[dropcap]H[/dropcap]ere’s an updated chart that identifies some of the people you’re hearing about in the various Congressional, Inspector General, FBI probes.
[hr] Read “The Smear” at your local library or purchase anywhere today.[hr]
[dropcap]H[/dropcap]ere’s an updated chart that identifies some of the people you’re hearing about in the various Congressional, Inspector General, FBI probes.
[hr] Read “The Smear” at your local library or purchase anywhere today.[hr]
Sheryl, Normally I think you do a good job on your reports – HOWEVER, you have been leaning a little to right instead of both sides.
For instance, the report on the memo. It has received major critic from not only government representative – but it also shows that what started the investigation was Carter Page, from his ties to Russia as far back as 2013. You failed to bring that point up. You also “endorsed” Trumps “fake news” headlines by making it appear the FBI is corrupt.
Shame on you – if you truly are a reporter and wanting to show the truth – show both sides and don’t act like you’re working for Fox News – who only works to inflate Trumps ego and is working on destroying freedom of the press – by being poised far right. I also noticed you did not bring up the plea deals, the current charges to Trumps campaign managers, etc.
I apologize if I sound abrupt – but only the truth should be reported – and the only way to get to the truth is to tell both sides. I am America Veteran, and would normally follow whatever President is in charge – regardless of my political thoughts. However, in this case – I fear the man in charge – he wants to make America an Autocratic Society – he wants to have a military parade in Washington, just like Russia, China & North Korea. He is irrational, volatile, etc.
Thank you for your time, Larry
It is interesting to look at that chart. I wonder if one could measure or estimate the amount of information that has flowed over time between each person. Strzok and Page have all those text messages, but I would be interested in the others too: lots of complex interactions. Also, it would be interesting to correlate individuals on your chart to newspaper articles etc. with anonymous source information. Comey admitted a big leak, Strzok and Page look like they pushed out a lot of leaks, but who else did so? The person I wonder about most is Priestap, who is a source (corroborational infancy) in the HPSCI memo. Is he really quiet in all these leaks or something else. Also: where is Carlin in your diagram? Why did he resign so early?
Thanks for a nifty diagram and all your writing!
TYPO/ERROR ALERT: On your updated chart of players, the description of Mueller (#6), says that he worked for Comey during the Bush Administration. Wasn’t it the other way around? Didn’t Comey work for Mueller?
Thanks and keep up the good and much-needed work!
Your updated chart is a handy way to keep readers informed about what appears to many as a very convoluted story. Another useful contribution would be more reporting on the uses the warrants were put to. For example, you note that Sally Yates “unmasked and reviewed surveillance on Trump associates.” This ought to open a new phase of investigation. Till now the focus has been on the warrant scandal in the FISA court. That’s just the beginning. The FBI was playing fast and loose with the warrant applications. But that was only the first chapter of this unfolding Deep State conspiracy. The real scandal will only come into focus when we learn who used the information and what were their purposes. Today (2/7/18) we see a text message that Page wrote to Strzok on Sept. 2, 2016 saying “potus wants to know everything we’re doing.” This looks to be clear indication of what went up the tree.
Getting the memo out was progress. As I just suggested, the next stage is even more crucial. What we have in the Nunes memo is like a video of a nighttime break-in at a jewelry store. We know that the scoundrels got in. Now what did they steal? The warrants allowed them to surveil Page. Where did they go from there? They kept renewing their subscription to listen in on their target and to tap into everyone else he communicated with. What did they gather? What did they do with that information? Did they move on to other targets and to their individual contacts? How many layers might there have been? Were there other warrants? Did they really need any other warrants to eavesdrop on every other Trumpian contact? Does this go to the “unmasking” of many individuals associated with the Trump campaign? Did they all get identified and surveilled? Is there a chain of “un-maskers” that leads through Rice and Powers right up to the top? Does anyone really want to know?
Watergate was a “one off” break-in. It targeted an office with a finite information opportunity. This looks instead to be an ongoing operation. It may have started out of convenience with Page but he was just their gateway. Someone in the FBI remembered that a warrant on Page had been issued in 2013/14. He was already designated as an agent of a foreign government. It was easier to get another warrant on him than to start out fresh with another person. Then he turns up as an advisor to the Trump campaign at just the time that McCabe/Strozk et al wanted to peek inside Trumpdom. How fortuitous! An enrollee in the inner circle. They didn’t care about Page. They cared about his contacts. It could have been any one of a number of candidates. It may even have started out to be Papadapoulus based on a ginned up tip from an Aussie spook. But this was better. It was more plausible. Four warrants later we see the workings of a new FBI “Hoover” operation sucking up conversations and electronic communication – even archived communication – from an Enemies List, continuously. All that was required was a subscription renewal every ninety days and even that seems to have been automated. This is way beyond what Nixon and the Plumbers ever contemplated. I hope Nunes and his committee follow every thread to a finding and that Sharyl keeps us all fully informed on where this scandal is leading.
