Thursday, December 31, 2020

Not So Happy New Year: Barr And The CIA Revisited

I've spent the last 24 hours or so pondering an article that appeared yesterday:

Barr Points to the True Culprit—Comey’s FBI Team

Attorney General William Barr’s statement exculpating the CIA, rather than disappointing, is in fact hopeful for all who treasure equal justice for both sides of the political fence.

The article is by a former federal prosecutor, John D. O'Connor, who can be presumed to know a thing or two about the Deep State:

John D. O’Connor is a former federal prosecutor and the San Francisco attorney who represented W. Mark Felt during his revelation as Deep Throat in 2005. O’Connor is the author of the book, Postgate: How the Washington Post Betrayed Deep Throat, Covered Up Watergate, and Began Today’s Partisan Advocacy Journalism.

I remain totally unconvinced by O'Connor. Which is to say, I continue to believe that Barr's "exculpation" of the CIA is false and a basic betrayal of the nation. Equal justice will not flow from covering up the CIA's role in the Russia Hoax and everything to do with the last two decades of Deep State rule.

Obviously, O'Connor is correct in his contention that disgraced former FBI Director James Comey played a central role in the Clinton/Obama coverups and the attempted coup against Trump. However, O'Connor's attempt to portray the entire Russia Hoax operation as an FBI operation because most of the main players were assets of the FBI is misguided. Every single one of the people under consideration:

Joseph Mifsud

Stefan Halper

Christopher Steele

Nellie Ohr

Alexander Downer

Mary Jacoby and Glenn Simpson

fit the profile of CIA assets. They move in circles that are far too rarefied for the FBI--diplomatic officials, high level executive branch officials, persons with obvious connections to foreign intelligence services rather than counterintelligence services. My operative assumption has always been that, to the extent that some of these people cooperated with the FBI they did it on loan from the CIA. And that means that the CIA knew why the FBI needed their services.

Joseph Mifsud--as O'Connor acknowledges--was an operative for at least two Western Intel services, the Italians and MI6. That he should have also cooperated with the CIA and was thus eligible to be loaned to the FBI for his part in the Russia Hoax is not surprising.

Stefan Halper, it's true, had worked off and on with the FBI in the past, but his real connections were clearly with the CIA. This is clear from his close ties to MI6--the Brit counterpart to the CIA. It's also clear from the way he was paid--money funneled through a DoD front (Office of Net Assessment, ONA) for bogus foreign intelligence 'reports' and analyses. That has CIA fingerprints all over it. BTW, have you been holding your breath waiting for Durham to get to the bottom of the leaks against Michael Flynn that were handled through the head of ONA? My advice: exhale.

Chris Steele, of course, had worked with the FBI since 2010 or so. However, he was ex-MI6--supposedly ex. By his own admission he maintained ties to the former head of MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove. I'm here to tell you that Dearlove maintained ties with the CIA's John Brennan. The fact that Dearlove also had close ties with Halper also establishes the CIA nexus--Dearlove is far too high level in the Globalist Deep State to be hobnobbing with a simple FBI asset.

The involvement of Alexander Downer is, to my mind, a dead giveaway of CIA involvement. Downer is an operative at the highest levels of Australian intelligence. His diplomatic activity is cover. A brief perusal of Downer's Wikipedia entry is sufficient to show how absurd is O'Connor's clumsy attempt to portray Downer as an FBI asset. However, that clumsy attempt:

Alexander Downer’s private employer Hakluyt also housed Stefan Halper, a later acknowledged confidential informant of the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane.”


gives the game away.

The ties of Downer and Halper to Hakluyt is proof that their status is much higher than that of assets for the FBI. Their cooperation with the FBI--and Downer's was arms length, mediated through DoS--was necessitated by US law, which prevents the CIA from engaging in counterintelligence investigations within the US.

That 'Hakluyt' link is to references in this blog, but a rereading of Jeff Carlson's work on Hakluyt is well worth your while if you want to get a handle on what Trump is and has been up against. In particular, this piece from two and a half years ago:

Dearlove Connections – UK Intel Firm Hakluyt, Alexander Downer, Stefan Halper & Papadopoulos

Carlson's article is quite lengthy and doesn't delve into John Brennan's connections to Hakluyt, but you can take it for granted. In this substantial excerpt (but read it all--there's lots more!) Carlson is giving you a look at the Deep State:

We’ve been postulating that foreign intelligence – primarily from the UK – was used by CIA Director Brennan to initiate the FBI’s July 2016 Counterintelligence Investigation and push the Russia Narrative.


