CORRECTION?

Yesterday I did a post: Why Did The FBI Stop Documenting Its Contacts With Chris Steele? However, on p. 226 of Lee Smith's The Plot Against The President: The True Story of How Congressman Devin Nunes Uncovered the Biggest Political Scandal in U.S. History. we read this:

After the special counsel team was named May 17, Steele told Ohr he wanted to spek with the Mueller team. 

Ohr continued to meet with the FBI at the Bureau's request, as Steele's cutout, until late November 2017. The 302s of the post-May 2017 meetings were held in the custody of the special counsel and never disclosed to Congress.

From this account--deriving, one assumes, from Congressional sources--it appears that 302s of the contacts between Steele and Team Mueller--as filtered through Bruce Ohr--were in fact created, but that their existence was not disclosed to Congressional investigators. In other words, the FBI agents working for Team Mueller's Office of the Special Counsel continued contact with Steele as before--using Bruce Ohr as the intermediary, since Steele had been closed as a Bureau source for cause. What DIDN'T happen is that Team Mueller did not disclose those contacts to Congress.

However, on p. 284/324 of the Horowitz Dossier we read something quite different:

On May 8, 2017, Ohr told SSA 4 and Case Agent 5 that Steele was willing to work with the FBI again. Ohr said that Steele had independently raised with Ohr the subject of re-engaging with the FBI. On May 12, 2017, SSA 4 requested that Ohr ask Steele if he was willing to meet with FBI agents in Europe. According to Ohr, he contacted Steele, who agreed to talk with the FBI agents on May 15, 2017. This meeting did not take place, and, as discussed in Chapter Six, the FBI did not have contact with Steele until September 2017 when he was interviewed by agents assigned to the Special Counsel's Office. Ohr told us he continued to communicate with Steele through the end of November 2017 and provided the details of those communications to the FBI, which primarily focused on Steele's interest in being interviewed by the Special Counsel. However, the FBI did not memorialize any meetings its agents had with Ohr after the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was transferred to the Special Counsel's Office in May 2017. Ohr told us that Steele stopped contacting him after Ohr's name appeared in news articles at the end of 2017.

How to resolve this? I can't on my own. My guess is that what Team Mueller retained were Ohr's notes and/or printouts/copies of their communications using "an encrypted electronic forum." (p. 283/323) These notes/communications would not be actual FD-302s that would be placed in official FBI files. The point is that if the FBI was conducting official investigative actions--and they had, according to Horowitz, reached out to Steele through Ohr--then they should have been memorializing those contacts. Instead, they were hiding those contacts from official reporting channels. The only way those contacts were discovered was because Ohr coughed up his own notes and other documentation to OIG. The reasons Team Mueller had for concealing all this remains as described in my original post.

Here's the bottom line: Officials of the US Government do NOT conduct private investigations. Their investigative activity MUST be reported as required by the internal regulations of the agency in question and MUST be maintained in a form that can be recovered. It's a permanent record.

Movement On Impeachment

Mitch McConnell is on board with Josh Hawley's resolution:

The resolution would give the House 25 days to send articles of impeachment over to the Senate. After that, a senator could offer a motion to dismiss "with prejudice for failure by the House of Representatives to prosecute such articles" with a simple majority vote, according to Hawley's proposal.

That apparently means: 25 days from when the articles were voted.

Here's what that means as a practical matter:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told Republicans during a closed-door lunch on Thursday to expect President Trump’s impeachment trial to start next week.  

...  

Proceedings have been held up while Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has refused to send over the House-passed articles of impeachment, but she told reporters earlier Thursday that she would “soon” do so. 

...  

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) added that McConnell told senators that the two articles would be sent over "soon," expecting them in the "next day or two."  

...  

Once Pelosi sends the articles over, the trial would start the next day at 1 p.m. The Senate would then be in session for six days a week, excluding Sunday, until they wrap what is expected to be a weeks-long process. The six-day work week will be a shift for senators, who normally come into town on Monday night and leave by Thursday afternoon.  

