaya, allowing her to attend the notorious Trump Tower meeting involving Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner. You know, that time they took a pass? Interesting

Anyway, I think that, even though the FBI was aware of Source #1's media affiliation, Carter Page's contact with real-deal Russian Spies would constitute an opportunity to also conduct a counter-intelligence investigation, because Source #1 previously provided good intel on the FIFA corruption probe, which checked out. Russia DID influence the bidding for the location of the 2018 World cup using bribery. "Source checks out, let's see what else they can get on Russia." This is probably a large portion of the redacted parts of the Application. If Page was a double-agent, listening to his calls when he thinks he isn't being monitored by the surveillance he knows about would prove useful.

So I think the FBI can be excused for wanting that FISA warrant. To further that opinion I submit that the FBI probably wouldn't have known yet about Fusion GPS's association with the DNC, through the Law Offices of Perkins Coie, nor that Fusion GPS had allegedly not informed Christopher Steele of the identity of the client, nor the intent of the probe. They based the merit of Source #1 not on Fusion GPS, but rather on the reputation of Christopher Steele, Hero of the Great Dirty Tourism Bust of 2018. No reason to doubt him.

Now way back when, I mentioned it was a FISA renewal application. Well, what evidence did they use in the original the Application?

CIA plant Joseph Mifsud's influence on George Papadopolus. This branch of the investigation is why Barr and Durham visited Italy. Now they're looking at the beginning of the operation, not the end.

As far as the info on Manafort, he had no reason to be affiliated with Russia. The last pro-Russia guy he did work for stiffed him on the bills. Yanukovych owes Manafort's firm a significant sum. Manafort spent considerable effort trying to push Yanukovych toward the EU, because he knew that's where the money was. Yanukovych reneged, was ousted, had been looting the treasury, and Manafort was left standing with the check. Not the most amicable of partings. To add insult to injury, elements of the Ukrainian "Bolsheviks"(I know, I know, they were just a popular uprising against that damn liar Yanukovych, I'm referring to the opportunistic ones that were trying to ride that popular current into power) accused Manafort of being part and parcel to the deposed Yanukovych's abuse of the treasury.

This is where the "black ledger" came from, accusing Manafort of receiving cash payments in a supposed money laundering scheme, to which Manafort retorted that they only ever received payment via wire transfer, for legitimate services rendered. Political consulting, you see, is actually one of the most honest professions, in the same way that prostitution is honest: there are no illusions about what goods and services are being exchanged. Political consultants are like hairdressers: they can give you an image, but it's up to you to wear it. Another firm Yanukovych hired for political consulting was Tony Podesta's org. You know, brother of John, HRC's campaign manager and likely future chief of staff? I wonder why when Paul Manafort was charged Tony shuttered his political consulting org? Just little things, that make you think. The 'black ledger' was allegedly verified when particular payment amounts from the ledger matched payments received to Manafort's firm, however they were received as wire transfers, just as Manafort had asserted. Is it possible, just possible, that accurate numbers indicating payments could have been injected into a forgery, in an attempt to express authenticity? I'll let you be the judge.

I hope this satisfies your first question. To address your second, regarding what charges I predict to come from Barr and Durham's investigation:


If the redacted portions of the Page FISA warrant do not include the information regarding Page's former and contemporary status as a CI, I would say Brady Violation. If the prosecution failed to provide exculpatory evidence to the defense, it violates the defendant's constitutional rights. Further, such a violation would have occurred in the ONLY court in the land in which the defendant is not permitted to face their accuser. This would make it especially egregious and precedent-setting. As I've outlined, I think this is not the case, based upon the candor of Source #1(Steele) having been in contact with the media. They somehow felt that despite that exculpatory evidence, their case was strong enough to stand without Source #1. In short, someone gaslit the FBI. Who could do that?

The DIA, or more specifically former Director of the DIA James Clapper, and the CIA, or more specifically the former Director of the CIA John Brennan. I don't know what they'll be charged with, but it will have something to do with "failure to faithfully execute the oath of office."

Chalupa should be charged with failure to register as a foreign agent, after having solicited the assistance of a foreign government in influence of a national election. But only if she maintains her claim that she was operating as an independent consultant. If she want's to flip and implicate the DNC directly, I'd be open to that, for after all they did pay her during the time she was solicting.

