Catherine Herridge ponders what could possibly lay behind the remain redactions on footnote #350. We know the overall subject matter relates to U.K. intelligence, Christopher Steele’s primary sub-source, and the overall lack of interest by the FBI to undermine their objective; the investigation of the Trump campaign. [Tweet]
Not to sound overly dismissive to the question, but the remaining redactions, intentionally placed by the CURRENT DOJ, only relate to the specific sources and methods within what we know was an investigative partnership between the FBI and British intelligence.
Who or what the specific agencies are [and I’ll share one possibility below] is essentially irrelevant to the larger story. Unfortunately, the DC administrative state writ large, is attempting to obfuscate the real story by focusing on “Russian disinformation” within the Steele report that was not identified by the FBI.
That DC narrative is a great deflection from the more uncomfortable reality that U.S. intelligence officials purposefully and willfully worked to create, promote and support a dossier they knew from the outset was garbage. They all knew the dossier was junk because the U.S. intelligence apparatus and political operatives provided the material to include within it.
So here’s footnote #350 from the Herridge tweet, modified only by size to use as a template for possible redaction discussion:
And… considering what we know about the subject matter that is discussed in fn350; and considering what is already known from prior research and public document production; here is a rough example of what could be behind the redactions.
Again, in the big picture the redacted material is moot. We know the FBI used U.K. sources to corroborate Christopher Steele’s work product; and we know British agencies informed FBI officials that Steele was unreliable, biased in his views toward Donald Trump as a target, and lacking due diligence as an outcome of his intent.
In reality Chris Steele only used one primary sub-source, in addition to the information he was being fed by Fusion-GPS, Glenn Simpson, Nellie Ohr, democrat allies of Hillary Clinton, U.S. media conscripts, officials of the U.S. intelligence community (FBI, CIA, DOJ-NSD) & finally The U.S. State department. All of these operators participated in the assembly of a political opposition research document without any verification. {Go Deep}
So the part where we ask questions about U.S. agencies not verifying the material inside a dossier they helped assemble, promote and exploit is, well, a little silly. Alas, this is the pretend questioning game the DC machine likes to play.
Meanwhile most people avoid asking why Attorney General Bill Barr classified the IG report footnotes in the first place.
The only material behind the classifications is material that exposes U.S. corruption; U.S. intentional wrong-doing; and the use of intelligence surveillance as a political weapon.
♦Footnote 334 Before
♦Footnote 334 After
Do you see any “sources or methods” in that redaction?
Of course not….
So why was it there?
The only thing the DOJ was hiding was: the reality of a Primary Sub-source who said his contacts were not viewed by him as a network of sources. That is correct, they were just random people he interacted with as an ordinary part of life…. and they chatted about rumors, gossip, innuendo, theories, and stuff. [Just like it said in the IG report]
Footnote 334, outlining the PSS who gave Steele the majority of information, was embarrassing to the CURRENT institutional interests of the FBI because it showed the prior FBI officials were on a mission; undeterred by truth.
The FBI is a mess of political targeting operations.
That’s what was redacted in the December 2019 IG report, a mere four months ago. Embarrassing stuff that makes the CURRENT institutions of the DOJ and FBI look bad. So they hid it…. again… as they continue to hide damaging and embarrassing material.
Which brings me to the point of AG Bill Barr and his biggest challenge.
The challenge for Attorney General Bill Barr is not investigating what we don’t know, but rather navigating through what ‘We The People’ are already aware of…. And then finding a way to protect the institutions of the DOJ and FBI while getting people to stop demanding action to address the corruption within them.
We are once again stuck in this stupid place where DC pretends the previous CIA, FBI and DOJ officials were duped by “Russian disinformation”, while we roll our eyes at them because we know the truth; and we know that they knowthe truth; but their pretense is supported by a willfully blind media.
AG Bill Barr has to keep feeding the purveyors of investigative hope-porn as a method to keep the pitchforks at bay, while simultaneously trying to figure out how to do nothing of substance so he can preserve the institutions. Remember, the DC system operates on an entirely different legal principle when it comes to internal investigations within the bubble.
As a result we get AG Barr saying “if John Durham can find evidence of criminal conduct”; where “criminal” in DC is defined around a DC-exclusive legal theory of “intent” that doesn’t apply anywhere else in the country. [examples: see Hillary Clinton; or see IG Horowitz saying he couldn’t find intent.]
If John Q Public violated a law, the FBI would break down our door in a no-knock raid and use the violation as leverage to get us to break. The FBI would not sit around debating whether John intended to violate the law; they’d deal with that aspect after the raid and the pressure on us to fork over $250,000 in a legal effort to defend ourselves. [example: see Roger Stone]
AG Bill Barr has no intention on prosecuting any former individual or entity, regardless of their political hierarchy and/or level of participation, in the matrix of the coup effort against Candidate/President Trump…. unless the DC-exclusive legal hurdles are met.
(1) There must be clear intention that cannot be excused by the coup participant behind obtuse justifications. If the corrupt participant says they had to follow-up and investigate because the Trump-Russia ramifications were so enormous (ie. the justification trap); and there’s nobody to refute that, then it’s over.
(2) There must be no collateral damage to the institutions of government. No executive agency or branch of government can be compromised by the truthful prosecution of an individual from within it. If the consequences are severe enough to damage an entire institution, then it’s over.
The current DOJ redactions and lack of declassification of a host of known material (including the scope memos), is directly related to #2, the need to preserve and protect people (Rosenstein) and the institutions (DOJ/FBI/Congress).
Think about the argument: Are we debating what lies behind redactions on current DOJ documents from the AG Bill Barr agency; and simultaneously believing that AG Bill Barr is going to deliver some form of justice from inside the institution of the DOJ?
The Bill Barr Dept. of Justice is currently engaged in an ongoing effort to cover/redact details that are embarrassing to the institutions; but the same Bill Barr Dept. of Justice is going to prosecute those who embarrassed the institutions?…
There’s something akin to a Stockholm Syndrome in the ability of people to rationalize away two mutually exclusive facets of DOJ behavior. And no, the redactions have nothing to do with U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation. Look at them again if needed.
In the fulsome picture, U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr is trying to navigate.
…The challenge for Attorney General Bill Barr is not investigating what we don’t know, but rather navigating through what ‘We The People’ are already aware of… And finding a way to tamp down the inquisition…
[@4:10 of Video] INGRAHAM – What can you tell us about the state of John Durham’s investigation? People have been waiting for the, the final report, on what happened with this, what can you tell us?
BARR – “Well I think a report y’know, may be, and probably will be, a by-product of his activity; but his primary focus isn’t to prepare a report, he is looking to bring to justice people who were engaged in abuses if he can show that there were criminal violations; and that’s what the focus is on. And, uh, as you know, being a lawyer yourself, building these cases, especially the sprawling case we have between us that went on for two or three years here, uh…, it takes some time, it takes some time to build the case. So he’s diligently pursuing it.”
“My own view is that, uh, the evidence shows that we’re not dealing with just mistakes or sloppiness, there was something far more troubling here; and we’re going to get to the bottom of it. And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”
INGRAHAM – “The president is very frustrated, I think you, you obviously know that; about Andrew McCabe, uh, he believes that people like McCabe and others just were able to basically flout the laws, and so far with impunity.”
BARR – “I think the president has every right to be frustrated, because I think what happened to him was one of the greatest travesties in American history. Without any basis uh, they, uh, they started this investigation of his campaign; and even more concerning actually, is what happened after the campaign; a whole pattern of events while he was President. uh, So I, to sabotage the presidency; and I think that, uh, or at least had the effect of sabotaging the presidency.”
INGRAHAM – “Will FISA abuses be prevented going forward given what happened here where FISA judges were not given critical pieces of information; material facts about evidence that informed the governments’ okaying of surveillance on American citizens.”
BARR – “You know I think it’s possible to put in a regime that will make it very hard, either to willfully circumvent FISA, or to do so sloppily without due regard for the rights of the American person involved. And also to make it very clear that any misconduct will be discovered and discovered fairly promptly.”
“So I do think we can put in safeguards that will enable us to go forward with this important tool.. uh.. I think it’s very sad, uh, and the people who abused FISA, have a lot to answer for. Because this was an important tool to protect the American people, they abused it, they undercut public confidence in FISA but also the FBI as an institution: and we have to rebuild that.”