"I'm not holding them indefinitely," Pelosi had said during a press briefing in the Capitol. "I'll send them over when I'm ready, and that will probably be soon." 

...  

Asked about McConnell's comments, a spokesman said the GOP leader's guidance was not based on conversations with Pelosi.  

...  

Pelosi reiterated on Thursday that she wants more details on the parameters of an impeachment trial from McConnell. 

"We need to see the arena in which we are sending our managers. Is that too much to ask?" Pelosi said.

Cocaine Mitch says "no haggling." Period.

Did Rod Rosenstein Lead A Computer Intrusion Unit For The Obama Admin?

That's what a new lawsuit by Sharryl Atkisson suggests. I'm already spread thin, but you can read about the new lawsuit at American Greatness: New Lawsuit Claims Rod Rosenstein Led Task Force that Spied on Sharyl Attkisson’s Computers.

Of particular note is that, in addition to Rosenstein, another named defendant is Shawn Henry, who is currently president of Crowdstrike Services. At the time, Henry was executive assistant director (EAD) of the Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch (CCRSB), working for Robert "Bob" Mueller. Rosenstein, Mueller, Henry--it's a small world.

Here's a short excerpt from the article. For some reason I'm very familiar with the name Les Szwajkowski, but for the moment can't pinpoint it:

As part of the lawsuit, former FBI Unit Chief Les Szwajkowski confirms that he facilitated a forensic exam in January of 2013 that revealed government surveillance spyware in Attkisson’s computer. Szwajkowski signed a sworn Affidavit confirming the government intrusion into Attkisson’s computers. 

The specialist quickly identified spyware proprietary to the federal government in Attkisson’s computer, according to Szwajkowski. He advised Attkisson that he and his intel associates were “shocked” that the government had used covert surveillance on a national journalist and he said they thought it was “outrageous.” 

Szwajkowski says he reported to Attkisson that the analysis showed clear evidence that her computer was infiltrated with government spyware proprietary to the CIA, FBI or National Security Agency (NSA). Forensics indicated the particular intrusion uncovered by the analysis was accomplished through software attached to an otherwise innocuous email sent to Attkisson in February 2012. 

Attkisson alleges that “numerous other Americans” were also targeted by Rosenstein’s unit while he was the U.S. Attorney in Baltimore, Maryland.

Why Did The FBI Stop Documenting Its Contacts With Chris Steele?

This past Monday I adverted to a circumstance that Margot Cleveland dug up from perusing the Horowitz Dossier--which is slowly being revealed as a gold mine of information (albeit partial) on the Russia Hoax: Cleveland: OIG Report Fingers Team Mueller. The nugget that caught my attention was the previously unknown fact that that Team Mueller continued to contact Chris Steele--supposed author of the eponymous dossier--until nearly the end of 2017. They did this, using Bruce Ohr as a cut-out, but they didn't document those meetings. Here's what I wrote about that:

UPDATED: OMG Funny!

Paul Krugman Says Someone Using His IP Address To Download Child Porn

UPDATE 1: CTH makes a good point, and has some fun:

In a follow-up tweet Krugman states: “The Times is now on the case”. 

Apparently calling the police for a forensic review was out of the question, or something.  Very odd.

Next up: Crowdstrike!  Wait for it….

UPDATE 2: Crowdstrike would come in handy if it was a server in Ukraine that placed the stuff on Krugman's computer. Or was this Putin helping Trump again?

UPDATED: Pelosi Is Losing Senate Dems

Several sites are reporting that Diane Feinstein--undoubtedly speaking for quite a few more Dem senators--is demanding that Pelosi send the articles of impeachment over to the Senate:

Dianne Feinstein says it’s time for Speaker Nancy Pelosi to send the impeachment articles to the Senate.

“If we’re going to do it, she should send them over,” the California Democrat said. “I don’t see what good delay does.”

— Laura Litvan (@LauraLitvan) January 8, 2020

Looks like a cave to the GOP, united behind Trump and Cocaine Mitch--this is the kind of thing that makes McConnell such a great Senate leader:

Other Senate Democrats are joining Feinstein in her calls against Pelosi’s decision to withhold the articles. 