Let's see, Wolff already got his, so good riddance to bad rubbish. James Comey, he should probably be indicted on charges of conspiracy, having colluded with a civilian associate to disclose privileged information gleaned while executing official business with the President of the United States. I'd be okay with it if he was pardoned, or even acquitted, he really was in an impossible situtation, and he actually kind of saved the world by the seat of his pants. So maybe give him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and change the rules so you can give it a "V" device for jumping on that grenade.

Mike Rogers, he should also get the Presidential Medal of Freedom, but no "V" device because he was too damn fast, enemy never had a chance. Give him the Flag and Torch as a device instead, or something reflecting the speed of Hermes, winged shoe, something like that. Because damn.

I think the fundamental thing this whole episode illuminated was that forces within the American government were constructing intelligence "clearing houses" in foreign countries, because when Americans lean on a foreign nation there is a definite incentive to cooperate. That, along with the recent legalization of American propaganda in domestic publications essentailly endruns the protections guaranteed by the Constitution. Your 4th amendment rights, in particular, are moot, if the government has the power to monitor you without a warrant, "share" that intel with a foreign govt, "receive" that intel as a credible CI, to be used as evidence in a FISA warrant, with secondary corroborating sources in the media, which has also been leaked by the primary source.

cont...

cont...

What do you even call that crime? I'm open to suggestions. It's conspiracy, graft, obstruction, forgery, perjury, fraud, waste, abuse, and maybe sedition? All rolled into one? I know what it'll be called! The real 28th Amendment! The one where we specifically outline how the US Intelligence Apparatus is to be used in a way that is non-partisan. It think the outcome of all of this nonsense will provide some pretty specific language to use in the drafting of this amendment. How do you all think it should be worded?

Best!
Z

Again, special thanks to user Gryphon66 for having great aesthetic taste and for asking great questions.

a reply to: Zelun

A) wasn’t fusion gps originally hired and had already begun compiling the Steele dossier by a conservative super pac, which then was then sold to the dems once that super pacs candidate dropped out??

B) we have the Trump Jr. email which is specifically and unambiguously setting up a meeting with Russian spy’s to obtain dirt on Hillary..

A meeting that literally the top 3 people in the trump campaign took the time to have a meeting with Russian spies..


How valuable was that meeting to the trump campaign if they got a meeting with manafort , Kushner and Jr???


I bet it take more than 5 million dollars in donations for me or you to get that meeting..

C) MOST IMPORTANTLY!!!!


If trump had any proof of malfeasance, he can declassify ANYTHING and prove it yesterday..

But trump instead makes allegations without providing evidence or without ANYONE being prosecuted later..


Why??

Because accusations are free..

Indictments require evidence.

a reply to: Zelun

So what does it mean when no one trump has accused of setting him up or the various other felonies he has accused people of, never manifest at all??

What does it mean if comey, clapper, strok, Lisa page, the clintons, Obama’s, Biden’s, exc , never face any form of accountability???

Does it mean that a DOG completely ran by trump appointees covered it up??


Or

Does it mean that there was never any evidence for any of trumps accusations and he was just playing his supporters for knuckleheads??


I see no third option..

Trump and his appointees run the DOJ and every other sector of federal law enforcement.

Trump has a Supreme Court majority for any challenges and such...


There is nothing but air and opportunity for trump to hold people accountable if he has proof of wrong doing. So why hasn’t he??


Why rely on accusations with zero evidence , when he could prove his case in court?

a reply to: JustJohnny

The Free Beacon stopped the oppo research when it was becoming clear that Trump would win the nomination. Fusion GPS was working alone at this time, and using publicly available sources for its research. As I understand it, Steele entered the picture shortly after FGPS was hired by Clinton to continue the research.

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: Zelun

So what does it mean when no one trump has accused of setting him up or the various other felonies he has accused people of, never manifest at all??

What does it mean if comey, clapper, strok, Lisa page, the clintons, Obama’s, Biden’s, exc , never face any form of accountability???

Does it mean that a DOG completely ran by trump appointees covered it up??


Or

Does it mean that there was never any evidence for any of trumps accusations and he was just playing his supporters for knuckleheads??


I see no third option..

Trump and his appointees run the DOJ and every other sector of federal law enforcement.

Trump has a Supreme Court majority for any challenges and such...


There is nothing but air and opportunity for trump to hold people accountable if he has proof of wrong doing. So why hasn’t he??


Why rely on accusations with zero evidence , when he could prove his case in court?

We'll have to see why Durham has turned his inquiry into a criminal investigation. Usually that only happens when solid evidence has been found.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

A) it is very much a side point that is not really relevant.. what matters is it factual and/or was it the only/primary reason for the fisa Warrent..

