Tuesday, August 25, 2020

This Is Some Tease!

It better be very good! Looking forward to it.

I've been noodling something for ~3 months & 3 weeks ago got a clue during AG Barr's interview on Levin. Been running that line down for 3 weeks, reading, re-reading, and re-reading original source documents. Yesterday figured it out. Will be AWOL to lay it out concisely. 1/
1:33 PM · Aug 25, 2020


  1. I'm so tired of the teasing and the waiting. And while I can understand in this case regarding ProfMJCleveland it doesn't help. I'm getting very impatient that this farce continues while anyone who reads what is publicly assessible can clearly see a coup.
    If Barr can't prove a coup it would be nice if they started saying so now so we can stop waiting. I'm still waiting for the document missing in the Clinesmith filings.

    Regarding ProfMJCleveland I wish she left a clue. I didn't understand her second tweet but I think it meant it would be a while before we get the reveal.

  2. I watched two YouTube videos last night.

    1st was Lou Dobbs w/Fitton from JW where they talked about Fridays Brennan interview at CIA HQ. Fitton was tied in fits frustrated at all ends with Durham asking why CIA HQ and not once touching or speculating about jurisdiction.

    2nd was the other guy from JE Chris something on Seb Gorka’s show and he did the same thing and neither he nor Seb touched on the notion of Eastern Virginia jurisdiction.

    Just dumb.

  3. Love mysteries. I’m going to watch/listen again to Levin’s interview with Barr. Saved the video. See if I can figure out what Margot is talking about.

    As for AC’s comments about jurisdiction, maybe that didn’t occur to them. I saw many forum posters clamoring about “why at CIA headquarters? why not at FBI or DoJ”…. Some need things spelled out in crayon letters two feet tall...

    1. This is true. If you think you've got it figured, let me know.

  4. Trying to cross-reference what was going on in May that also entered into his responses to Levin a few weeks ago.

    The key Cleveland words to me are “original source documents”.

    Most of Barr’s responses to Levin were his opinions on current events - his appearance in the House committee hearing; Antifa; the demonization of the police; the media’s projection of a narrative rather than objective truth re the riots; etc. No documents involved.

    It has to be Barr's comments on the Flynn case, his assignment of USA and former FBI special agent Jensen to “have a look at it”, and his ultimate conclusion - based on Jensen’s findings - that lead to his dismissing the case. And his language was “I dismissed the case”.

    This was the only topic during the Levin interview that would have had original source documents…

    My 2 cents...

    1. Great. Thanks. Presumably that slip by Barr--revealing that he's the guy who's directing all these "reviews" and so forth--applies more broadly than to the Flynn case. So then we have to ask, What does Cleveland intend to make of that admission of hands on involvement--which can hardly come as a surprise. Margot is pretty sharp, so she must have something significant in mind.

    2. @Bebe, didn’t Barr and/or Durham travel to London in May? To meet with the top Steele contacts Andrew and the other 3? My reference points slightly escape me at the moment. This would have been post Steele’s settlement with the Italian bank I believe.

      Also to me “original source” refers to the EC.

    3. @Bebe, another reference point from the Towergate Timeline for that time period.

  5. Happenings in May (appx. 3 months ago) had caused Cleveland to do some noodling, and then something Barr said to Levin earlier this month gave Cleveland a clue:

    May 1, 2020 - Lou Dobbs is reporting that sources close to the Durham investigation are telling Fox that Durham has reviewed the Flynn docs and that there is enough there to bring charges against corrupt FBI officials. And that Durham is building a serious conspiracy case against the perps in the FBI/DOJ/CIA. Barr has also assigned Jeff Jensen to Durham's team. And that former FBI GC James Baker has flipped.

    May 5, 2020 - Tom Fitton at JW receives 143 pages of documents that show more evidence that James Baker, Stefan Halper's boss at the Pentagon Office of net Assessment, was an anonymous source for Michael Isakoff. The two had regular lunch meet-ups and dozens of email contacts dating back to 2015. Baker is believed to be the person that leaked the contents of the Flynn / Kislyak phone call.

    May 7, 2020 - The DOJ releases a less redacted version of the second scope memo authored by Rod Rosenstein. The release is bad news for the coup plotters. The scope memo authorizes Mueller to investigate, Manafort, Paps, Flynn, and one other individual. The dossier appears to have been the reason for the authorization....which the FBI/DOJ knew the dossier was a fraud.

    May 8, 2020 - The DOJ dismisses case against General Michael Flynn citing that the investigation was conducted without any legitimate investigative basis. Lead attorney Brandon Van Grack was forced to resign from the case. (emphasis added)

    May 10, 2020 - Recently released documents show that Sally Yates and her colleagues "hit the roof" when they learned that Comey sent Strzok and Pientka to interview (set up) Flynn. Comey had been previously advised on DOJ protocol for interviewing a WH official. There was also a conflict between Comey and McCabe and Yates and the DOJ about whether to brief the Trump team on their issues with Michael Flynn and specifically the Flynn / Kyslyak phone call.

    May 11, 2020 - New information reveals that Michael Isakoff was not the first reporter at the WashPo to learn of the Flynn/Kislayk phone call. Adam Entous was. And, Entous has a close connection to Sally Yates.