Hakluyt is British strategic intelligence and advisory firm. It was founded by former MI6 members and retains close ties to UK Intelligence services.

In the small circular world of professional spooks, Hakluyt has ties with ...

  • Australian diplomat Alexander Downer.
  • Stefan Halper, a former policy advisor to Nixon, Ford and Reagan.


As previously noted, Alexander Downer has long-standing ties to the Clinton Foundation.

Downer personally arranged one of the largest foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation – $25 million from the Australian government.

Less known is that Downer was on the Advisory Board of Hakluyt (the private UK intelligence firm) from 2008-2014.

He reportedly still maintains contact with Hakluyt officials. [No kidding!]


Created by former MI6 British Secret Service agents, Hakluyt is an ultra secretive firm whose client list reads like a who’s who of the business world with corporations retaining their services for strategic intelligence and advice as they look to expand operations.

Australian High Commissioner to the UK Alexander Downer had been on the advisory board of the London-headquartered firm since 2008 when he was a UN special envoy but was forced to give up the position when he was appointed to head the Australian diplomatic post in London in 2014.

But it can be revealed Mr Downer has still been attending client conferences and gatherings of the group, including a client cocktail soiree at the Orangery at Kensington Palace a few months ago.


The firm’s top officials come from MI6. Several Board Members come from GCHQ – the UK’s NSA.

Hakluyt’s Parent Holdco is Holdingham. Holdingham’s Advisory Board & Directors.

One Board member stands out. Ambassador Louis Susman (bio here). Susman received his Ambassadorship through fundraising abilities & Chicago connections with Obama.


Before rattling the tin for Barack Obama, Susman generated $244m (£156m) as national finance director of John Kerry’s presidential bid and he played a key fund-raising role for previous White House hopefuls including Bill Bradley, Dick Gephart and Edward Kennedy.

Susman is close to Hillary Clinton. He would feature in several Wikileaks emails – here, here, here.


There has been speculation that Mifsud was working with UK Intelligence. Julian Assange put out a Twitter Thread noting the connection between Mifsud and UK Intelligence. More on Mifsud will probably be revealed.

Another odd meeting occurred between Papadopoulos and Dr. Stefan Halper. The Daily Caller reported on the meeting:

Two months before the 2016 election, George Papadopoulos received a strange request for a meeting in London, one of several the young Trump adviser would be offered — and he would accept — during the presidential campaign.

The meeting request, which has not been reported until now, came from Stefan Halper, a foreign policy expert and Cambridge professor with connections to the CIA and its British counterpart, MI6.


Halper is a Cambridge Fellow. He was a Senior Policy Advisor to Presidents Nixon, Ford & Reagan (bio here).

Halper had previously invited Carter Page to attend a July 2016 symposium held at Cambridge regarding the upcoming election. The speaker list was notable:

  • Madeleine Albright (former U.S. Secretary of State)
  • Vin Weber (Republican Party strategist and former Congressman)
  • Ambassador Peter Ammon (German Ambassador to the UK)
  • Sir Richard Dearlove (former head of MI6)
  • Bridget Kendall (BBC diplomatic correspondent and the next Master of Peterhouse College)
  • Sir Malcolm Rifkind (former Defence and Foreign Secretary)

Page attended the symposium just four days after his July 2016 Moscow trip. Page met with Halper during the London visit. Page’s Moscow trip would figure prominently in the Steele Dossier …


Halper has connections to the UK Intelligence firm Hakluyt through Jonathan Clarke, with whom he has co-authored two books. You can find a June 2004 video of the pair discussing their first book here.

Jonathan Clarke is the U.S. Representative – Director U.S. Operations for Hakluyt. Clarke is a fairly public figure – but it was quite difficult to locate references to his association with Hakluyt.

Given the lengthy association between Halper and Clarke, I expect we will find additional ties between Halper, other members of Hakluyt and members of British Intelligence.

Halper’s association with former MI6 Head Richard Dearlove – via their previous positions at Cambridge Intelligence Seminar –  is already known.


Connections with Richard Dearlove – the former MI6 Head – keep turning up. He appears to be the one constant in the overseas connections. As far as I can tell, he knows every single player. [Chris Steele sought Dearlove's advice regarding the Russia Hoax--below.]

