Why have no *FBI* whistleblowers come forward to reveal the plot?
Over at Conservative Treehouse, a fellow who goes by "Sundance" has posted a long article analyzing the FBI's corrupt efforts to both prevent Trump's election, or failing that, to sabotage his presidency. An edited version is below, but I encourage everyone to read the whole thing.
To understand why no FBI agent has come forward to reveal the depth of the corruption you need to realize how thoroughly the top echelons were and are corrupt. And that the first rule of the FBI is to protect itself--which means never admitting wrongdoing.
Next: As you read what follows, keep in mind that Rule One for corrupt officials is: they never appoint as a deputy--or promote within their agency--someone who isn't also corrupt. The reason is obvious: A corrupt official would never want to put an honest person in a position to possibly stumble onto evidence of the corruption.
Keep Rule One in mind as you read the long history below.
Rod Rosenstein was a Deputy Attorney-General at the laughably-misnamed "Department of Justice." In May of 2017 Rosenstein appointed former FBI director Robert Mueller to the post of Special Counsel, ostensibly looking for collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Recall Rule One?
Rosenstein also facilitated the McCabe operation against Trump during the May 16th, 2017, White House FBI sting against Trump.
Rosenstein also wrote and signed three "scope memos" that allowed the corrupt investigation of President Trump to be expanded. AG Bill Barr hasn't allowed these "authorizing memos" to be seen by the public.
Another indicator of Rosenstein's corrupt intent is that despite knowing the Trump investigation held a false predicate, Rosenstein signed the 3rd renewal of a fraudulent FISA application.
Rosenstein was also the person who recommended that president Trump appoint Christopher Wray as director of the FBI after the president fired the corrupt James Comey.
Rule One again.
Trump then allowed Wray to select his own top deputy. Wray chose David Bowditch. Rule One again.
FBI Director Wray selected the former head of DOJ-NSD to become the lead lawyer for the FBI, chief legal counsel Dana Boente. Rule One...yet again.
So from Rosenstein we got: Chris Wray, David Bowditch, Dana Boente and another dubious DOJ recommendation, DC U.S. Attorney Jessie K Liu (ref. Awan Bros and James Wolfe). Keep this in mind moving forward.
Michael Atkinson is another career corruptocrat to come out of the DOJ-NSD who was also involved in the fraudulent legal filings. Atkinson was the lead lawyer for the division, so should have had the intelligence to spot the illegalities in the FISA apps.
Atkinson would later become the "Inspector-General for the Intelligence Community. Convenient, eh? I haven't been able to find who appointed him.
From this powerful position Atkinson was able to change the rules regarding "whistleblowers" to allow "hearsay." Before that the rules required whistleblowers to have actual first-hand knowledge of corrupt actions. This was a problem for the anti-Trump plotters because their only source for tales of improper acts in Ukraine--CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella--didn't have first-hand knowledge, just hearsay.
Solution? Change the rules.
What we ended up with was a large network of corrupt officials; each determined to coverup illegal acts by their agencies.
If you're skeptical about all of the above, I don't blame you: After all, no one in the intel community has been charged with illegal acts, very few have been fired, none of the lawbreakers has lost their fat gruberment pension or gone to jail. But there are some matters of undisputed public record that show how far-reaching the corruption is: Consider a thing called the "Senate Select Committee on Intelligence" (SSCI).
The SSCI is arguably the most powerful government body "overseeing" the intel community. It has "oversight" (i.e. power) over every agency in the U.S. intel community--including the FBI, CIA, DOJ and ODNI. It's chaired by Richard Burr, with Democrat Mark Warner as vice-chair.
In 2017 the New York Times published secret information that seemed as if it could only have come from a member or staffer with the SSCI. This was considered very damn serious, and investigators eventually found the leaker: The committee's head of security for 30 years, who was married but trading top secrets for sex with a 25-year-old reporter--who published them and later was hired by the NY Times.
The critical secret leaked by Security Director Wolfe was that investigators had applied for a "FISA warrant" to allow them to wiretap Trump advisors. Presumably revealing that information would show Americans that Trump's advisors were guilty of...something, probably colluding with Russia, which was the idea being pushed by Democrat leadership, Mueller's team and the Mainstream Media.
Skeptics suggested that because it was easy to find the leaker, it was highly unlikely that Wolfe would have leaked the FISA information to Watkins unless he was acting on instructions from one of the senators on the SSCI.
Interestingly--significantly--the DOJ and FBI didn’t charge Wolfe with the serious crime of leaking highly-classified information. Instead he was only charged with one count of lying to the FBI, to which he admitted guilt.
Court documents show that Wolfe was prepared to call the senators on the committee in his defense. IF Wolfe leaked the information to the reporter on instructions, the senators would not have allowed him to be charged with a serious crime lest it expose corruption within the SSCI.
==
The following story--from CBS on December 18th, 2018--shows how the corrupt network gives a tongue-bath to those it wants to protect, while someone not an ally of the network charged with the exact same crime--lying to the FBI--gets a sentence of a dozen years or more:
Journalists call this "burying the lede:" Wolfe had been trading the intel community's top secrets to reporter Ali Watkins for sex.
This is absurd and brazen. Contrast this absurd leniency with the sentences imposed on Trump advisors and campaign workers for exactly the same crime of lying to the FBI.
How does this level of institutional corruption discourage FBI agents from becoming whistle-blowers? Well, consider that all presidential nominations to executive positions in ANY intel agency must be approved by the SSCI. And if the SSCI wants to keep an honest person from getting an executive position, they simply, they don’t take it up. (See Trump’s attempt to appoint Representative John Ratcliffe as ODNI as an example.)
By contrast, the SSCI quickly approved former DOJ-NSD legal counsel Michael Atkinson to become Intelligence Community Inspector General. An honest intelligence whistle-blower would presumably have to go through Atkinson to have whistleblower protection. Going to reporters wouldn't win that.
Sundance claims the following people are "dirty" (which I translate as corrupt):
If we had an honest media none of these corrupt officials could survive media scrutiny. Unfortunately the corrupt administrative state absorbs the press…it makes the press part of the corrupt process. The press can't expose the corrupt administrative state without exposing their own culpability, participation and lack of credibility…which they'll never do.
==
“All of that is why we haven't seen any honest FBI whistle-blowers come forward: There’s no one for them to blow the whistle to…”
The author means no honest FBI agent, knowing how corrupt the Director and henchment were and are, would 'blow the whistle' to any exec in the FBI or DOJ.
But why has no honest FBI agent 'blown the whistle' to Nunes, Durham, Sharyl Attkisson, Mollie Hemmingway, Sara Carter, Gregg Jarrett, John Solomon or others outside the FBI?
One of two reasons seems plausible: Either every FBI agent knows the rewards for protecting the corruption are too juicy to give up; or...that they all know what happens to agents who rat out the top brass. And going to reporters wouldn't give them statutory whistleblower protections.
As the Inspector-General's report admitted, various FBI employees committed at least 17 egregious violations of law or FBI or FISA procedures--all with the goal of sabotaging Trump. It should be obvious to rank-and-file agents that if no one in the agency testifies to the plot, the FBI will no longer have any credibility.
They swore an oath to defend the Constitution. They betrayed that oath. And it looks as though not one of them cares.
To understand why no FBI agent has come forward to reveal the depth of the corruption you need to realize how thoroughly the top echelons were and are corrupt. And that the first rule of the FBI is to protect itself--which means never admitting wrongdoing.
Next: As you read what follows, keep in mind that Rule One for corrupt officials is: they never appoint as a deputy--or promote within their agency--someone who isn't also corrupt. The reason is obvious: A corrupt official would never want to put an honest person in a position to possibly stumble onto evidence of the corruption.
Keep Rule One in mind as you read the long history below.
Rod Rosenstein was a Deputy Attorney-General at the laughably-misnamed "Department of Justice." In May of 2017 Rosenstein appointed former FBI director Robert Mueller to the post of Special Counsel, ostensibly looking for collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Recall Rule One?
Rosenstein also facilitated the McCabe operation against Trump during the May 16th, 2017, White House FBI sting against Trump.
Rosenstein also wrote and signed three "scope memos" that allowed the corrupt investigation of President Trump to be expanded. AG Bill Barr hasn't allowed these "authorizing memos" to be seen by the public.
Another indicator of Rosenstein's corrupt intent is that despite knowing the Trump investigation held a false predicate, Rosenstein signed the 3rd renewal of a fraudulent FISA application.
Rosenstein was also the person who recommended that president Trump appoint Christopher Wray as director of the FBI after the president fired the corrupt James Comey.
Rule One again.
Trump then allowed Wray to select his own top deputy. Wray chose David Bowditch. Rule One again.
FBI Director Wray selected the former head of DOJ-NSD to become the lead lawyer for the FBI, chief legal counsel Dana Boente. Rule One...yet again.
So from Rosenstein we got: Chris Wray, David Bowditch, Dana Boente and another dubious DOJ recommendation, DC U.S. Attorney Jessie K Liu (ref. Awan Bros and James Wolfe). Keep this in mind moving forward.
Michael Atkinson is another career corruptocrat to come out of the DOJ-NSD who was also involved in the fraudulent legal filings. Atkinson was the lead lawyer for the division, so should have had the intelligence to spot the illegalities in the FISA apps.
Atkinson would later become the "Inspector-General for the Intelligence Community. Convenient, eh? I haven't been able to find who appointed him.
From this powerful position Atkinson was able to change the rules regarding "whistleblowers" to allow "hearsay." Before that the rules required whistleblowers to have actual first-hand knowledge of corrupt actions. This was a problem for the anti-Trump plotters because their only source for tales of improper acts in Ukraine--CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella--didn't have first-hand knowledge, just hearsay.
Solution? Change the rules.
What we ended up with was a large network of corrupt officials; each determined to coverup illegal acts by their agencies.
If you're skeptical about all of the above, I don't blame you: After all, no one in the intel community has been charged with illegal acts, very few have been fired, none of the lawbreakers has lost their fat gruberment pension or gone to jail. But there are some matters of undisputed public record that show how far-reaching the corruption is: Consider a thing called the "Senate Select Committee on Intelligence" (SSCI).
The SSCI is arguably the most powerful government body "overseeing" the intel community. It has "oversight" (i.e. power) over every agency in the U.S. intel community--including the FBI, CIA, DOJ and ODNI. It's chaired by Richard Burr, with Democrat Mark Warner as vice-chair.
In 2017 the New York Times published secret information that seemed as if it could only have come from a member or staffer with the SSCI. This was considered very damn serious, and investigators eventually found the leaker: The committee's head of security for 30 years, who was married but trading top secrets for sex with a 25-year-old reporter--who published them and later was hired by the NY Times.
The critical secret leaked by Security Director Wolfe was that investigators had applied for a "FISA warrant" to allow them to wiretap Trump advisors. Presumably revealing that information would show Americans that Trump's advisors were guilty of...something, probably colluding with Russia, which was the idea being pushed by Democrat leadership, Mueller's team and the Mainstream Media.
 |
| James Wolfe: security director for senate intel comittee |
Interestingly--significantly--the DOJ and FBI didn’t charge Wolfe with the serious crime of leaking highly-classified information. Instead he was only charged with one count of lying to the FBI, to which he admitted guilt.
Court documents show that Wolfe was prepared to call the senators on the committee in his defense. IF Wolfe leaked the information to the reporter on instructions, the senators would not have allowed him to be charged with a serious crime lest it expose corruption within the SSCI.
==
The following story--from CBS on December 18th, 2018--shows how the corrupt network gives a tongue-bath to those it wants to protect, while someone not an ally of the network charged with the exact same crime--lying to the FBI--gets a sentence of a dozen years or more:
James Wolfe, the former director of security for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), was sentenced Thursday to two months in prison for lying to the FBI about his dealings with a reporter. Wolfe pleaded guilty in October to one federal count of making false statements.
In addition to prison time, Wolfe must complete four months of supervised release, pay a $7,500 fine and perform 20 hours of community service a month during his release period. He will be allowed to "self-surrender" and has request[ed] a minimum security facility in Cumberland, Maryland.
U.S. District Judge Ketanji B. Jackson said in court she understood the human nature aspect of why Wolfe lied: "I can certainly imagine how scary it must've been," Judge Jackson said. "In that moment you had been caught. The jig was up."
In December 2017 Wolfe misled FBI agents who were investigating leaks to the media about the SSCI. Despite being warned by agents that lying to federal agents was a crime, Wolfe denied having contact with various reporters, including one later identified by The New York Times as reporter Ali Watkins. Watkins dated Wolfe before joining the paper to cover the intelligence community.
 |
| judge Ketanji B. Jackson--an Obama appointee--sentenced Wolfe to TWO MONTHS |
Jackson said she took Wolfe's high position as a government official into account when determining his sentence...Oh, you bet. Bullshit. Clearly the system wanted a light sentence for Wolfe as an incentive to prevent him from revealing something it didn't want revealed. But what? Oh, maybe this is a clue:
Wolfe was the SSCI's top security official for three decades. ... in this position he was entrusted with "receiving, maintaining, and managing all classified national security information...[that every security agency in the nation sent to the SSCI]
Bipartisan members of the SSCI had written to the judge requesting leniency for Wolfe, saying "we do not believe there is any public utility in depriving him of his freedom."
Wolfe and his lawyers asked the judge for leniency and to a sentence of probation and community service so he could give back to his country.
Before imposing the two-month sentence judge Jackson told those in court that the case is "not really about leaking — it's about lying," and that that "maintaining relationships with reporters is not a crime."Ah...so according to this "judge" the case isn't REALLY about leaking, because...the Obama-appointed system defender Jackson says so. And then absurdly summarizes the case as "maintaining relationships with reporters is not a crime."
This is absurd and brazen. Contrast this absurd leniency with the sentences imposed on Trump advisors and campaign workers for exactly the same crime of lying to the FBI.
How does this level of institutional corruption discourage FBI agents from becoming whistle-blowers? Well, consider that all presidential nominations to executive positions in ANY intel agency must be approved by the SSCI. And if the SSCI wants to keep an honest person from getting an executive position, they simply, they don’t take it up. (See Trump’s attempt to appoint Representative John Ratcliffe as ODNI as an example.)
By contrast, the SSCI quickly approved former DOJ-NSD legal counsel Michael Atkinson to become Intelligence Community Inspector General. An honest intelligence whistle-blower would presumably have to go through Atkinson to have whistleblower protection. Going to reporters wouldn't win that.
Sundance claims the following people are "dirty" (which I translate as corrupt):
- Senator Mark Warner
- Senator Richard Burr
- ICIG Atkinson
- FBI Director Chris Wray
- FBI Deputy Director David Bowditch
- FBI Legal Counsel Dana Boente
- Former FBI director Robert Mueller
- Rod Rosenstein
- All of the members of Mueller's staff including Andrew Weissmann and Brandon Van Grack
- FBI Agent David Archey (Mueller's lead FBI agent), who was later promoted to head the Virginia field office
- FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok
- FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith
- FBI lawyer Lisa Page
- Former FBI director James Comey
- Andrew McCabe
- James Baker
- Supervisory Special Agent Joseph Pientka--clearly outlined as dirty by IG Horowitz report on FISA abuse, and yet he's still employed; still providing cover.
If we had an honest media none of these corrupt officials could survive media scrutiny. Unfortunately the corrupt administrative state absorbs the press…it makes the press part of the corrupt process. The press can't expose the corrupt administrative state without exposing their own culpability, participation and lack of credibility…which they'll never do.
==
“All of that is why we haven't seen any honest FBI whistle-blowers come forward: There’s no one for them to blow the whistle to…”
The author means no honest FBI agent, knowing how corrupt the Director and henchment were and are, would 'blow the whistle' to any exec in the FBI or DOJ.
But why has no honest FBI agent 'blown the whistle' to Nunes, Durham, Sharyl Attkisson, Mollie Hemmingway, Sara Carter, Gregg Jarrett, John Solomon or others outside the FBI?
One of two reasons seems plausible: Either every FBI agent knows the rewards for protecting the corruption are too juicy to give up; or...that they all know what happens to agents who rat out the top brass. And going to reporters wouldn't give them statutory whistleblower protections.
As the Inspector-General's report admitted, various FBI employees committed at least 17 egregious violations of law or FBI or FISA procedures--all with the goal of sabotaging Trump. It should be obvious to rank-and-file agents that if no one in the agency testifies to the plot, the FBI will no longer have any credibility.
They swore an oath to defend the Constitution. They betrayed that oath. And it looks as though not one of them cares.
posted by SF at
1:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home