How come it’s taken so long for any of this to get out? Talk about stonewalling! I would hope there was still a Mark Felt or two out there among the G-men who work for us. But none of them have stood up so far. Pension denial must be powerful intimidation. Lucky there’s a Nunes. And lucky there’s small number of journalists who keep assessing the information that’s available and pressing for more. I used to think that was what all the media did. Most of them are a big disappointment.
Random Questions: Wouldn’t any information gleaned from surveillance based on a mistakenly granted FISA warrant be tainted and useless to the Mueller investigation? Wouldn’t misrepresentation of evidence before a FISA court be a crime? I wonder what Mueller knew about the warrants when he signed on and when he was clued in. I can’t imagine Mueller not using the dossier and/or the information the warrants dredged up if it was all handed to him. And I also wonder what specific fruit he’s pulled off the poisoned tree. If he did harvest any, the folks who say that there is no connection between his investigation and the Nunes memo will have egg on their faces. Flynn and Manafort might do well to wonder about this likelihood too.
A Suggestion: There is great ignorance about how the FBI could have used the surveillance warrants. Little has been mentioned about this. But Sharyl could do us all a great service by elaborating further on the process and its mechanics. Let’s get to the un-masking and the uses the eavesdropping might have been put to, like support for numerous political campaigns beyond the presidential race and even for court pleadings. Let’s get to the legal jeopardy of all of those who sought and used the warrants for political purposes when they weren’t totally forthcoming with the dossier’s provenance.
Sharyl,
You are the Woodward and Bernstein of our time. You have persevered in the face of incredible opposition and pushback from those in power. The scariest thing for me is that, if Mrs. Clinton had been elected, we would not know about any of this wrongdoing.
God Bess,
Ron Kohl
The facts show there was no Russian collusion with Trump but there was with the Dems and Hillary. We know the DNC and Hillary’s campaign paid for the discredited Steele dossier which started the Russian collusion story. The FISA spying request was based on the discredited dossier. Isn’t this corruption and abuse of power? Is this happening in America or are we in Cuba, North Korea or Russia?
If Mueller is so “honest” and competent shouldn’t he be going where the facts take him. Is Mueller part of the solution or the abuse?
The FISA court accepted and approved the warrant against Carter Page. The Steele Dossier is clearly fabricated stories. What other documentation justified spying on an American citizen?
Why isn’t anyone looking at the Judge who is ruling on this case and accepting the extensions? Maybe the Judge is as biased as the FBI investigators.
This looks like Sheryl territory to me.
Nice work. Well done!
Is an MI-6 officer ever “ex” or absolutely retired? To what extent did MI-6 bless Steele’s dossier activities? It is quite possible that MI-6 was as opposed to a Republican winning the presidency as management at the FBI, DoJ, CIA, IRS, ATF, EPA, etc. were and are. I realize that they all perceived nominee Trump to be more dangerous to them than tamer Republicans would have been, and the UK is much further to the left in general than citizens of the United States. Therefore, it seems to me that for MI-6’s perceived self-interests Hillary had to win, and they would work with the DNC toward that goal on a basis of plausible deniability. Or put simply, the DNC might have a cadre of moles in MI-6. (And MI-6 has a history of discovering the occasional Russian mole.)
I have PROOF that Page was FBI Undercover agent during the russian spy story around 2012. If he was agent then, he was agent when INSERTED into Trump campaign to JUSTIFY FISA WARRANT. How can I send you attachments…court documents….
Sharyl:
I think your chart is missing a few people :).
Ever heard of Cody Shearer? In a 2015 article in the Weekly Standard Mr. Shearer was described as running “a new plumber operation” for the Clintons:
https://www.weeklystandard.com/meet-the-men-behind-hillary-clintons-private-spy-network/article/901675
The article says that he ran (runs??) a smear outfit called the Investigative Group International that Dick Morris called ”the White House secret police.”
His name has now appeared re: the Steele dossier which, as it turns out, should be called the Shearer dossier.
There is more to the DNC hack than meets the eye.
Try here and let me know what you think
https://gjordan741.angelfire.com/ElectionIndex.htm
Then there is the huge list of so-called journalists such as Maggie Haberman to be exposed.
So thorough. That is how I look at your reporting. Have you given any consideration that the Russians threw out lines to both campaigns? Looks like only the Democrats and Hillary Clinton took the bait but the overall outcome is that the pea brained anti-Trump camp, including Flake and McCain, are the ones doing Russia’s work. What Russia wanted was to undermine our government. They have succeeded. With the Democrats wanting Trump out sooooo bad, they won’t allow themselves to admit that they’ve been played. (At least, that is my take on this series of events.) I just can’t figure out why no one else has brought this up as a plausible scenario.