Here is a video of the only UK televised interview Dearlove has done. He makes some interesting comments:

Trump is President. And that is a large element of unpredictability. Trump is only going to be there, probably, for another three years. We need to think more broadly.

He’s done some unpredictable things, but I don’t think you should necessarily judge the Intelligence relationship in terms of Trump’s tweets.

Regarding the Steele Dossier and Christopher Steele:

I won’t confirm or deny that I knew Christopher. I think there is probably some credibility to the content. I wouldn’t put it any more forcibly than that.


I’ve maintained that John Brennan held a central role in establishing the FBI’s Trump-Russia Investigation and pushing the Trump-Russia Narrative. Clapper provided assists.

I’m growing ever more curious as to the true role of Richard Dearlove.

Here is what I’ve added to A Listing of Participants on Hakluyt:

Hakluyt (Parent Holding Company is Holdingham. Pelorus Research provides intel to Investment Managers):

  • British strategic intelligence and advisory firm.
  • Fitzroy MacLean – Founder (deceased).
  • Christopher James – Founder. Managing Director. Formerly in charge of MI6’s business relations.
  • Mike Reynolds – Founder. Director. Former station head of MI6 in Germany. Reportedly close friends w/former MI6 Head Richard Dearlove.
  • Lord Paul Deighton – Chairman. British Conservative Politician. Former Investment Banker.
  • Paul Schreier – Managing Director.
  • Keith Craig – Former CEO. Remains on Advisory Board.
  • Andy France – Hakluyt Cyber (role unclear). Former Darktrace CEO. Former Deputy Director for Cyber Defense Operations at GCHQ.
  • Jonathan Clarke – Director – U.S. Operations.
  • Jonathan Selib – Employed by Hakluyt – Made donations to Clinton Campaign.
  • Holly Evans – Employed by Hakluyt – Made donations to Clinton Campaign.
  • Andrew Exum – Employed by Hakluyt – Made donations to Clinton Campaign.
  • Sir Iain Lobben – Advisory Board Member. Former Director, GCHQ.
  • Ambassador Louis Susman – Advisory Board Member. Former U.S. Ambassador to UK.
  • Alexander Downer – Former Advisory Board Member. Australia’s top diplomat in Britain. Previously UN Envoy to Cyprus. Met with George Papadopoulos in London. Downer was an Advisory Board Member from 2008-2014. He reportedly still maintains contact with Hakluyt officials.

Hakluyt’s Parent Holdco is Holdingham. Holdingham’s Advisory Board & Directors.


Hakluyt/Holdingham is a secretive firm. It is difficult to obtain much information. Hakluyt historically maintained ties w/Kissinger’s firm. Connected to MI6 through long-standing relationships.

Anyone who actually believes Bill Barr's story about the CIA staying on the straight and narrow with regard to the Russia Hoax is, well, delusional. Just as anyone who believes what he said about electoral fraud is delusional. This vast network--and this is only part of it--is what Trump is up against.


  1. His stuff about "hopeful for all who treasure equal justice" is laughable.
    Who's gonna have the power to pursue equal justice, if DJT leaves the WH in a few weeks?

    1. I gotta wonder who put O'Connor up to writing this. I'll joyfully eat my words if I'm wrong again, but ...

    2. I gotta wonder who put O'Connor up to writing this.
      Dr. Fauci

  2. Have only skimmed. This should keep me off the street and out of trouble for a few hours. May need to chart things so they can be followed. Back later. :-)

  3. It probably takes a desperate man who's got nothing to lose to go up against the CIA. Barr is not that man. Nor is Trump. Nor are any of us ready to disturb an organization authorized to blackmail & murder via layers of cutouts.

    I don't know if Barr authorized the arrest of Epstein, or if somebody else made that mistake. But I don't think it was a surprise to anybody when Epstein was quickly suicided. Anyway, Barr appeared to learn a lesson at that moment and forever after behaved just as the CIA would wish.

    1. Yes, nothing focuses the mind like a hanging.
      Tom S.

  4. Yup.

    There's undoubtedly a lot more to say, but


    Good job, Mark.

    PS: Let's not forget that Bill Barr is ex-CIA, too.

    1. As with Marines, no such things as ex- it seems.

  5. No mention of DOJ - the dog that did not bark?

    My guess is his Doj network put him up to writing the article, hence no mention of how the doj enabled the coup.