According to Vox Senior Political Correspondent Andrew Prokop, Senators Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., agree it is time Pelosi send the articles to the Senate. 

“I think the time has past [sic]. [Pelosi] should send the articles over,” Murphy said.

Imagine what their polling is telling them!

UPDATE: Ya gotta luv the way Scott Jennings puts it:

McConnell just ate Pelosi and Schumer's lunch

Jennings' op-ed piece makes an interesting contrast to the other CNN pieces, liberally linked throughout his article. Samples:

This is the bombshell Trump's team didn't want revealed 

John Bolton's statement should scare Trump

Uh, right!

Here are some excerpts from Jennings' article, edited to work in a more or less continuous style:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer have been bested by Mitch McConnell yet again. The two Democrats attempted to create impeachment leverage where none existed by withholding the Articles of Impeachment passed last month against President Donald Trump. 

But like your Aunt Frieda threatening not to bring her awful fruitcake to Christmas Dinner, their plan didn't work. Nobody wanted it in the first place.

McConnell won this round against his Keystone Cops opposition because he has something Schumer and Pelosi don't: a reasonable argument. 

I guess opposing Donald Trump is a helluva drug. 

The days of Pelosi being hailed as some next-level genius impeachment strategist I guess will have to come to an end for the liberal pundit industry. Her plan to withhold the articles of impeachment to create that "leverage" over McConnell failed spectacularly. No Republicans were harmed, pressured, or otherwise inconvenienced in the making of this sad, sad film.

They failed to convince a single Republican in the House that impeachment was necessary. They failed to pressure Mitch McConnell's conference to do their homework for them.

And they will fail to remove President Trump from office when all is said and done, instead delivering him to a perch of exoneration from which he will bludgeon them for weeks. 

This could not have gone more poorly if the Democrats had tried. Any Republican senator on the ballot this year knows it would be suicide to join Pelosi or Schumer's hapless crusade now.

Meanwhile, Pelosi's great triumph was getting all those Trump district freshman reps to walk the plank for her.

IMPORTANT UPDATE: Briefly Noted: Stefan Halper Update

There are a number of blogs out this morning that build of information gleaned from the OIG FISA report to shed interesting new light on the activities of two key intel operatives: Chris Steele and Stefan Halper. What the new information strongly suggests is that there was close coordination between the John Brennan's CIA and the Clinton campaign, using Fusion GPS, the Clinton's oppo research firm that was secretly funded through a DNC connected law firm. Some of this general thrust of new revelations can be seen in Mike Sylwester's article yesterday, Steele's Reports About Putin's Presidential Administration.

Margot Cleveland at The Federalist focuses on Stefan Halper's interaction with Carter Page: Exclusive Carter Page Interview Raises New Questions About ‘Inaccuracy-Laden’ IG Report. Here's what I see as the essence of what Cleveland is saying:

According to the IG report, after the launch of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI tasked Halper as a confidential human source to target Page, George Papadopoulos, and another unnamed, high-ranking Trump campaign official, widely known to be Sam Clovis. 

Halper’s handling agent told the IG it was “serendipitous” that Source 2 — the moniker used for the unnamed Halper — “had contacts with three of their four subjects, including Carter Page.” They “couldn’t believe [their] luck,” the handling agent noted, upon learning that Halper knew Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort, and had crossed paths with Page just weeks before. 

After asking Halper about Papadopoulos, whom “he had never heard of,” the case agent told the Office of the Inspector General that Halper “asked whether the team had any interest in an individual named Carter Page.”

Cleveland is rightly skeptical about the serendipitous nature of all this, and asks the obvious questions:

UPDATED: All's Well That Ends Well?

Hopefully.

