NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers has announced to his staff he is resigning. A nominee will be announced to replace him shortly. Rogers departure makes sense. His incredible accomplishments are complete; he will now be free to testify, unencumbered, to congress.
Intelligence information is housed by compartments within the larger intelligence community network. Each intelligence unit holds intelligence unique to that compartment and task.
The FBI Counterintelligence unit would hold the intelligence information specific to their task or assignment; the DOJ National Security Division would hold their own compartmented intelligence; again, specific to their task and objectives. So too would the DoD (Pentagon), State Dept., or CIA.
This compartmented structure is what led to the creation of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI. The 911 commission recommended the office to serve as a hub able to ensure intelligence sharing; that is – to ensure intelligence was not intentionally withheld from other compartments when needed.
In 2016 the ODNI for President Obama was James Clapper. The DNI is a political appointment, a cabinet member, of the President. If the executive branch, the President, wanted to weaponize intelligence as a political tool, he/she would have control over such weaponization as an outcome of their political appointees within the: FBI (Comey, McCabe), DOJ (Lynch/Yates), CIA (Brennan), DNI (Clapper), or DoD (Ash Carter). The efficient weaponization of intelligence stems from controlling the hub, James Clapper.
The civilian (representative) oversight into the compartmented intelligence falls to a very select group known as the Intelligence Gang of Eight.
Four Democrats and Four Republicans (four minority party and four majority party political leaders) for a total of eight. Four from the House and Four from the Senate. –Understand the Gang of Eight Here– The Gang-of-Eight can, if they choose, interact with the intelligence product they oversee with the same level of security clearance as the originating compartment being reviewed.
Only these eight members can interact with the intelligence product in this way. This ensures their ability to conduct oversight. The eight elected officials also hold oversight on all covert intelligence operations and are briefed on all presidential finding memos.
It becomes important to understand the difference between the House Intelligence Committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Gang of Eight.
Two members from the House Intelligence Committee (chair Nunes and minority Schiff), and two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee (chair Burr and vice-chair Warner) are participants. The other four are Speaker of the House (Ryan), minority leader of House (Pelosi), Leader of Senate (McConnell) and Minority leader of Senate (Schumer). The latter four are not part of any other intelligence committee.
?We begin: During March 20th 2017 congressional testimony, James Comey was asked why the FBI Director did not inform congressional oversight, senior leadership, about the counterintelligence operation that began in July 2016.
FBI Director Comey said he did not tell congressional oversight he was investigating presidential candidate Donald Trump because the Director of Counterintelligence suggested he not do so. *Very important detail.*
I cannot emphasize this enough. *VERY* important detail. Again, notice how James Comey doesn’t use FBI Counterintelligence Director WH “Bill” Priestap’s actual name, but refers to his position and title. Again, watch the first three minutes:
“Because of the sensitivity of the matter“? FBI Director James Comey was caught entirely off guard by that first three minutes of questioning. He simply didn’t anticipate it.
Oversight protocol requires the FBI Director to tell the congressional intelligence “Gang of Eight” of any counterintelligence operations. The Go8 has oversight into these ops at the highest level of classification. In July 2016, the time when the operation began, oversight was the responsibility of this group, the Gang of Eight:
Obviously, based on what we have learned since March 2017, and what has surfaced recently, we can see a motive why the FBI and DOJ would want to keep hidden that they were running a counterintelligence operation against a presidential candidate.
After all, as FBI Agent Peter Strzok said it in his text messages, establishing the Russian Conspiracy narrative was an “insurance policy”. REMINDER – FBI Agent Strzok to FBI Attorney Page:
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
FBI Director James Comey told congress on March 20th, 2017, the reason he didn’t inform the statutory oversight “Gang of Eight” of the counterintelligence operation was because Bill Priestap (Director of FBI Counterintelligence) recommended he didn’t do it.