Concerning it being factual I have not seen anything actually debunked.. past trump saying it is fake, which is not evidence it is.

The crazy claim about trump paying hookers to pee on a bed the obamas slept in, is not 100% a hit piece..

A hit piece has trump paying the hookers to pee on him... not an empty bed.. sure it is kinda nasty both ways, but if I am lying on trump to make him look bad. I say trump likes golden showers, not that he hates Obama bad enough to have a hooker pee on a bed he once slept in.

That isn’t evidence for it either.. just that it is not as bad as a trump enemy willing to lie could have sold it.



B) conceding it being the only/primary evidence fir the fisa.. trump could have released the fisa and proven that years ago now..

Why doesn’t he??

Only one reason makes sense... it does not say what it says it does.. and the additional things it says look bad..

a reply to: Wardaddy454

We will for sure see..


The end result will be an objective answer one way or the other.

If some bigwigs are charged and indicted it will validate trump and even other claims he has not provided evidence for..



If nothing happens.. maybe trumps crew comes out and claims “their actions were troubling but not criminal “.

That means trump was always lying to hype up the sheeple.

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: Zelun

A) wasn’t fusion gps originally hired and had already begun compiling the Steele dossier by a conservative super pac, which then was then sold to the dems once that super pacs candidate dropped out??

B) we have the Trump Jr. email which is specifically and unambiguously setting up a meeting with Russian spy’s to obtain dirt on Hillary..

A meeting that literally the top 3 people in the trump campaign took the time to have a meeting with Russian spies..


How valuable was that meeting to the trump campaign if they got a meeting with manafort , Kushner and Jr???


I bet it take more than 5 million dollars in donations for me or you to get that meeting..

C) MOST IMPORTANTLY!!!!


If trump had any proof of malfeasance, he can declassify ANYTHING and prove it yesterday..

But trump instead makes allegations without providing evidence or without ANYONE being prosecuted later..


Why??

Because accusations are free..

Indictments require evidence.

I see you like the outline format. I will to the best of my abilities oblige:

A) Yes, Fusion GPS was originally hired during the republican primary to source dirt on Donald Trump. Once it became clear that Trump would win the primary, Fusion GPS began shopping their services to new clients, namely the DNC's Perkins-Coie "legal" services. Insulated as such, the DNC felt free to spend some serious money. Perkins-Coie, now having additional funding, solicited the services of Christopher Steele to compile the Steele Dossier. Steele, according to their own records, was not advised as to the identity of the client. All he knew was that this guy, Sichen, had popped up in his previous investiation of the 2018 FIFA scandal, and that this guy, Carter Page, kept popping up in mentions. Now, Steele would not have been aware that Page was employed by the Southern District of New York's Federal Prosecutor, for he was merely a foreign agent, milking his sources.

Read the damn Steele Dossier. Read it, with the knowledge that Page was a CI, acting on behalf of the US Government during the entire time the Steele Dossier implicates him as a Russian Spy. Read it, knowing that Paul Manafort rendered services as a political consultant, was not paid in full by his client, was then implicated with high crimes and misdemeanors, and was ultimately jailed for his association with a client. No solid evidence of graft. The thing that Manafort did was indicating to the world that his client would join the EU. Then his client stole the treasury. Then his client's enemies blamed Manafort for it. But it's a high-risk occupation, vs/ high risk rewards.

B) Oppo research is legal. Or do you want to say that HRC broke the law when her campaign contracted Perkins-Coie to sub-contract Christopher Steele to draft the Steele Dossier?

I want you to read this next part very carefully:

Christopher Steele was hired by Fusion GPS only after the DNC had engaged with Perkins-Coie, having been dumped by the RNC.

C) Your impression of importance is different than the importance felt by people with influence. For instance: a man bumps you on the sidewalk! A person with influence might be inclined to determine the identity of that person. They might be inclined to determine who they are, what sort of things they do, how they feel about certain things. Maybe they determine that they were bumped on the sidewalk ON PURPOSE! Well, New York traffic is notoriously busy, this could EASILY have been an assassination attempt.

Now, on one hand, there has been an attempt on you life. On the other, you got bumped into. You be the judge.

a reply to: Zelun

Walls of text.

Literally.

What is your main point?

Not being snarky, but from your posts, it's hard to tell exactly what you're trying to say.

Please elucidate us.

Thank you.