Deterrence appears to be being reesrablished. That’s how you stay out of war. Good. pic.twitter.com/EExLfQZryx

— Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) January 8, 2020

If tonight's #IranAttacks indeed failed to kill any Americans, #Trump restraint right now wd put him in a much stronger position - both domestically and internationally - to hit back hard again after another #embassy attack-like provocation.  #Soleimani #foreignpolicy #MiddleEast

— (((Alan Tonelson))) (@AlanTonelson) January 8, 2020

That war sucked. Lets take Greenland. We could own the place by breakfast time.

— Adam Townsend (@adamscrabble) January 8, 2020

UPDATE: Just ahead of President Trump's address to the nation, we're learning that Iran warned Iraq of the coming missile strikes and--wink, wink--Iraq warned the US, including that Iran did not seek war with the US:

If you're just waking up, here's what's happening:

■ Iran launched a ballistic missile attack at two Iraqi bases which house US troops in the early hours of Wednesday morning local time.

Here's what you need to know: https://t.co/8joSEITX47 pic.twitter.com/wqGe35Uk29

— CNN (@CNN) January 8, 2020

UPDATED: Re The Sandmann Case

This is John Hinderaker's take. As I commented earlier, the circumstances strongly suggested that Sandmann has received a substantial settlement:

Settlements of this sort are almost always subject to confidentiality agreements that prohibit the plaintiff from telling the press how much he got. Often it is the defendant that doesn’t want the world to know how much it paid; sometimes it is the plaintiff (or more likely his lawyers) who doesn’t want the world to know how little he settled for. 

In this instance, I am pretty sure that it was CNN, one of the main malefactors, that didn’t want the world to know how much it paid Sandmann as a result of its pathetically biased reporting. Now Sandmann’s lawyers can use CNN’s contribution, likely in the mid six figures, to fund their ongoing battle against the Washington Post, NBC and any others who slandered the boy. That is how the system works, and in this case, it appears to be working for the good.

UPDATE: While I simply inserted Hinderaker's take without adding, I commented in a response last night that I was skeptical of Hinderaker's guess of "mid 6 figures" for the settlement. Hinderaker, of course, is a highly experienced trial attorney. Nevertheless, there were reasons for skepticism, beyond that it may have been a simple misstatement. It's possible that in his view "mid 6 figures" extends up to the 75 percentile range for 6 figures.

Sandmann's attorney is Lin Wood, the biggest name in defamation law. If Wood were willing to accept as low as ~ $500K from CNN when the lawsuit was progressing well, that would be a tremendous blow to Wood's brand (and future earning power) and would provide WaPo and NBC (and other potential defendants) incentive to play the hardest of hardball. So the balancing of interests moving toward a settlement--which all parties would want--would include significant compensation for Sandmann and Wood, yet neither so little as to encourage defense stonewalling nor so much as to make the defendants desperate to resist.

I figured we'd soon be getting informed "guesses" re the amount of the settlement, and now this morning Mike Cernovich is stating that the settlement was in the "7 figure range, maybe 8 figures." More specifically, he estimates $750K to $2.1 million. His estimate is based on brand damage to CNN, which he claims could have been "catastrophic" based on the very public nature of the CNN brand and the direct damage to their brand as a news organization. In other words, because of the nature of CNN's business, and the likelihood that this case will be used repetitively to attack CNN, CNN was under pressure to get this case behind them. Cernovich believes his guesstimate of the settlement--what Sandmann's team was willing to accept--offered CNN a viable way out. And maybe even a lesson learned.

Now the other defendants may believe they see a path forward to settlements they can live with, based on the CNN settlement. That would be greatly preferable for them than the prospect of death dealing judgments.

Cocaine Mitch To Schumer: Pound Sand

Per Politico, Mitch McConnell has the votes

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has locked down sufficient backing in his 53-member caucus to pass a blueprint for the trial that leaves the question of seeking witnesses and documents until after opening arguments are made, according to multiple senators.

That could set the stage for a quicky trial with no witnesses and an acquittal after opening arguments.

As Zerohedge puts it:

There have been no discussions between McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who can go pound sand as talks seem unlikely.

