Red Meat For Unknown

I'm sure it's been noticed that in the comments I've been getting some pushback to my narrative of optimism. Commenter Unknown is the most prominent, but there have been others.

I don't want to be accused of hiding the ball, so here's my baseline for success--for Barr as AG in the biggest political crisis America has ever faced:

1) Truly significant prosecutions, i.e., prosecutions of major figures like Comey, Brennan, and players on a similar level at DoJ, in the White House, and in the Hillary campaign structure (Glenn Simpson, Nellie Ohr, possibly lawyers); and/or (because I always try to be reasonable,

2) Truly significant revelations of the complete shape of the coup plot via declassification.

Less than this--one or the other will do, but preferably both--will constitute failure. For Barr, not necessarily for Trump. Success for Trump at this point is reelection. He has his own ways of getting the truth out. And I repeat what I've said recently: Trump gives every indication of being very pleased with Barr's performance thus far. I have to assume that that means Trump knows things we don't.

With that said, here's the Red Meat for the Nabobs of Negativity, and it comes from a real veteran observer of the Washington Swamp Inside Game, Paul Sperry. Sperry went on an absolute tear on Twitter last night, and I reproduce below his highly negative, even defeatist, tweets--although, you'll see that they're intermixed with truth continuing to come out. My only comment is this: Sperry appears to believe that if the NYT and WaPo decline to cover the Russia Hoax story as it is--rather than serving as propaganda organs for the Dems--then defeat is around the corner for conservatives. To me, his attitude seems ironic. Here he is, a journalist, tweeting this negativity yet not appearing to understand the power of the new media, which Trump revealed to stunning effect by his very election and by his continued successes.

A Former FBI Assistant Director Speaks Out

Chris Swecker was Assistant Director of the FBI's Criminal Investigative Division from 2004-2006. Tonight Swecker spoke with Tucker Carlson about Paul Sperry's article about James Comey's targeting of President Trump, and he spoke frankly. Here is a partial transcript of the 3 minute interview, via GP--Former FBI Asst. Director: James Comey and His Inner Circle Were Making up Their Own Set of Rules – This Is ‘Seven Days in May’ – As Shady as it Gets: I've corrected the transcript and expanded it in a few places. For example, in the first paragraph, Swecker speaks of "criminal" statutes (GP has "civil"--big difference). Those who have followed this blog will recognize that Swecker is talking about the same things I've harped on: the three types of investigations, the guidelines, the need for predication, the fact that this all has to be documented, etc.

Chris Swecker: It would be difficult to overstate how egregious and in violation with the Attorney General guidelines and probably several criminal statutes that type of operation would be without predication. And in this case… I don’t see any predication whatsoever and certainly no documentation of an assessment or an intelligence assessment as Comey described it in his book, or a preliminary inquiry or a full investigation. And those are the only three types of investigations there are. So there would have had to have been some sort of documented predication to do that. 

Tucker Carlson: If the documents existed, we would know, right? 

Chris Swecker: Right… I read the article, it sounds like a rogue operation on the part of the FBI Director. ... I thought all along that Deputy Director McCabe’s initiation of an investigation out of the Deputy Director’s office was thoroughly unprecedented. The deputy director should not be running any investigation whatsoever. And the director himself should not be operational in any investigation. So it’s hard to number all the things that are wrong with the things that are described in this article, again assuming that these two sources are true. 

Tucker Carlson: But as someone who spent a lot of time in management over at the FBI you see this and your first thought is, this is bizarre and rotten ...

Chris Swecker: You can’t make this stuff up. This is about as shady as it gets… Jim Comey and his inner circle were just off making their own set of rules, doing their own thing for their own personal reasons, primarily because they just dislike the president…

...  

Anything that J. Edgar Hoover was accused of would pale in comparison to this. This is Seven Days in May. This is an inner circle of self-appointed moral guardians taking over the presidency and trying to take it down for their own personal reasons. ...

There's no shadow of a doubt about this. We're living through the biggest political scandal in the history of the United States.

And here's the video:

Sperry's OIG Bombshell: Comey Targeted Trump

Paul Sperry has a terrific article at Real Clear Investigations this morning: Justice Dept. Watchdog Has Evidence Comey Probed Trump, on the Sly. Sperry accomplishes a number of important things in this article (it's fairly lengthy, but absolutely warrants a close reading).

In this important investigative work, Sperry documents that--contrary to the fears of many--Michael Horowitz at OIG has not been simply twiddling his thumbs. Nor, by very direct implication, have Bill Barr and John Durham been idle. The investigative task Congressional investigators--and now the Barr team--faced, and continue to face, is monumental in and of itself. They have had to contend with, and are still confronted by, determined resistance from the Deep State. Sperry's article provides reassurance that we will in due course (i.e., before the 2020 elections) receive some key answers as to the overall shape of the Russia Hoax: its origins, its development, its morphing into the Mueller inquisition.

That last phrase is important in its tripartite structure: the Russia Hoax: its origins, its development, its morphing into the Mueller inquisition. These three aspects of the overall Russia Hoax can be seen, in a sense, as three acts in a drama. Let's see how that metaphor plays out, as we look at Sperry's account.

AG Barr has said he wants to "get his arms around" the origins of the Russia Hoax, and that is the task he has--at least initially--assigned to Durham. To that end, we've heard that Durham is, no doubt among other activities, talking to senior CIA and FBI officials who were associated with the document that was a key to establishing and perpetuating the Russian "meddling" narrative: the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA). Of course, this aspect of Durham's inquiry also has implications for later events, but it's very much at the origin of the Russia Hoax.

The task of Horowitz and OIG has been to get to the bottom of the fraud that was later perpetrated on the FISA court (FISC). However, Sperry's sources tell him that OIG has gone well beyond that initial task and have examined the targeting of Trump himself by Comey and, more generally, by the FBI, during the period from the election to the appointment of Mueller as Special Counsel. This is the second act, the development of the Russia Hoax from an effort to prevent Trump's election to an attempt at a coup: the removal of a sitting president for political reasons, under the pretense of legal action.

Sperry Tweets Highlights Of HPSCI Hearing

Paul Sperry is tweeting highlights from today's HPSCI hearing, at which two FBI officials testified. Here are a few of his tweets:


Paul Sperry‏

@paulsperry_ 

4 hours ago
BREAKING: In (LIVE) hearing, Nunes just pronounced: "The counterintelligence department over at the FBI is in big trouble."  

40 minutes ago
BREAKING:Rep Stefanik asserted that Comey "circumvented" requirements to brief Gang of 8 about counterintelligence investigations of a federal campaign in March 2017 & instead broke the rules to publicly confirm for 1st time the FBI was investigating members of the Trump campaign

60 minutes ago
BREAKING: Rep. Ratcliffe suggested during line of questioning in today's HPSCI hearing that the FBI had "exculpatory" info (likely ref to alleged transcripts of recorded convos) re Papadopoulos & yet w/h it from FISA affidavit, which names him as part of alleged Russian conspiracy

1 hour ago
Nunes pointed out that "numerous" current government officials and former officials -- including anti-Trumper Gen. Hayden -- have appeared many times on RT and some have even taken RT money, and yet they were not put under counterintelligence investigation like Lt. Gen. Flynn.‏

2 hours ago
All Schiff & Dems & their witnesses have in terms of any "collusion" is Manafort sharing polling data to Kilimnik even tho Kilimnik was US asset (not Russian agent) & he was Manafort's partner in political consultancy & the polling data came from firm contracted by consultancy!

2 hours ago
BREAKING: Schiff's FBI witnesses -- both of whom worked for Mueller when he was FBI director -- claimed under oath they have never read the Steele dossier

No, I don't believe that last bit either.

UPDATED: Paul Sperry Gets It Right In Just Over 25 Words

Barely over 25 words. This is really what it was all about, IMO:

Paul Sperry‏ @paulsperry_

Mueller wasn't just investigating alleged espionage, he was investigating Trump's anti-globalist foreign policy, witnessed by Mueller's strange months-long probe of the Center for the National Interest, which advocates for a non-interventionist foreign policy based on realism

9:43 AM - 3 Jun 2019

UPDATE: Commenter HMH asks, "Where can I read more about this?" Here are some links that explain the Mueller focus on Center for the National Interest, run by Dmitri Simes. Yes, it really was a witchhunt. None of Hillary's many links to Russians and Ukrainians were examined:

Dimitri Simes flew too close to Trump, and his think tank got burned

As the Mueller report and various news reports have spelled out, Simes was engaging in activities that are both legal and widespread in Washington: back-channel communications with foreign officials, wielding influence on behalf of corporate interests and privately helping political campaigns while running a “nonpartisan” organization. However, those activities became a focus of federal and congressional investigations and tons of media scrutiny. Simes said he does not think he should be held responsible for any of it.

Russia-linked figures in Mueller's probe come in from the cold after report's release

Washington-based Russian expert Dimitri Simes, who appears to have had influence on Jared Kushner's foreign policy platform, based on the Mueller report, has made occasional appearances during the past two years – though more frequently in Russian media outlets.

The Mueller report says that during the 2016 campaign, Simes, who heads a think tank called the Center for the National Interest, prepared a "Russia Policy Memo" for Kushner.

In it, Simes described "a well-documented story of highly-questionable connections between Bill Clinton" and the Russian government. The memo was forwarded to senior Trump campaign officials, including then-Trump campaign Paul Manafort and deputy chairman Rick Gates.

Mueller's prosecutors described Simes in the report as personally having "many contacts with current and former Russian government officials," and cited his think tank's own description of itself as having "unparalleled access to Russian officials and politicians among Washington think tanks." According to the report, the center grew out of an organization founded by former President Richard Nixon.

According to the report, however, Simes had also previously advised Kushner that it was "bad optics" for the campaign to develop "hidden Russian contacts," and told Kushner to not "highlight Russia as an issue" and to handle any Russian contacts with care, according to the report.

The report also revealed that after the 2016 election, Simes was contacted by an associate working for Petr Aven, the head of Russia's biggest bank -- Alfa Bank -- to establish direct communication between the Trump administration and the Russian government. The report said he declined, saying he did not want to be seen as an intermediary between Trump world and Kremlin.

Mueller report reveals Kushner's contacts with a ‘pro-Kremlin’ campaign adviser

Dimitri Simes, who runs a Washington think tank, offered advice on Russia policy and even peddled rumors about the Clintons.

Standing Up For Realism

Briefly Noted: Paul Sperry On Fire, Developments

Raw tweets from today:

Paul Sperry‏

@paulsperry_

NYT & WaPo knew of "govt investigator" Strzok sent to spy on Papa-D w Halper since at least May 2018. They know "Aza Turk's" identity just like knew Halper's & won't divulge not to protect them but FBI handlers/leakers. Just like knew Steele's ID & HRC behind dossier. #CorruptMSM

#SpyGate What did Vice President Joe Biden know and when did he know it?

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Burr: “I think when we get through with our report (set for end-of-summer release), there won’t be any room for anybody to make these wild accusations about collusion.”

MYSTERY: Mueller Report states Joseph Mifsud interviewed Feb 10 2017. Yet no citation of an FBI 302 for interview. Mueller also states he has docs proving Mifsud made "false" statements to investigators. Yet he never prosecuted him for lying like Papa-D. Why was Mifsud protected?

DEVELOPING: Congressional investigators are looking into "a number of false statements" made by Mueller in Volume I of his report where he misrepresented the underlying evidence ostensibly to mirror the FBI's stated pretext for opening investigations on Trump campaign figures