    May 11, 2020 - Fox News reports that John Durham's investigation is going at full throttle. AG Barr has assigned Timothy Shea and Jeff Jensen to Durham's team full time.

    Timeline lists a number of other Flynn-related events in May, and then:

    May 29, 2020 - DNI Ratcliffe releases transcripts and summaries of calls between Mike Flynn and Sergei Kislyak to Ron Johnson and Chuck Grassley who then released the docs to the media and the public. The transcripts show Flynn said or did nothing wrong, providing further evidence that Flynn was railroaded.

    May 30, 2020 - Dana Boente is forced to resign. The decision was made by the top of the DOJ...assume Barr or Timothy Shea. Boente was involved in everything related to the Carter Page FISA, Operation Crossfire Hurricane, the frame up of Michael Flynn, and Boente withheld documents from those who were trying to carry out oversight to cover for the Mueller witch hunt. This suggest that John Durham must be close to wrapping up his investigation.

    In his appearance on Levin’s program, Barr brought up his having USA Jeff Jensen “take a look at” the Flynn matter. Based upon what Jensen turned up. Barr dismissed the case against Flynn.

    I’ll stick with my original thought on what Cleveland may be referring to. It will be interesting to see what her tease turns out to be about...

  6. In his Levin appearance, Barr also talked at length about “the rule of law”. Levin asked him what it was and Barr’s reply essentially was that the rule of law is that the law applies to everyone equally.

    It is interesting that a transcript of an Obama call to his “alumni association” just after the DoJ’s dismissal of the charges against Flynn expressed his concern about the rule of law (according to Obama’s definition, not Barr’s).

    From the Gateway Pundit May 9, 2020:

    An audio of former President Barack Obama, whose Administration spied on the Trump team and Administration, was released by deep state reporter Michael Isikoff at Yahoo News on Friday night.

    In the “call” which appears totally set up, Obama is concerned about the rule of law.

    Here is the transcript:

    “The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed — about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn,” Obama said during a virtual discussion with members of the Obama Alumni Association. “The fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free. That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic — not just institutional norms — but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk. And when you start moving in those directions, it can accelerate pretty quickly as we’ve seen in other places.”

    Obviously, Obama is completely panicked with the news of his criminal spying on his political opposition.

    On Saturday brilliant attorney and Democrat Jonathan Turley schooled former Harvard law student Obama on his leaked complaints against President Trump and legal precedent.
    Jonathan Turley tweeted: President Obama is being quoted on Flynn, saying “There is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free.” It is a curious statement. First and foremost, Flynn was not charged with perjury. Second, we now know Obama discussed charging Flynn under the Logan Act which has never been used successfully to convict anyone and is flagrantly unconstitutional. Third, this reaffirms reports that Obama was personally invested in this effort. Finally, there is precedent. There is a specific rule allowing for this motion under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a). There are specific Supreme Court cases like Rinaldi v. United States addressing the standard for such dismissals. The Justice Department has dismissed cases in the past including the Stevens case.That was requested by President Obama’s own Attorney General Eric Holder for the same reason: misconduct by prosecutors. It was done before the same judge, Judge Sullivan. How is that for precedent?

  7. While we continue to wait for Margot's scoop, consider what Grenell said in his speech last night:

    >> “… silenced the many brave intelligence officials who spoke up against it." <<

    [referring to surveillance of Trump campaign]

    Source video clip HERE:

    >> <<

    Anybody else remember that big-assed briefcase Grenell walked into DOJ with to see AG Barr right after he took over as acting DNI?

    Looks like there were people in Gov't who recognized what the Coup Plotters were doing was wrong, and spoke out against it at the time, and were "silenced."

    Lots of whistleblowing has likely been going on after Barr took over DOJ, and Grenell as DNI (and Atkinson was fired as IC IG,) and that's what we are not hearing about re: Durham's investigation. Grenell, I bet, has seen the documents. And I bet they were in his big, fat briefcase when he visited Barr.

    Lastly, recall AG Barr said something a whiel back about being surprised "nobody spoke out against what was going on against Trump AT THE TIME."

    This could be the explanation: they DID try to speak out, but were silenced. And Grenell appears to have found the classified docs to prove it.

    AG Barr comment appears to be designed to sandbag the coup plotters, pretending he didn't know that officials had tried to speak out against what they were doing.

    It seems to me that suppression of dissenting opinions about the surveillance of Trump's campaign constitutes 1) evidence of "guilty mind" on the part of the coup plotters, and 2) are overt acts in furtherance of covering up an ongoing criminal conspiracy.

    Possible Obstruction as well?

  8. Margot Cleveland today:

    1. Yes. I've read it. It's interesting but factually complex. Not sure Durham can do too much with those facts beyond what he's probably doing now. What I mean, can he use those facts against McCord? I'd like to see that.

    2. I plowed through her whole article, which is interesting. This header stuck in my mind, but I’d have added other names to it.

      Evidence Comey Never Thought Would Surface

      I don’t believe any of the players named thought that that evidence would surface. And now Durham surely has had it.