The next step will to change Senate rules to allow a trial to begin without a "formal" transmittal of the articles--something that Lindsey Graham flatly stated on Sunday that the GOP will seek to do. IMO, Pelosi's idea of dictating terms to the Senate by holding them hostage was always bound to fail, being an affront to the Senate's sense of their own dignity and importance.

UPDATED: Government Asks For 6 Months Jail Time For Flynn

This is shameful, but Flynn should never have insistently claimed under oath that he was guilty. OTOH, it's time that judges faced up to the reality of plea deals rather than living in a fantasy world:

Flynn case update:

DOJ reverses prior recommendation and asks that Flynn be incarcerated for 0-6 months.

They previously asked for no jail time. pic.twitter.com/kbDoh86K0u

— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) January 7, 2020

DOJ takes back its previous position that Flynn substantially assisted the Gov't.

December 2018: Flynn provided substantial assistance.

January 2020: Flynn "has not substantially assisted the Government." pic.twitter.com/ovmeeL05GG

— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) January 7, 2020

This part of the government memo is rather remarkable:

Prosecutors noted in a Tuesday filing that while Flynn "has sought to assist and aid the government," there were periods "where the defendant has sought to thwart the efforts of the government to hold other individuals, principally Bijan Rafiekian, accountable for criminal wrongdoing."

Recall that the jury verdict against Rafiekian was tossed by the trial judge. According to that judge:

“The evidence was insufficient as a matter of law for the jury to convict Rafiekian on either count” 

The Government “failed to offer substantial evidence” that Rafiekian acted as an agent of a foreign government” 

“There is no substantial evidence” that he agreed to cooperate subject to the direction/control of Turkey; no evidence of any implied agreement w/ Turkey.

Naturally Flynn's lawyer, Sidney Powell, should take strong exception to the claim that Flynn should be punished for failing to assist a prosecution that was thrown out as insufficient as a matter of law.

UPDATES:

Reminder: Flynn was cooperating with the Gov't's FARA violation case against Rafikian right up until the moment the  corrupt prosecutors directed him to lie under oath.

— RussiaGate Was 100% Fake SpyGate Is 100% Real (@drawandstrike) January 7, 2020

NEW per Flynn attorney @SidneyPowell1 : "The government seeks to punish Mr. Flynn for telling the truth when it wasn’t what the prosecutors wanted to hear.  This is outrageous."#michaelflynn https://t.co/gjXUXqjitF

— Brooke Singman (@brookefoxnews) January 7, 2020

Briefly Noted: Three Reasons Trump Wins 2020

At Zerohedge this morning there's an article on the 2020 election that I found quite informative regarding how elections work. It's long, but I want to focus on the part that discusses the interplay between Impeachment Theater and real policy--specifically USMCA. Here's a link to the full article: The Three Main Reasons Trump Can't Lose 2020 – Dispelling Nonsense-Polls & Wishful-Thinking.

Basically, the author maintains that many key matrixes showed the country actually trending conservative since 2000. GOPers managed to avoid reaping the full benefits of that trend by their embrace of the predatory crony capitalists fueled by Clinton's anti-labor policies--NAFTA in particular. Dems, OTOH, were able to create a "buzz" surrounding Obama that distracted independents from the fact that Obama continued to support that same class of crony capitalists. It was a Uniparty thing. Trump, of course, changed all that, by creating a "buzz" around his policies that went right to the concerns of the disenfranchised working class.

So now we come to Impeachment Theater. Impeachment Theater was intended to appeal to the left, college educated, low-info boomers who watch Rachel Maddow. That appeal was necessary because that's a key part of the Dem base, but in making that appeal through Impeachment Theater the Dems inevitably alienated another key part of their base--labor. And that part of the base is the key part that actually does the get-out-the-vote work of walking the precincts and generating the necessary "buzz" that allows the Dems to win elections in a basically conservative country.

As a result, Pelosi found herself in the position of having to do Impeachment Theater while at the same time trying to hitch a ride on Trump's USMCA band wagon that's hugely popular. But the voters aren't fooled any more, nor are the labor precinct walkers likely to gin up the type of "buzz" that can reverse what Trump started in 2016.

Here's a key passage: