State Department Red Flag on Steele Dossier, Exposing It As Politically Motivated and Highly Inaccurate, Was Sent to Senior FBI Leader -- BEFORE the First FISA Application

So, they took a document they knew was not reliable and used it to get a FISA warrant on Carter Page (and really on Trump) anyway.

And -- lied to the court about its reliability!

John Solomon:

In all Washington investigations, the essential questions become who knew it and when did they know it.

In the case of FBI informant Christopher Steele and the credibility of his now-disproven Russia collusion allegations against Donald Trump, we have some important clarity: Government officials confirm that an October 2016 email revealing that Steele met with State Department officials -- a breach of protocol for an informant if it was unauthorized -- was sent to an FBI counterintelligence supervisor.

Multiple sources confirm to me that the recipient of the State Department email was Special Agent Stephen Laycock, then the FBI's section chief for Eurasian counterintelligence and now one of the bureau's top executives as the assistant director for intelligence under Director Christopher Wray.

The email to Laycock from Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec arrived eight days before the FBI swore to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that it had no derogatory information on Steele and used his anti-Trump dossier to secure a secret surveillance warrant to investigate Trump’s possible ties to Moscow.

Officials tell me that Laycock immediately forwarded the information he received about Steele on Oct. 13, 2016, to the FBI team leading the Trump-Russia investigation, headed by then-fellow Special Agent Peter Strzok.

They swore, under penalty of perjury, that they had no derogatory information to undermine the reliability of the Steele dossier -- and they did have derogatory information in hand.

But they swore a falsehood to the court anyway.

And Wray is doing his darnedest to protect them, huh?

Trey Gowdy offers a simple place to start the investigation:

Former Congressman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) Monday night had some interesting advice for the federal prosecutor who was just appointed by Attorney General William Barr to look into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation. Gowdy told Fox News host Sean Hannity that there is "an easy road map to follow" and suggested that investigators start by looking for certain "emails between [former CIA director] Brennan and [former FBI director] Comey in December of 2016."

AG Barr has assigned John H. Durham, a U.S. attorney in Connecticut, to examine potential wrongdoing by the intelligence agencies during the 2016 election, the New York Times reported Monday evening.

Durham, it turns out, "has a history of serving as a special prosecutor investigating potential wrongdoing among national security officials," according to the Times.

Trey Gowdy added, in a fresh appearance on Fox:

"What I'm telling Mr. Durham or whoever is going to look into this is, I think you'll see late in 2016, well after it had been used, it was still unverified and the people responsible for it were referring to it as unverified and one or the other demanded that it be included in the intelligence assessment which then prompted the discussion you and I are having now," Gowdy said.

Rand Paul had previously asserted that Brennan was responsible for jamming this RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION into a warrant application, but Breenan denied that -- claiming it was Comey and the FBI who insisted on including it.

Hit the link for details on that. I say put 'em both under oath, and then convict each of them with the other's testimony.

Maybe this information is dribbling out because John Durham, the man tasked to investigate the legality of the FISA warrants and spying operation, has actually been investigating this for months.

John Durham, the prosecutor tapped by Attorney General William Barr to investigate how Trump-Russia allegations emerged and spread within federal law enforcement, has already been looking into whether the FBI’s former top lawyer, James Baker, illegally leaked to reporters.

In fact, the U.S. attorney from Connecticut appears to have begun that work more than seven months ago, to judge from an underreported transcript of an October congressional interview with Baker. The Baker interview, at which Durham was not present, suggests that the prosecutor nevertheless has some people very worried.

Why worry? The Guild protects its own. Only mere citizens have to obey the law. Those appointed to enforce the law can violate it any time they damn well please with complete immunity and impunity.

I'll tell you what, if I'm ever on a jury and being asked to convict someone for perjury or obstruction in a federal case -- lol get fucked. If the law doesn't apply to the Lawmen, it also does not apply to the citizens they inflict it on.

If the federal government wants to ever convict someone again on these sorts of charges, they'd better prove, quickly, that the law applies to the DOJ, CIA, and FBI as well as to the plebes and commoners.

State Department Red Flag on Steele Dossier, Exposing It As Politically Motivated and Highly Inaccurate, Was Sent to Senior FBI Leader -- BEFORE the First FISA Application&bodytext=So, they took a document they knew was not reliable and used it to get a FISA warrant on Carter Page (and really on Trump) anyway. And -- lied to the court about its reliability! John Solomon: In all Washington...&topic=world_news"> posted by Ace of Spades at 12:02 PM

| Access Comments