James Comey throwing this guy under a bus:
W.H. “Bill” Priestap, FBI Director of Counterintelligence
?The originating intelligence agency agency, in these examples the DOJ National Security Division and/or FBI Counterintelligence Division, holds the proprietary intelligence they create in their intelligence compartment. They may also receive intelligence products created for them, which they will also host in their unique compartment. Access to this intelligence comes via a “SCIF” Secure Compartmented Information Facility. Thus, intelligence is compartmentalized.
In 2015 Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The Office of Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight over the DOJ National Security Division and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
?The White House -the executive branch- is also a host of intelligence information and consequently the White House has their own compartmented intelligence unit and SCIF which holds intelligence products they would create (very little), or intelligence products created for them (the vast majority).
An example of an intelligence product created for the executive branch would be the President’s Daily Briefing or PDB.
The PDB as a whole product would only exist in the White House compartment. Parts of the PDB would be hosted by the originating participant, ex. NSA, FBI, DOJ, DoD, CIA State Dept. etc., but only the White House would have the fully assembled product. After all, it’s assembled for the President.
Putting the “Oversight” structure together with the “Compartmented” intelligence security you will note that only a few people ‘could’ traditionally access the full PDB. However, under President Obama the President’s Daily Brief went to almost everyone at top levels in his administration. Regarding the Obama PDB:
[…] But while through most of its history the document has been marked “For the President’s Eyes Only,” the PDB has never gone to the president alone. The most restricted dissemination was in the early 1970s, when the book went only to President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who was dual-hatted as national security adviser and secretary of state.
In other administrations, the circle of readers has also included the vice president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with additional White House staffers.
By 2013, Obama’s PDB was making its way to more than 30 recipients, including the president’s top strategic communications aide and speechwriter, and deputy secretaries of national security departments. (link)
Pay attention to that last part. According to the Washington Post outline Obama’s PDB’s were going to more than 30 recipients including: Ben Rhodes and “Deputy Secretaries of national security departments”.
During an MSNBC interview about her unmasking U.S. citizens within 2016 intelligence reports, in April 2017, President Obama’s National Security Adviser, Susan Rice, defined the Obama national security departments to include: “State” – “Defense” (Pentagon includes NSA) and “CIA”. Other national security departments include FBI (counterintelligence) and DOJ (National Security Division).
So under President Obama’s watch Deputy Asst. Secretaries of Defense had daily access to the PDB. An example of an Obama Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense, Evelyn Farkas.
With dozens of people having access to President Obama’s PDB, Rice’s unmasking of names within the intelligence product gave dozens of people direct access to unmasked intelligence – including Obama officials who could, likely did, use the PDB for specific and intentional political purposes. This political outcome was essentially confirmed by Evelyn Farkas who was one of the downstream recipients of unmasked intelligence.
I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.
Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.
So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to the Hill.” … “That’s why we had the leaking”. (link)
(New York Times Link)
? If the House Intelligence Committee, or Senate Intelligence Committee, as a whole – wanted to see the President’s Daily Briefing, they would have to request the individual components from the individual intelligence agencies because the PDB product was not created for them; it was created for the Office of The President.
Only the Chairman and Minority leader from each Intel committee could go to the White House to see the PDB end product. [Remember, they alone are four of the Gang-of-Eight.]
This is why Devin Nunes, who is a Go8 member, has to request the intelligence from each department (NSA, DOJ, FBI etc.) in order to share it with the oversight committee. Nunes can review the ‘executive SCIF product’ but cannot export or import intelligence product he did not create.
The Congressional SCIF would then hold the compartmented information after delivery for the committee members to review under very tight controls. The intelligence is removed/deleted after review. No systems are connected.
Our research indicates that in February and March 2017 Chairman Devin Nunes, a gang of eight member, reviewed intelligence reports (most likely PDB’s) that were assembled exclusively for the office of the former President (Obama). That is why he went to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB) Information Facility to review.