    1. Quite possibly. The notion that this was just a small group at the FBI doesn't pass the laugh test.


    Has it ever been definitively established who "Azra Turk's" actual employer was? Everyone is very cagey with the phrase "the FBI sent her" or some such prevarication. No one will definitely claim her it seems, and speculation ranges from private contractor to the Turkish gov't.
    Tom S.

    1. My recollection is that she was an FBI agent from NY role playing. You're not supposed to remember that.

    2. Papadopoulos, who was a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, discussed this woman in his book, Deep State Target. He described her as attractive and doubted she was being forthcoming about her identity after she asked whether the Trump campaign was working for Russia.

      “There is no way this is a Cambridge professor’s research assistant,” he wrote.

      In reaction to the article by the Times, Papadopoulos insisted that Turk was not working for the FBI. "I agree with everything in this superb article except 'Azra Turk' clearly was not FBI. She was CIA and affiliated with Turkish intel. She could hardly speak English and was tasked to meet me about my work in the energy sector offshore Israel/Cyprus which Turkey was competing with," he wrote in a tweet.

      Turk attended a second of Papadopoulos and Halper's meetings, and it was at a third Papadopoulos wrote in his book that he cut the meeting short after Halper pressed him on hacked emails.

    3. I'm not dogmatic about her having been FBI, but Papadopoulos' reasoning has some holes: CIA affiliated with Turkish intel?

      Here's some refs to why I said what I did:
      F.B.I. Sent Investigator Posing as Assistant to Meet With Trump Aide ...
      May 2, 2019 ... The F.B.I. sent her to London as part of the counterintelligence inquiry ... with the woman, who said her name was Azra Turk, is one previously ... The decision to use Ms. Turk in the operation aimed at a presidential campaign official shows ... Ms. Turk went to London to help oversee the politically sensitive ...
      FBI sent hot blonde to meet with Trump aide ... - New York Post
      May 2, 2019 ... The woman, who used the name Azra Turk, was working for the feds when she posed as a research assistant who wanted to discuss foreign ...
      Reporter won't say if woman who targeted ... - New York Post
      May 3, 2019 ... ... New York Times reporter Adam Goldman didn't answer directly when asked if the woman, who called herself Azra Turk, was “an FBI agent.”.
      FBI sent undercover investigator to meet with Papadopoulos in 2016 ...
      May 2, 2019 ... The FBI in 2016 sent an investigator posing as a research assistant to meet with ... Russia and the Trump campaign, according to The New York Times. The woman, who went by the name Azra Turk, reportedly met with Papadopoulos, ... What his official registration was is irrelevant, he was a Democrat.

    4. Nearly all of those articles mentioning her being FBI refer to the New York Times article with which Papadopoulos disagrees on just that point, contending she was CIA rather than FBI, and he said Azra Turk was Turkish.

      Re Turkish intel and the CIA, MIT is the Turkish state intelligence agency (initials are for its name in Turkish):

      The MIT co-operates with the Central Intelligence Agency and the intelligence agencies of Russia. Its operations and missions are classified. In practice, religious minorities in Turkey are barred from careers in the MIT.[14]

      I’d venture that Papadopoulos might know more about her than Adam Goldman of the NYT.

    5. I doubt that Papadopoulos does know much about her. And if he understood more about how intel agencies work he probably wouldn't have ended up needing a pardon. The CIA appears to have maintained enough distance to sustain deniability. They may have turned over assets for use by the FBI, but they didn't control their operations. The FBI did that. For example, we know that several FBI officials traveled to London to participate in the OCONUS lures Strzok spoke about. It seems more likely that Azra Turk was one of those OCONUS lures operated by the FBI--along with Mifsud and Halper and possibly Downer (I think Priestap was in London when that went down) than that the CIA got involved. Turning all that over to the FBI maintained the facade of legality, since the OCONUS lures were approved by DoJ. These ops were all under the umbrella of CI, which is not a CIA field.

  7. George Papadopoulos traveled from London to Rome to meet with Josef Mifsud because he was told to do so by Avinder Sambei, an FBI Counsel in London.

    Stationed in Rome (where Papadopoulos and Mifsud met) was Michael Gaeta, the FBI Special Agent who managed Christopher Steele, a paid source of the FBI.

    It seems to me that the Papadopoulos-Mifsud meeting in Rome was entirely an FBI operation -- done without any participation or even knowledge of the CIA.