The intelligence product would be delivered to that SCIF system for his review, most likely by the ODNI (Dan Coats) or NSA (Mike Rogers). It would be removed from that SCIF system after Nunes review, (no systems are connected). It is important to note here that President Trump nominated Senator Dan Coats as ODNI on January 5th, 2017 – however, Democrats held up that nomination until March 16th, 2017.
It is not coincidental that immediately following DNI Dan Coat’s ability to provide that information, Chairman Devin Nunes first reported his concerns.
After Devin Nunes review the information March 22nd 2017, Nunes stated the intelligence product he reviewed was: “not related to Russia, or the FBI Russian counter-intelligence investigation”.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, then held a brief press conference and stated he has been provided intelligence reports brought to him by unnamed sources that include ‘significant information’ about President-Elect Trump and his transition team.
1.) …”On numerous occasions the [Obama] intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition.”
2.) “Details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration; details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting.”
3.) “Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition members were unmasked.”
4.) “Fourth and finally, I want to be clear; none of this surveillance was related to Russia, or the investigation of Russian activities.
“The House Intelligence Committee will thoroughly investigate surveillance and its subsequent dissemination, to determine a few things here that I want to read off:”
•“Who was aware of it?”
•“Why it was not disclosed to congress?”
•“Who requested and authorized the additional unmasking?”
•“Whether anyone directed the intelligence community to focus on Trump associates?”
•“And whether any laws, regulations or procedures were violated?”
“I have asked the Directors of the FBI, NSA and CIA to expeditiously comply with my March 15th (2017) letter -that you all received a couple of weeks ago- and to provide a full account of these surveillance activities.”
Again, this is why the intelligence reports seem likely to have been political opposition research -that was part of Obama’s PDB– unless it was a separate intelligence product, apart from the PDB, which was created for the Office of the President. [I view the latter as highly doubtful because it would be too risky for the President to be asking for specific ‘stand alone’ intelligence against political adversaries, ie candidate Donald Trump.]
…Here’s where all the dots connect:
?Fast forward to 2018 – Aside from the larger Russian conspiracy narrative, up to now the controversial media story has been around the origin of the 2016 FISA warrant(s).
As previously stated by all reporting there was a June 2016 FISA application that was denied, and an October 2016 application that was approved. The current line of congressional inquiry surrounds the underlying content of the requested FISA warrant, and whether it was built upon fraud and manipulated content (the ‘Steele Dossier’) presented to the FISA Court (FISC).
Recently the media have been working frantically, against an entire year of prior support for the Steele Dossier, to distance the origin of the FBI counterintelligence operation from the dossier. The probable motive reveals the bigger underlying story.
When Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes explained his concern in March 2017 -about what he saw from a review of 2016 intelligence gathering, reporting and subsequent unmasking- the issue behind his concern was clouded in mystery. Indeed the larger headlines at the time were about demanding a special prosecutor and driving the Russia conspiracy narrative.
In hindsight, and with information from our assembled timelines of 2016 though today, we can now revisit that March 2017 concern expressed by Chairman Nunes with a great deal more perspective and information. Understanding the latest information will help us all understand the totality of Nunes original frame of reference.
Admiral Mike Rogers became NSA director in April 2014.
Sometime in early 2016 Admiral Rogers became aware of “ongoing” and “intentional” violations of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), Section 702(17) surveillance. Specifically item #17 which includes the unauthorized upstream data collection of U.S. individuals within NSA surveillance through the use of “About Query”.
Section 702 – Item #17 “About Queries” are specifically the collection of electronic messaging, emails and upstream phone call surveillance data of U.S. persons.
The public doesn’t discover this issue, and Director Rogers action, until May 2017 when we learn that Rogers told the FISA court he became aware of unlawful surveillance and collection of U.S. persons.
Put into context, with the full back-story, it appears that 2016 surveillance was the political surveillance now in the headlines; the stuff Chairman Nunes is currently questioning. The dates here are important as they tell a story.
As a result of Rogers suspecting FISA 702(17) surveillance activity was being used for reasons he deemed unlawful, in mid 2016 Rogers ordered the NSA compliance officer to run a full audit on 702 NSA compliance.
Again, 702 is basically spying on Americans; the actual “spying” part is 702. Item 17 is “About Queries“, which allows user queries or searches of content (messaging, email and phone conversations) based on any subject matter put into the search field.
The NSA compliance officer identified several strange 702 “About Queries” were being conducted. These were violations of the fourth amendment (search and seizure), ie searches, privacy violations, and surveillance without a warrant. Admiral Rogers was briefed by the compliance officer on October 20th, 2016.
Admiral Mike Rogers ordered the “About Query” activity to stop, reported the activity to the DOJ, and then went to the FISA court.
On October 26th, 2016, full FISA court assembled, NSA Director Rogers personally informed the court of the 702(17) violations. Additionally, and as an outcome of the NSA systems inability to guarantee integrity, Rogers also stopped “About Query” permanently.
[Things to note: ?Note the sequencing; ?note that Rogers a career military person, followed the chain of command; ?note the dates as they align with the Trump FISA application from the FBI and DOJ-NSD, (ie. early October 2016); ?and note amid this sequence/time-line the head of DOJ-National Security Divsion, John P Carlin resigns.]
IMPORTANT – WATCH The first two and a half minutes of this video:
Here’s the part where we find criminal intent and malice aforethought.
By looking at the way the FISA court was notified, it becomes apparent the DOJ National Security Division set Admiral Mike Rogers up to take the fall for their unlawful conduct.
Asst. Attorney General in charge of the DOJ National Security Division, John P Carlin, preempted Rogers by filing a notification with the FISA Court on 26th September 2016(look at the pdf). DOJ-NSD head John Carlin was setting up Rogers as the scapegoat while knowing the NSA FISA compliance officer was still reviewing their conduct.
According to what we know of the FISA warrant, right around the time the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for the FISA Application, the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. It would have specifically been John Carlin’s responsibility to ensure a valid legal basis for the FISA application submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
The timing is way too suspicious. DOJ-NSD Director Carlin wouldn’t notify the court of a FISA compliance issue, while a compliance review was ongoing, unless he was trying to cover something. Conspicuously John Carlin never informed Admiral Rogers, but rather announced his resignation. The NSA compliance officer did not brief Admiral Rogers until 20th Oct 2016. Admiral Rogers notified the FISC on 26th Oct 2016.
October 2016 is a very important month:
?DOJ Deputy Attorney Bruce Ohr was “demoted” in the summer of 2017 after the Inspector General discovered unreported 2016 contacts between Ohr and Russian Dossier author Christopher Steele, as well as contact with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, that happened in October 2016.
?Also in October 2016 the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for the Trump FISA application; the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. It would have specifically been John Carlin’s responsibility to ensure a valid legal basis for the FISA application submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).
?In October 2016 the NSA compliance officer completes a review and briefs Rogers of FISA(17) violations, email collection and phone surveillance. Rogers informs FISC – [FISA Court Ruling Link]
Now Look At This – October 2016: On Friday November 18th, 2016, The Washington Post reported on a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position:
The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed.
The recommendation, delivered to the White House last month, was made by Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., according to several U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
[…] In a move apparently unprecedented for a military officer, Rogers, without notifying superiors, traveled to New York to meet with Trump on Thursday at Trump Tower. That caused consternation at senior levels of the administration, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel matters. (link)
Important reminder. Remember, in 2015 Sally Yates blocked any inspector general oversight of the DOJ National Security Division (SEE Pdf HERE). The OIG, Michael Horowitz, requested oversight and it was Sally Yates who responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ (PDF HERE) All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except the NSD.
There’s a pretty clear picture here.
Obama’s political operatives within the DOJ-NSD were using FISA 702(17) surveillance “about inquiries” that would deliver electronic mail and phone communication for U.S. people (Trump campaign). The NSD unit (John Carlin) was working in coordination with the FBI Counterintelligence Unit (Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok etc.). DOJ Attorney Lisa Page was the intermediary between the DOJ National Security Division and he FBI Counterintelligence Division.
In an effort to stop the FISA 702(17) activity NSA Director Mike Rogers initiated a full 702 compliance review. However, before the review was complete the DOJ-NSD had enough information for their unlawful FISA warrant which worked retroactively to make the prior FBI surveillance (began in July ’16 per James Comey) lawful. Mike Rogers stopped the FISA702(17) process on October 26th 2016. As a result of his activity, Rogers became a risk; DNI James Clapper demanded he be fired.
?Ten days after the presidential election, November 17th 2016, Admiral Rogers travels to Trump Tower without telling ODNI James Clapper. Rogers likely informs President-elect Trump of the prior activity by the FBI and DOJ, including the probability that all of Trump Tower’s email and phone communication was being collected.
? On November 17th, 2016, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers went to see President-Elect Donald Trump in Trump Tower, New York. –SEE HERE– Director Rogers never told his boss DNI, James Clapper.
? On November 18th, 2016, the Trump Transition Team announced they were moving all transition activity to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. –SEE HERE– Where they interviewed and discussed the most sensitive positions to fill. Defense, State, CIA, ODNI.
The transition team was set up in Trump Tower. The very next day, November 18th 2016, Trump moves the entire transition team to Bedminister New Jersey?
Does this make more sense now?
It would appear Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, is up to his eyeballs in this; though he denies participating. The FBI counterintelligence unit was monitoring Trump through FISA 702(17) upstream surveillance collected by a DOJ National Security Division that had no oversight. No-one knows the exact start date of the data-mining but FBI Director James Comey admitted the FBI counterintelligence operation began in July 2016.
All research indicates the information the FBI collected, and the stuff Fusion GPS was creating via Christopher Steele (The “Russian Dossier), was used to create the Russian Narrative and also to manipulate the FISC into giving them a FISA warrant. ie. “The Insurance Policy”.
?Ultimately, the people within all of these intercepts is what Devin Nunes discovered when he looked at the “unmasking requests” which were a result of those FISA 702(17) collections on Team Trump. That’s why Devin Nunes was so stunned at what he saw in February and March 2017.
This is why Chairman Devin Nunes is currently gathering evidence.
In hindsight it appears that President Trump was fully aware when the tide would change. The moment when an empowered group of congressional people, Devin Nunes, Chuck Grassley and Bob Goodlatte, would develop a coordinated plan to defeat the corruptionamid a corrupt intelligence apparatus Admiral Rogers had been holding back for the past several years.
What we are seeing now, leading up to the release of a years-worth of Office of Inspector General evidence, is the outcome of a specific plan –WELL OUTLINED HERE– to deal with the deep corruption inside the FBI and DOJ.
On October 7th 2017 President Trump stated:
…”You guys know what this represents? Maybe it’s the calm before the storm.”..
Everyone was trying to figure out what the president meant. The media went bananas for a few cycles talking about it. However, a picture from that evening –in addition to the recent discoveries– likely tells us all we need to know:
That night, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers was seated at the head of the table as each member of the military likely aware -in varying degrees- just how consequential NSA Director Mike Rogers was in fending off the biggest constitutional crisis in the history of the U.S.
A grateful U.S. President, recognizing a great and patriotic man, amid many great and patriotic men. ….And no-one outside that room even knew. Until now.
You know it’s funny…. We all felt the tide change mid-November, something was different. By early December the Inspector General stories about the DOJ and FBI malfeasance and corruption began to hit the headlines (Strzok, Page, Ohr, Baker, etc.); but it only becomes clear today, how that entire chain-of-events began.
RESOURCES: – The BIG UGLY
- Grassley and Graham call FBI/DOJ Bluff HERE
- NSA Director Mike Rogers and the FISA Scheme Explained HERE
- The Russian Conspiracy was “The Insurance Policy” HERE
- Fusion GPS runs for Cover HERE
- Lindsey Graham discussed the Steele Dossier and FISA Warrant HERE
- The Scale of the DOJ and FBI Corruption – Outlined HERE
- The DOJ FISA Corruption Outlined HERE
- Devin Nunes subpoenas McCain staffer David Kramer HERE
- New context to understand Evelyn Farkas Comments – Discussed HERE
- How will media respond? – Discussed HERE
- A Counterintelligence Timeline – WH and FBI – HERE
- FBI Asst. Deputy, Andrew “Andy” McCabe announces intent to retire – HERE
- FBI Legal Counsel, James Baker, identified as leaker to media – HERE
- FBI Legal Counsel, James Baker, removed from responsibility – HERE
- Steele Dossier Origination Now Directly Leads To Obama White House – HERE
- FBI Asst. Director “Andy” McCabe has convenient memory lapse – HERE
- Rand Paul Discusses Evidence of Conspiracy HERE
- Summary of Scheme and Letter from Trump Transition Team HERE
- Congress Confirms the Investigative Approach for The Big Ugly HERE
- Understanding the Background Motives of Inspector General Horowitz HERE
- Democrats Realize the BIG Ugly Is Coming HERE
- Understanding the Important Role of Bill Priestap HERE
- Inspector General Horowitz Explains how he caught Peter Strzok and Lisa Page HERE
- Understanding the Pattern of Information Releases HERE
- Jim Jordan Questions Rod Rosenstein HERE
- More releases of information about Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe HERE
- Why Was FISA Court Judge Recused – Discussion HERE
- Jaw-Dropping Info. on Demoted DOJ Deputy Bruce G Ohr’s wife, Nellie H. Ohr HERE
- Discovery – Nellie Ohr worked for Fusion GPS on Trump Opposition Research Project
- Intel Chairman Devin Nunes Outlines FBI FISA Warrant Abuse HERE
- The FBI/DOJ Leak Hunting Task Force Everyone Forgot – Outlined HERE
- Jim Jordan Discusses the Fraud Behind the FBI FISA Warrant HERE
- Black Hat Hunting II – Becomes Obvious – False Media Leaks To Catch Leakers HERE
- The BIG UGLY – The Big Picture and What it Means HERE
- Judge Rudolph Contreras Recuses Himself – FISA Discoveries HERE
- “The Predicate” – The Importance of the Origin of The FISA WARRANTS HERE
- Black Hat Hunting I – First Appearance of Coordinated Plan HERE
- Deputy Head of Counterintelligence FBI Agent Peter Strzok – Outlined HERE
- Discovering Initial Seeds of DOJ-OIG Investigative Plan – Outlined HERE
- President Trump Reacts to Evidence of FBI Mgmt Bias Against Him HERE
- Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes Threatens FBI with Contempt HERE
- First IG Release of FBI Team Bias on Robert Mueller Squad HERE
IG Stimulated Releases of Information:
?Release #1 was the FBI Agent Strzok and Attorney Lisa Page story; and the repercussions from discovering their politically motivated bias in the 2015/2016 Clinton email investigation and 2016/2017 Russian Election investigation.
?Release #2 outlined the depth of FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page’s specific history in the 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton to include the changing of the wording ["grossly negligent” to "extremely careless”] of the probe outcome delivered by FBI Director James Comey.
?Release #3 was the information about DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr being in contact with Fusion GPS at the same time as the FISA application was submitted and granted by the FISA court; which authorized surveillance and wiretapping of candidate Donald Trump; that release also attached Bruce Ohr and Agent Strzok directly to the Steele Dossier.
?Release #4 was information that Deputy Bruce Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, was an actual contract employee of Fusion GPS, and was hired by F-GPS specifically to work on opposition research against candidate Donald Trump. Both Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr are attached to the origin of the Christopher Steele Russian Dossier.
?Release #5 was the specific communication between FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page. The 10,000 text messages that included evidence of them both meeting with Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to discuss the “insurance policy” against candidate Donald Trump in August of 2016.