  8. From a leaked phone call in August.......

    "Hi, John, Bill Barr here- sorry to call you on your house phone, but you weren't home- I thought the registered letter I sent last week asked for a meeting this morning at your home, but I might have misremembered. Anyhoo, your wife is annoyed at me- she kept saying she didn't know where you were, and hadn't seen you all week- that you were probably hunting moose somewhere in far northern Quebec. I was wondering if you got my e-mail messages asking for an update on a timeline- I think I sent about 10 of them between June and the end of July."

    "Bill, is that you? You are breaking up. Can I call you back? No? Ok, well, we have been working hard all Summer. I have the entire staff out interviewing some people, but COVID has slowed us down- most of the people we wanted to talk to were infected and under quarantine and/or on ventilators most of the Summer. As for your e-mails, the internet has been out since May, and I keep losing my cell phone and having to replace it, so I didn't get any of your messages. I did write a preliminary report, but then the wife got sick with COVID and I mislaid it somewhere, or maybe the dog ate it. I think we can wrap this up sometime by early November- like, maybe, the 4th. Anyway, gotta go- talk to you later. The prelim report will be in the mail ASAP!"

  9. Mary Jacoby and Glenn Simpson fit the profile of CIA assets

    Jacoby and Simpson were interested primarily in Russian organized crime. For many years, they were associated with Bruce Orh, a DOJ/FBI official who specialized in organized crime.

    In 2010, Ohr introduced FBI Special Agent Michael Gaeta to Christopher Steele, who did various research projects -- focused on Russian organized crime -- for Simpson.

    After Gaeta was introduced to Steele in 2010, Gaeta arranged for Steele to come to FBI Headquarters to give talks and answer questions. In about the fall of 2015, Gaeta arranged for Steele to become a paid informant of the FBI. This development happened because Steele had provided reports to the FBI about Russian corruption of international soccer.

    After Gaeta was compelled to fire Steele as a paid informant of the FBI, Steele and Ohr met repeatedly in order to continue the information transfers that had been interrupted by the firing of Steele as a paid FBI source.

    It seems to me that Simpson's relationship is overwhelmingly with DOJ/FBI -- not with the CIA.

    1. Bruce Ohr was NOT a "DOJ/FBI" official. He was only employed by the DoJ. Jacoby/Simpson's association with him does not preclude their association with CIA--which is well known for recruiting journalists and political operatives, unlike the FBI, which has restrictions on that. CIA would also have unquestionably had an interest in international organized crime--just from a different perspective than FBI.

  10. Nellie Ohr ... fit[s} the profile of CIA assets

    Nellie Ohr is the wife of Bruce Ohr, a top DOJ official who specializes in Russian organized crime.

    In 2010, Bruce Ohr introduced FBI Special Agent Michael Gaeta to Christopher Steele, who often did research projects for Simpson about Russian organized crime. Eventually -- in about the fall of 2015 -- Gaeta arranged for Steele to become a paid informant of the FBI.

    At about the end of October 2016, Gaeta fired Steele from his position of paid FBI informant. In the following weeks, Bruce Ohr (Nellie Ohr's husband) met repeatedly with Simpson in order to continue the information transfers that had been interrupted by Gaeta's firing of Steele as an FBI paid source.

    Somewhere along the way, Nellie Ohr (wife of DOJ official Bruce Ohr) had been hired by Simpson. As an employee of Simpson, Nellie Ohr (wife of DOJ top official Bruce Ohr) apparently acquired all the reports that Steele ever had written for Simpson. Nellie Ohr put all those reports onto a small storage device, which Bruce Ohr delivered to the FBI.

    Nellie Ohr does not fit the profile of "a CIA asset". Rather, she fits the profile of a DOJ/FBI asset.

    1. Mike, please stop this. Nellie Ohr was a CIA contract employee--that's well known. Simpson was certainly well aware of that when he hired her. Steele's continued contacts with (work for?) with Dearlove and other extremely high level Brit intel officials is a sure sign that he was far more than an FBI asset. The latter was an arrangement of convenience for him.

    2. Yes. And the strategy of the Conspirators always was: (1) FBI was conducting a reasonably predicated 'investigation' of Russian election meddling and collusion with the Trump Campaign and (2) CIA was operating strictly in its lane; when it became aware of foreign intel relating to Russian election meddling and/or Trump campaign interference it passed it off to the FBI, as required by law.

      Thus, everything the various players did was, as Susan Rice said, "by the book".

      What, did you expect Brennan to admit he was involved?

    3. Agreed with Cassander. Brennan set the predicate however ignoring the advice of HRC's involvement he spun his web w/the drooling folks at DOJ/FBI and slowly backed away. No fingerprints, documents, or involvement so they say so far. Brennan's complicit but highly doubtful touchable at this point.

    4. I'm disappointed, Mark, that you apparently refuse to publish my response about Nellie Ohr's being a CIA contract employee.

    5. Mike, I deleted SEVERAL of your comments. You seem to want to conduct a monologue rather than a dialogue--you don't respond to my responses, etc. I'll continue to delete comments like that as well as others that contain unsupported speculation.

  11. Off topic, but does anyone have a comment on this action?

    1. If true I would suppose the clerk was acting on instructions.

  12. William Barr is telling the public that John Durham has found that the CIA "stayed in its lane" and did not commit serious wrong-doing in this history.

    Rather, Durham has found the wrong-doing mainly among the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigators.

    I don't see that as a cover-up.

    Rather, I see that as Barr preparing the public to learn what Durham did not find and did find.

    Durham did not find that the CIA committed serious wrong-doing in this history.

    We should use Barr's public hints to begin now to re-think our suspicions about what happened. We all suspected that the CIA played a major role, but those particular suspicions indeed might turn out to have been mistaken.

    1. Well, I feel better. Nothing to see here, the gov't sez so, so I'll just move along. The great thing about the gov't investigating itself is how often we discover our concerns were completely unfounded.
      Tom S.

    2. Plus John Brennan has told us he did nothing wrong. So there's that, too.

    3. "We should use Barr's public hints to begin now to re-think our suspicions about what happened. We all suspected that the CIA played a major role, but those particular suspicions indeed might turn out to have been mistaken.”

      No. Not at all prepared to let malicious Communist Brennan off the hook based upon what I am supposed to infer are hints from Barr. Too much “watch my hands”. Suspension of disbelief.

    4. I still think our allies played a role.

  13. Academia, Barr and the whole lawyer cabal against the working class needs to stop. I find it disgusting only a few legal minds will help
    Trump and his backers. Heartlanders vs coastal elites. I say starve the elite, they are too stupid to know how to survive without we the people catering to every need they desire.

    1. Trying to pit Americans against each other based upon geography is merely hanging on to the television-produced red state-blue state map from the 2000 election. California produced more votes for President Trump in the 2020 election than had ever been cast for a Republican president - over 6 million votes, when only 5+ million registered as Republican voters. The “elites” are everywhere, but primarily in big cities. One big city in the Heartland - Chicago - is loaded with them. So are other population centers. It is not just a matter of state location. How can states that don’t even have 6 million registered voters in toto write off a state that has that many voting for a Republican presidential candidate?

    2. Very true. A glance at a county or precinct election result map is useful. Yes, much of that red territory is lightly populated, but not necessarily. Certainly not in many parts of CA and much of the US east of the Great Plains.

    3. "The “elites” are everywhere, but primarily in big cities."

      The elites are wherever their Gulfstreams take them. One of the problems exacerbating the rift between them and Americans is that they consider themselves above loyalty based on global geography. They are not Ms Scarlett, they have no ties to the land or the people around them. They are an Uber Tribe. That's why any local uprising will simply result in them jetting away. To the global Deplorables geography is a limitation, to the elites it is a feature.
      Tom S.

    4. I meant to add: When dealing with their mindset think more absentee landlords of the British or French Empires, without the horse and carriage limitations of Louis XVI.
      Tom S.

    5. An another addendum: Do not confuse the elites with the nomenklatura or apparatchiks. The elites will sacrifice their tools at the drop of a hat (looking at you Hollywood and DS/Congress/SCoTUS critters). They hold no power in their own right but are mere house elves for the true elite, hoping to earn a dirty sock.
      Tom S.


      "...dirty sock."

      No sooner do I post the above than Mitt Romney R-(DS) rises to volunteer for the part of Creature in an off-Broadway remake of "Harry Potter".
      Tom S.

    7. Tom, at least the absentee landlords of the British or French Empires likely cared about those empires, instead of being deranged sociopaths, as are most of today's elites.

    8. Sociopaths, insofar as they back the spread of such sociopathic doctrines as CRT.

    9. That's my point. The lords of the 18th/19th century Empires:
      1) Had grown up among people with a genuine belief in Judeo-Christian teachings. Not so our would be masters.
      2) Had to deal with much the same worldly limitations of technology/geography as the common people they had contact with, tradesmen, shop keepers, renters etc., thereby compelling a certain amount of shared experience/commonality. How often has Bill Gates stood in a TSA line, with his shoes off, waiting for the privilege of being groped by a gov't employee, who makes it plain that, whomever they work for, it is not the people in line?
      3) They had a sovereign they answered to. Socialist malarkey aside, while there were bad sovereigns I can't think of a single one that didn't want their country to survive, if not be successful, and would reign-in such interests that appeared to be hostile to a content, productive, populace. True Louis XVI and Czar Nicolas mucked things up, but not out of malice or casual indifference. They were overtaken by their own unique versions of the DS. Solzhenitsyn mentions a couple of times that, under the Czars, there were at least legal limits adhered to as to torture, punishment, prisoner treatment, while the cruelty or indifference of the Socialists was unfettered beyond the universal rule that allowing a prisoner to die under torture was considered bad form, earning those involved a reprimand (A dead prisoner can be of no further use to the State and killing them through torture indicates a certain lack of professionalism and possibly could be viewed as a lack of dedication to the Party, thereby earning the bungler a "tenner". Not so our would be masters. They see nothing above them other than blue sky. They are utterly untethered from humanity other than their own Tribe. A very different outlook than European aristocracy ever held.
      Tom S.

    10. Tom, please elaborate on "They were overtaken by their own unique versions of the DS."
      In the case of Nicky, do mean the Black Hand?
      In the case of Louis, I'll not dare guess what you mean.

    11. And, about Nicky's successors, can you recommend sources, on how things really went in the Lubianka?

    12. And, about US academia, see a long, detailed article
      at , w/ a slew of links to studies of opinion etc. shifts in higher ed:

      "The Atlantic reported as well, on prior research from University of Pennsylvania professor Diana Mutz, that had concluded that “white, highly educated people are relatively isolated from political diversity”, and that “people who went to graduate school have the least amount of political disagreement in their lives.” Mutz’s explanation was that such people are less likely to talk with those who disagree with them….
      Has education always cooked up an over-saturated brew bubbling over with an overpowering flavor of left ideological extremism? No.
      Pew Research Center findings from 2016 show a widening ideological gap between 1994 and 2015, among those who are more versus less educated….
      In 1994, one percent of those whose educations stopped after their high school graduation or even earlier, leaned “consistently liberal,” while that number was four percent for those with “some college,” five percent for college graduates, and seven percent for post-grads — a small upward progression but, all in all, not a massive difference.
      By 2015, however, the educational divide had become a gulf: five percent of those in the high-school-or-less category were consistently liberal in their views, but those numbers were 12% of those with some college, 24% of college graduates, and 31% of post-grads.
      No similar pattern obtained for those who were “consistently conservative.” Both in 1994 and in 2015, the percentage of down-the-line conservatives hovered between six percent and 11 percent, across all education categories, with no particular correlation with education to be found.
      The massive growth in the consistently liberal-minded, over the course of these two decades had not come at the expense of conservatives, but rather, largely at the expense of those with less partisan and more “mixed” political views...."

    13. This New Discourses site is a good intro into IDW thought/ methodology.

  14. I needed no convincing that the CIA was neck deep. All of the same players that were wrapped up in Flynn's mess from Cambridge.

    The ONA was the dollar front for both.

    Brennan's team KNEW what they were doing, the legal skirting was completely by design overseas so I can also see why they got passed over on investigation. You really more have to point the finger at what our government as a whole has allowed the agencies to be crafted into. It's systemically designed to be what it is.

    I'm no fan of Barr but it's hard to level blame at a AG when they've intentionally designed a unconstitutional system to begin with.

    The IC is corrupt, out of control and need to be killed off!

    1. And for context, the Intel State has been in place basically since WW2.

    2. They've had a long time to solidify their position.

    3. I'll ride with the farmers and ranchers from the heartland.

    4. The NSA of 1947 was no fluke. The first major act of the Executive. Forrestal was deeply upset about some of the things he saw happening under it's auspices. His objections immediately got him admitted to a mental institution from which he never emerged.
      Tom S.