September 7, 2022 - Hillary and Chelsea appear on The View and discuss the seized documents from Mar-a-Lago raid

 

September 8, 2022 - Trump v Clinton lawsuit is dismissed - A different take

“Recently a Florida judge dismissed the lawsuit brought by President Trump against Hillary Clinton. [65-page ruling HERE]  The media have enjoyed ridiculing Trump by using the words of the judge who dismissed the case.  As noted by the Washington Times, “Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks, a Clinton appointee, said Mr. Trump’s filing was too lengthy, detailing events that “are implausible because they lack any specific allegations which might provide factual support for the conclusions reached.”

(…) In March 2022 President Trump filed a civil lawsuit against: Hillary Clinton, Hillary for America Campaign Committee, DNC, DNC Services Corp, Perkins Coie, Michael Sussmann, Marc Elias, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charles Dolan, Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Robby Mook, Phillipe Reines as well as Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, Neustar Inc., Rodney Joffe, James Comey Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith and Andrew McCabe. [108-Page Lawsuit Here]

When I was about one-third of the way through reading the lawsuit, I initially stopped and said to myself this is going to take a lot of documentary evidence to back up the claims in the assertions.  Dozens of attachments would be needed and hundreds of citations to the dozens of attachments would be mandatory.  Except, they were not there.

After reading further, while completely understanding the background material that was being described in the filing, I realized this wasn’t a lawsuit per se’.  The 108-pages I was holding in my hands were more akin to a legal transfer mechanism from President Trump to lawyers who needed it.  The filing was contingent upon a series of documents that would be needed to support the claims within it.

Whoever wrote the lawsuit had obviously reviewed the evidence to support the filing.  However, the attachments and citations were missing. That was weird.  That’s when I realized the purpose of the lawsuit.  In hindsight, things became clear when the DOJ-NSD raided the home of Donald Trump, and suddenly the motive to confiscate the documents that would be the missing lawsuit attachments and citations surfaced.

With the manipulative, and I say intentional, “ongoing investigation” angle of the John Durham probe essentially blocking public release of declassified documents showing the efforts of all the lawsuit participants (Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax), President Trump needed a legal way to secure and more importantly share the evidence.

Think of it like the people around Trump wanting to show lawyers the evidence in the documents.  However, because of the construct of the lawfare being deployed against Trump, any lawyer would need a *reason* to review the evidence.   The Trump -v- Clinton et al lawsuit becomes that ‘reason.’

The “documents” (classified or not) are reviewed by lawyers in preparation for the lawsuit.  This is their legal justification for reviewing the documents.  In essence, the lawsuit is a transfer mechanism permitting the Trump legal team to review the evidence on behalf of their client, former President Donald Trump.

Once the formation of the lawsuit is established, the retainer and acceptance of the lawyers to represent their client cemented, the legal counsel, discussion and information within legal duties/obligations of those who represent the plaintiff (Trump) becomes an information silo.  In addition to previous executive privilege established by President Trump himself; outside government there is now another silo to defend against the motives of the Lawfare crew (DOJ), the attorney-client privilege.

The lawsuit itself is the transfer mechanism permitting sharing of the documents and providing legal cover for the reviewers (lawyers).  The details within the 108-page filing constitute the claims of the plaintiff in the lawsuit, which were established by the evidentiary documents later seized by the DOJ and FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago. (Read more: Conservative Treehouse, 9/11/2022)  (Archive)

September 8, 2022 - Some revelations about the content of the documents seized during Mar-a-Lago raid

“Huge revelations pertaining to the content of the documents seized by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago. Trump made some comments to Newsmax and today Devin Nunes is saying he thinks that the docs are about Russiagate.

In a report today from Newsmax, Trump claims he kept them under Executive Privilege, to PROTECT THEM FROM BEING DESTROYED BY THE DEEP STATE.

“I think they thought it was something to do with the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax,”

Initially, I found this peculiar, because Trump himself confirmed some of the docs were pertaining to the Iran Deal last week when he retruthed this post from Paul Sperry.

 

But based on Trump’s most recent comments to Newsmax, the docs are about essentially EVERYTHING! Trump said that the documents in question “expose a Deep State plot” against him. Which is the reason he Declassified them, and took the docs for protection. There are reportedly “11 sets of documents” the FBI were interested in.

So what are the docs about? All of the docs about Deep State’s crimes that Trump was concerned they might destroy. That could cover a wide variety of subjects. Thus far, we know some of the docs to pertain to the Iran Deal and Russiagate/Crossfire Hurricane, but what other crimes is Trump aware of that he might want to prevent the Deep State from destroying? Uranium One? Libya? Haiti? Benghazi? 9/11? JFK Assassination?

Whatever else is in those docs, Trump is insinuating the FBI is looking to retrieve them to prevent him from showing it to the American People.

“They were afraid that things were in there — part of their scam material.”

(…) While the Left think they are closing in, Trump just confirmed the boomerang is in effect. The docs don’t implicate him, they implicate the enemy in all of their most heinous crimes, and Trump wants them public.” (Read more: Clandestine/Substack, 9/8/2022)  (Archive)

September 13, 2022 - The possible reasons why the FBI made Danchenko a Confidential Human Source (CHS) after knowing he lied about the dossier

The purposes of making Danchenko a CHS should be quite clear. The Crossfire Hurricane investigation was plagued with problems from the outset. The reasons for opening the investigation were bunk. Those problems continued as the investigation went on, with claims of Trump/Russia collusion proven unverified or outright false. (Thus the targeting of Flynn for a Logan Act violation.)

That developed into the Carter Page FISA applications, first submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in October 2016, and which relied substantially on the Steele Dossiers (aka Steele Reports). The FISA applications were renewed three times – more on that later. Each application had its own problems, from FBI lawyers lying about Carter Page to the Court being generally misled.

Realizing its own misconduct, the FBI made Danchenko a paid CHS in March 2017 – just before the third FISA warrant was submitted in April 2017. This would allow Comey’s FBI to work directly with Danchenko in support of its counter-intelligence investigation against President Trump.

Danchenko being a CHS also served another purpose: it protected the Bureau and the Mueller Special Counsel from revealing their “sources and methods.” How do you hide misconduct? Bury the witness.

The Motion in Limine

When the Steele Reports were released, the media picked up on the most salacious rumors, one that was utterly unbelievable: that Russian intelligence had a video of Trump involved with prostitutes at the Moscow Ritz-Carlton Hotel. Also known as the “pee tape.”

The allegation came from Danchenko, who attributed it to his sources – one from the Ritz-Carlton, and another being Sergei Millian. Durham will refute it, as it expects to call at trial “Bernd Kuhlen,” the then-general manager of the Ritz-Carlton, who will deny speaking with or ever meeting Danchenko “in June 2016, or at any time.”

What is Durham’s theory on Danchenko’s motive for lying about the Ritz-Carlton allegations? Because it reflects “a deliberate effort to conceal from the FBI Charles Dolan’s role as a source for the Steele Reports and to deceive the FBI regarding Millian’s role (or lack thereof).”

In support of the theory that Danchenko engaged in an “over-arching ‘plan’ to deceive the FBI” about his work for Orbis (the company that collected the information contained in the Steele Reports), Durham also plans to introduce:

Evidence that Danchenko “on multiple occasions communicated and emailed with, among others, Charles Dolan regarding his work for Steele and Orbis.”

“Evidence that proves Dolan was aware of [Danchenko’s] reporting was part of a ‘related project against Trump’ and that this work was being done on behalf of Steele and Orbis.”

(Techno Fog/Substack, 9/133/2022)  (Archive)

September 13, 2022 - Durham: Danchenko was on FBI payroll as a Confidential Human Source (CHS)

“Today, Special Counsel John Durham moved to unseal this motion in limine in the false statements case against Igor Danchenko.

This motion provides new information on the details of Danchenko’s lies to the FBI, further information on how Special Counsel Mueller ignored Danchenko’s false statements, expected testimony from Clinton-connected executive Charles Dolan, and one crazy development.

But we’ll start with the most damning development: Danchenko was on the FBI payroll as a confidential human source (CHS) from March 2017 through October 2020.

The purposes of making Danchenko a CHS should be quite clear. The Crossfire Hurricane investigation was plagued with problems from the outset. The reasons for opening the investigation were bunk. Those problems continued as the investigation went on, with claims of Trump/Russia collusion proven unverified or outright false. (Thus the targeting of Flynn for a Logan Act violation.)

Those problems continued with the Carter Page FISA applications, first submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in October 2016, and which relied substantially on the Steele Dossiers (aka Steele Reports). The FISA applications were renewed three times – more on that later. Each application had its own problems, from FBI lawyers lying about Carter Page to the Court being generally misled.

Realizing its own misconduct, the FBI made Danchenko a paid CHS in March 2017 – just before the third FISA warrant was submitted in April 2017. This would allow Comey’s FBI to work directly with Danchenko in support of its counter-intelligence investigation against President Trump. (Read more: Techno Fog/Substack, 9/13/2022)  (Archive)

September 13, 2022 - Durham: The court should admit evidence of the FBI's prior counterintelligence investigation of Danchenko for possibly being a Russian spy

Clippings from pages 30-32/Durham Motion in Limine, 9/13/2022

September 15, 2022 - Retired Judge Raymond J. Dearie is appointed Special Master to review Mar-a-Lago documents; served on FISA Court until 2019

A special master has been appointed to act as a firewall between the Justice Department and materials seized during an Aug. 8 raid on former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach, Florida.

In a pair of Thursday orders from federal district Judge Aileen Cannon, the DOJ’s motion to access a subset of classified records stored on the Trump property was denied, and a recently retired judge that both the DOJ and Trump’s team agreed on – recently retired Judge Raymond Dearie – will serve as special master.

Raymond has until Nov. 30, 2022 to complete his review.

Cannon struck down the DOJ’s request for a partial stay of an earlier motion on accessing the seized materials, after lawyers for the government argued that they should be able to review over 100 classified documents taken during the raid – as they are not covered by any claims of personal property or executive privilege.

That said, Cannon sided with a DOJ request for Trump to pay the full cost associated with a special master.

“If the court were willing to accept the government’s representations that select portions of the seized materials are—without exception—government property not subject to any privileges, and did not think a special master would serve a meaningful purpose, the court would have denied plaintiff’s special master request,” wrote Cannon. “The court does not find it appropriate to accept the government’s conclusions on these important and disputed issues without further review by a neutral third party in an expedited and orderly fashion.” (Zero Hedge, 9/16/2022)   (Archive)

---

On July 2, 2012, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts appointed Dearie to a seven-year term on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

September 15, 2022 - Govt censorship: The critical nexus between Twitter, WSGR, Macgillivray & White House

PRIMARY SUBJECTS: Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Twitter, Biden White House, Obama White House, James Baker, Alexander Macgillivray, Vijaya Gadde 

In conjunction with a client who remains confidential, EDIFY developed the nexus schematics featured in this brief that are well-evidenced and identify and connect a slate of important individuals, entities and nations respective to a wide swath of past and ongoing scandals, corruption, crime, treason and bioterrorism.

This brief serves to expand and back-fill the details of the featured graphics while providing meaning with some granularity. At the same time, it informs important ongoing matters and litigation.

The findings develop along six vectors to demonstrate how the entanglements, relationships and overlaps translate to an effective network. The network is positioned to impact important matters like COVID-19 and the Hunter Biden laptop story as just two examples and whereby Twitter’s censorship of both makes Twitter the central node.

The six vectors are: 1-Twitter, its censorship policies and the application and enforcement thereof, 2-Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati [WSGR] an international law firm with over 1,000 attorneys representing many of the world’s largest corporations, as a hub with spokes running to critically-positioned individuals that is suggestive of WSGR as an interface for political control and influence across a wide array of Big Tech and geopolitical domains, 3- Alexander Macgillivray as a WSGR product who serves in the critical position of Principal Deputy U.S. Chief Technology Officer for the Biden Administration and who served the Obama White House similarly, 4-Vijaya Gadde as a WSGR product who was installed by Macgillivray at Twitter when Macgillivray served as Twitter’s General Counsel and where Gadde went on to suspend President Donald Trump, 5-Former FBI General Counsel James Baker as a common thread through Twitter to President Trump and the FBI/DOJ FISA abuse against Trump and 6-Alison Fauci, Dr. Anthony Fauci’s daughter, as a Twitter engineer and Twitter’s overlap to and potential communication and intelligence conduit for the COVID-19 enterprise fraud construct via Anthony Fauci and his NIH interface.

In the featured nexus schematics, the six vectors above are examined with explanations and SUMMARY FINDINGS to follow:

---

---

---

---

---

---

VECTOR 1: TWITTER: Twitter is the central node and the keystone to understanding. Twitter’s inherent value to the elites, political class and federal apparatus writ large is found in its ability to engage in perception management, which is a technical term more commonly referred to as “psyops” or “psychological warfare”. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Twitter engages in perception management in its capacity to establish and manipulate reality by means of actively determining and shaping the content on its platform. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Twitter consumers can receive filtered content or are prevented from receiving, seeing or having the ability to publish content altogether. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

The de facto censorship occurs primarily along the lines of determining and enforcing community standards, guidelines and rules for user engagement. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] The evidence is clear that the decisions here appear to fall along clearly identifiable political lines resembling two-tier justice. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Content determination, algorithmic manipulation and politically motivated censorship of off-reservation messaging and political opposition are all evidenced examples of how Twitter engages in perception management or appears to do so. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Two evidenced domains of Twitter’s engagement in perception management include censoring content relative to COVID-19 [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] and the Hunter Biden Laptop story. [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21]

Problematic for the critics of Twitter as a politically aligned entity is the patterned evidence of primary subject and other individuals being directly and indirectly tied to other relevant and important individuals and entities in overlapping domains. The complexity is high and so the schematic illustrations are hugely beneficial for understanding.

These nexuses occur such that clear and identifiable alignment to strict political agendas is found on one side of the political spectrum, where censorship is rampant, but not on the other side, where content is essentially unimpeded.

Summarily, evidence and analysis positions Twitter as a gatekeeper of public information.

Evidence of Twitter’s gatekeeper designation is found threaded through Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati as an interface for directly impacting the geopolitical landscape and rising to the level of affecting significant change. [22]

The primary subject from WSGR is Alexander Macgillivray. [22] [23]

VECTOR 2: WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI: WSGR is a an international law firm with over 1,000 attorneys representing many of the world’s largest corporations. WSGR is a primary thread through the network being evidenced that strings directly through to the primary node, Twitter. In that light, WSGR represents Twitter in all corporate disclosures. [24] [25] [26]

In regard to Macgillivray, WSGR also previously employed Vijaya Gadde, who was subsequently installed at Twitter by Macgillivray during his tenure there as General Counsel. [27] Gadde was central to Twitter’s censoring, suspension and banishment of President Donald Trump from the platform. [28]

WSGR’s representation directly overlays COVID-19 in a very critical capacity. WSGR represents Arbutus Biopharma Corp., a Canadian company that is one of two patent holders for U.S. Patent Nos. 8,058,069 and 9,364,435, which are the two patents for the lipid nanoparticle envelope necessary to manufacture the COVID-19 mRNA “vaccines”. [29] [30] [31]

An underlying position holds that the initial phases of the COVID-19 enterprise fraud construct included the unsustainable phase of comorbidity data harvesting where other morbidities [flu/pneumo, heart disease, diabetes and pneumonia] were fraudulently curated and then propagated as COVID-19/SARS-COV-2.

The subsequent “pandemic” phase is one of the vaccinated and boosted. This phase is entirely dependent upon acquiring the patent rights to the mechanism required to deliver the mRNA payload in the injection. The mRNA injections leverage the reverse transcription process causing the recipients’ DNA to become altered to the extent that it causes the body to begin producing the known and problematic S1 spike protein on its own. Evidence indicates that infection and mortality data for COVID-19 currently represents a “pandemic” of the “vaccinated” and boosted. [32] [33] [34] [35]

If vaccine manufactures didn’t acquire rights to WSGR-represented Arbutus’ patents, there could be no “pandemic”, for there would be no delivery mechanism for the required mRNA payload. [36]

With evidence linking COVID-19 directly to China and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, WSGR may further overlay China by its representation of SolarWinds. [37] SolarWinds was directly hacked in a sprawling data breach that caused U.S. lawmakers to designate a national emergency in 2020. China is suspected of the attack and if true, accounts for the overlay. [38] [39] [40] [41]

Relative to the sale of American user Twitter data to Japan’s Tourism Board through NTT Data, a Japanese company; and as it enmeshes Silver Lake Capital, WSGR represents Twitter in its partnership with Silver Lake. [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48]

Silver Lake connects to Ari Emanuel and positions Emanuel as a possible intermediary and conduit from the Biden/Obama cartel to the Japan Tourism Board through another possible and connected conduit/intermediary Rahm Emanuel, the current Ambassador to Japan. [49] [50] [51]

Silver Lake is linked to artificial intelligence and facial recognition companies in Sensetime and Shenzhen Sensetime Technology Co. Ltd. including Silver Lake CEO Egon Durban, who is on Twitter’s Board of Directors. Durban is also on the board at WWE, where Ari Emanuel is CEO. Silver Lake has a 20% stake in Sensetime and Shenzhen Sensetime Technology Co. Ltd.

Those companies are CCP functionaries and it is suspected that the Twitter data is being leveraged by them to develop profiles that could be used for China to target American citizens. [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57]

VECTOR 3: MACGILLIVRAY: Alexander Macgillivray is the primary subject linking multiple individuals, entities and events including but not limited to WSGR, Twitter, the censorship of President Trump, President Barack Obama, President Joe Biden and the Office of Science and Technology Policy and Google. [23]

WSGR employed attorney Alexander Macgillivray who links Twitter and WSGR to the Obama and Biden Administrations in critical roles, respectively: 1-Deputy U.S. Chief Technology Officer, Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP] and 2-Principal Deputy U.S. Chief Technology Officer, Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP]. [58] [59] [60] [61] [62]

Prior to serving the Obama and Biden White Houses, Macgillivray served as General Counsel to Twitter and Deputy General Counsel to Google. [63] Between the two administrative terms and according to his own blog, Macgillivray installed the CTO at the DNC and worked on election data. [70]

The sequenced thread of Macgillivray from WSGR to Obama to Twitter to Google to Biden is critical to understanding and presents as a launch point for fulsome comprehension of the full network.

Macgillivray currently serves the Biden White House OSTP as the Principal Deputy U.S. CTO. [59]

Established as a primary gatekeeper of public information, Twitter would likely require an interface with the federal government and presidential administration[s] to align Twitter with on-reservation messaging as the evidence suggests. For Twitter, this necessitates content determination, algorithmic manipulation and politically motivated censorship of off-reservation messaging, which have been widely reported. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Evidence suggests that Macgillivray is a good candidate for that interface through the OSTP in a familiar pattern of Obama retreads serving Biden in the same or similar capacities. It will be further evidenced relative to Nicole Wong below. [64]

As noted, during his tenure as General Counsel for Twitter, Macgillivray installed Vijaya Gadde, who was unprepared and unqualified in her position according to Macillivray’s words. Gadde was central to Twitter’s censorship, suspension and banishment of President Trump from its platform. [65]

When Macgillivray exited Twitter, he only did so on official terms: ““I’ll continue to support the company and its great people by staying on as an advisor for the legal, trust & safety, corporate development and public policy teams,” said Macgillivray. “I continue to care deeply about Twitter, the folks who work at Twitter and our tremendous users, so I’ll remain close to all three.”” [66]

From a ground floor perspective and in her multiple and similar capacities, Chinese-American Nicole Wong appears to have set the course for Macgillivray’s trajectory. [67] Wong’s trajectory cycled her through Twitter, Google and the Obama and Biden administrations. [68] Wong served the Biden transition team as overlaid by the CTSO/CTO vectors. Wong joined Biden’s transition Agency Review Team to support transition efforts related to the National Security Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy. [69]

Specifically, it is held that Wong likely returned to facilitate Macgillivray’s transition into the Principal Deputy U.S. CTO position for the Biden White House.

The argument that Wong was the “first version” of Macgillivray respective to his roles and functions identified in this report, is further evidenced by Wong’s similar background, to which she returned, respective to the CTSO/CTO vectors as overlaid by the national security domain and the current Biden Administration. It presented as the veteran ushering in the less experienced player, so to speak.

Wong’s professional entanglements also include but aren’t limited to: Perkins Coie LLP [becoming partner], Georgetown University, Berkley School of Law and the Stonebridge Albright Group. [68]

Macgillivray maintains a personal blog with many of his thoughts and opinions that are topical to matters here. [70]

VECTOR 4: GADDE: Vijaya Gadde is a primary subject, who is secondary to Macgillivray and who was installed as Twitter’s General Counsel by Macgillivray when the latter departed the company. [27] Vadde is generally regarded as unqualified and unprepared for her position respective to the scope of its duties and this made Gadde susceptible to manipulation by those surrounding her. [66] This is according to Macgillivray. [65] It occurs along the lines of Gadde appearing to be reliant on information and input from said others to fully execute her duties.

Consider, “Though Gadde doesn’t have the same bonafides as Macgillivray when it comes to first amendment stuff, she is apparently regarded well in the company and at her former firm.

In addition, from what we’ve heard, Twitter will be doing some shuffling of the legal structure as well. Its director of public policy Colin Crowell will no longer report to the General Counsel, but will report directly to CEO Dick Costolo on matters affecting Twitter and Washington.” [65]

In his Twitter departure, Macgillivray stated directly that he would continue to advise Gadde’s department lending to Macgillivray appearing as a prime interface for such manipulation of Gadde to occur. [66]

Gadde was formerly employed by WSGR like Macgillivray. [71]

Gadde was the primary subject who in the capacity of General Counsel for Twitter was central to the censorship, suspension and banishment of President Trump from Twitter’s platform altogether while likely under the influence of others, such as possibly Macgillivray. [72] [73] [74] [75]

VECTOR 5: BAKER: Former FBI General Counsel James Baker is a primary subject that threads top to bottom in varying capacities and overlaps. [76] [77] [78] Of particular interest to the matters here are his affiliation with the orchestrated and widely reported broader attacks on President Trump and Baker’s array of expertise relative to his affiliation with Twitter as Deputy General Counsel and Vice President Legal. [79]

Baker’s Twitter capacity is of particular interest relative to the broader attacks against President Trump, his supporters and specifically as it relates to First Amendment rights and the censorship of conservative content favorable to Trump and unfavorable to Democrats and Democratic candidates like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. Such instances are widely reported.

Baker’s acumen in law is compounded by his ties to the FBI, DOJ and Judiciary relative to Twitter and it is problematic here. Baker is uniquely positioned to be plausibly informative about potential DOJ investigations into Twitter for violations. Baker is uniquely positioned in alignment with a long list of individuals and entities that overlap in critical areas. It’s all reinforced by Baker’s spectrum of expertise: FISA, national security, intelligence policy, intelligence matters, counter intelligence matters, law enforcement, prosecution, investigation and more. [80] [81]

The initial DOJ/FBI investigation into President Trump diverged into numerous other contrived, orchestrated, planned, manufactured and executed events like rampant FISA abuse, two fraudulently predicated impeachments, the Mueller Special Counsel, the Capitol “insurrection” entrapment operation, a fraudulent pandemic and stolen 2020 election. These, too, have been widely reported.

Baker was appointed by then FBI Director James Comey, who is known as a long time Clinton confidant and fixer. Comey is intricately linked to the 2016 election and then candidate Hillary Clinton by means of the FBI’s decision not to pursue charges against Clinton for her private and unsecured email server.

The origins of the targeting of and abuses against Trump derived from Clinton’s false allegations that Trump and Russia were conspiring due to Trump’s association with Alfa Bank. [81] The ties further extend to the FISA warrant against Carter Page and so on as is well documented and reported by many. [82] [83]

Baker’s exposure overlaps cause him to be a primary thread. Beyond what is already outlined above, Baker is attached to Special Counsel John Durham by means of his involvement and testimony in the Michael Sussmann trial and the broader matters pertaining to it. [84] Also, Baker is the target of a federal investigation for leaking. [85]

Baker’s FBI and intelligence/counterintelligence experience should have made him an expert in China and yet China appeared to operate undeterred under the bureau’s nose and continues to do so.

Moreover, Baker’s position and qualifications should have positioned him to be privy to the actions of ex officio members of the HPSCI and SSCI respective to China, which would further extend to COVID-19. This would include subjects such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, then Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer and then Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell.

Baker’s prominent threading through to the Obama Administration, FBI and DOJ respective to his ties to Twitter, make him a candidate central to both Twitter [ongoing litigation] and the intelligence and FISA abuses against Trump.

It’s important to recall that the DOJ/FBI investigation of Candidate/President Trump initially began as an FBI COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION with a lower predicating evidentiary standard than a criminal investigation. This allowed the FBI/DOJ to circumvent Trump’s full 4th Amendment protections. The Mueller/Weissmann Special Counsel team therefore appeared to inherit the Trump counterintelligence investigation and then convert into a criminal investigation.

VECTOR 6: FAUCI: The involvement of Dr. Anthony Fauci respective to COVID-19 is assumed moving forward and as resting on substantial existing evidence. Moreover, this document includes limited evidence respective to funding and as outlined.

In part, it is evidenced by the flow of federal dollars from the NIH/NIAID to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The intermediary for the transaction, which pertained to the funding of the bioengineering of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, was Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance. [86] [87]

The entire Fauci onion peels back in layers suitable for a volume of books and is to substantial and complex for this space. It is also already fully documented by this investigator in an underlying catalog of analysis and work. The assumptions made on Fauci here allow us to remain focused. Lastly, they are made along the lines of COVID-19 being entirely a construct of enterprise fraud and where Anthony Fauci is a primary subject and realistic candidate as a primary criminal defendant.

Anthony Fauci’s daughter, Alison Fauci, is of particular interest to these matters respective to her hiring as an engineer at Twitter. [88] This is suggestive of Alison Fauci potentially serving as a conduit between Twitter, its leadership and censorship practices, and the federal medical apparatus framed by HHS, NIH, NIAID, CDC, et al.

According to recent whistleblower testimony from Peiter “Mudge” Zatko, whom Twitter hired in November 2020 to enhance cybersecurity and privacy at the company, testified that Twitter engineers have essentially unfettered and virtually anonymous access permitted by weakness in oversight and security allowing them to access personal and private data from user accounts. [89] It does this to the extent that it could permit the extraction and sale of that data without notice to Twitter as permitted by the oversight and security weaknesses.

Zatko also testified that the FBI had previously warned Twitter that it had one or more foreign intelligence operatives on its payroll. Evidence indicates penetration of Twitter by India and China. [89]

Alison Fauci is a Twitter software engineer who by title, would possess the technical capabilities and access to function as outlined in the testimony.

Beyond Alison Fauci’s functionality as a conduit or intermediary for Dr. Anthony Fauci and his principals at the NIH/NIAID and up, Alison Fauci is by title technically positioned to potentially extract private Twitter user data on designated people including political opposition. Any such extracted data could be fed back upstream to the Obama, Biden cartel et al.

It’s also further evidence of a distinct pattern of nepotism threading through all of these matters where spouses and children play critical roles determined by their placement into the broader construct.

Alison Fauci was positioned to be a possible conduit of information in an intermediary fashion relative to the Anthony Fauci cohort and its preferences for Twitter’s censorship policies for reliable COVID content damaging to the COVID construct of enterprise fraud and that official narrative.

SUMMARY FINDINGS:

The six vectors provide a plausible and evidenced network as diagrammed schematically and expanded upon in this report. The evidence examined and analysis of it inform the SUMMARY FINDINGS ranging from evidenced fact to positions of a high level of confidence:

Twitter is a recognizable and identifiable as a gatekeeper of public information
Twitter operates in alignment with a strict political agenda
Twitter’s agenda alignment appears along the lines of progressive liberal and Democrat thought and policy
Twitter’s collective actions technically rise to the level of engagement in perception management
Twitter engagement in perception management includes content determination, algorithmic manipulation and apparent active censorship against off-reservation messaging [conservative content favorable to Trump] WSGR represents Twitter in all of its corporate disclosures making WSGR integral to all things
WSGR partner Larry Sonsini is regarded as the “Godfather of Silicon Valley” [90] WSGR employed Alexander Macgillivray, another Harvard Law product, who went on to become an apparent architect for censorship practices while serving that capacity in the Obama and Biden White Houses
WSGR has critical ties to factually inconvenient individuals and entities such as Arbutus, Moderna and the mRNA vaccines vis-a-vis Arbutus’ patent holdings on the lipid nanoparticle envelope
WSGR is involved in ongoing litigation respective to the previous point
WSGR is indirectly positioned to intersect two presidential administrations in a capacity to target a third: Obama and Biden; targeting Trump
WSGR presents as an international firm capable of directly impacting the U.S. geopolitical landscape and media content on social media platforms
Macgillivray is the primary subject threading WSGR to the Obama and Biden Administrations and Twitter according to evidence
Macgillivray’s affiliations with/as WSGR, Twitter, Harvard Law, OSTP, U.S. CTO, Google and Vijaya Gadde are problematic
Macgillivray’s highly partisan and biased positions manifesting as anti-Trump are detailed by his own admission in his own blog
Macgillivray installed another WSGR asset in Vijaya Gadde to succeed him as General Counsel
Gadde was born in India and immigrated to the U.S. at three years of age
Vijaya Gadde was unqualified and was subject to influence by others including Macgillivray in his unofficial capacity, so as to rely upon them to fully execute her duties as Twitter’s General Counsel
As such, Vijaya Gadde was central to the censorship, suspension and banishment altogether from Twitter’s platform
Gadde was central to Twitter’s censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story
Through NTT Data, Twitter sold American user data to Japan’s Tourism Board
Long-time Barack Obama confidant Rahm Emanuel is the Ambassador to Japan
Emanuel’s brother Ari Emanuel is another Obama confidant who attaches to Silver Lake Capital
Silver Lake Capital ties to Twitter and links Twitter, Obama and both Emanuel brothers through Ari Emanuel
Silver Lake Capital ties to Chinese company Sensetime, which specializes in artificial intelligence
Egon Durban, on WWE’s board where Ari Emanuel is CEO, presents a likely bridge to full circle respective to China’s acquisition of American Twitter user data
Durban bridge consists of his 20% stake in Sensetime and Shenzhen Sensetime Technology Co. Ltd and his membership on Twitter’s Board of Directors
WSGR represents Twitter in its partnership with Silver Lake
Sensetime is affiliated with the Chinese Military Industrial Complex and the nation of China/CCP
SenseTime owns Shenzhen Sensetime Technology Co., Ltd., which specializes in Facial Recognition Techology
Shenzhen Sensetime Technology Co., Ltd. appears on the U.S. Treasury Department’s “Consolidated Sanctions List” and through ownership ties to the Chinese Military Industrial Complex and the nation of China/CCP
Twitter’s American user data sale to Japan/NTT is believed to have been funneled to China, the CCP and the Chinese Military Industrial Complex through the evidenced conduit network [as diagrammed] Twitter also appears to have actively leveraged parts or all of the same network to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story
The HB laptop suppression derived from the same CTSO that employed Macgillivray under Obama and employs Macgillivray now under Biden
Evidence indicates that political leadership, the intelligence community and the FBI/DOJ engaged in suppressing the HB laptop story
Megan Smith served in CTSO alongside Macgillivray in the same general capacity
CTSO overlaps Deputy U.S. CTO Nicole Wong
Wong was the legal director at Twitter and vice president and Deputy General Counsel at Google
Wong served Biden’s transition Agency Review Team to support transition efforts related to the National Security Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy
Wong’s trajectory cycled through Twitter, Google and the Obama and Biden administrations to include Wong’s service as on the Biden transition team as overlaid by the CTSO/CTO vectors
Wong presents as the ground floor first version of the trajectory Macgillivray took indicating Wong seems to have pioneered that course for Macgillivray
Wong appears to return to the CTSO/CTO domain via her Biden transition role to facilitate the smooth and effective transition of Macgillivray into his new role as Principal Deputy General of the U.S. CTO
Wong is a fourth-generation Chinese-American born in the U.S.
Wong’s grandfather was Vice President of one of the nations first Chinese community banks threading through to the banking industry and by default the CCP and Chinese Banking
Megan Smith served in CTSO alongside Macgillivray in the same general capacity [91] [92] Smith’s ex-spouse is journalist Kara Swisher who writes for outlets including the New York Times [the mouthpiece for the FBI/DOJ with Washington Post serving the same for the intelligence community] [93] Swisher publicly defended Twitter’s censorship of Trump respective to the Capitol event [94] Swisher’s insistence that Twitter doesn’t censor envelops Twitter’s suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story
Swisher publicly admitted her bias against Trump and a “broader responsibility” to take action on it in a Vox interview
Swisher’s public admission came during an interview that included Wong [95] WSGR and Macgillivray thread through Gadde and Smith right to Wong and Swisher as Smith’s ex-spouse
Macgillivray becomes a primary interface between Obama and Biden respective to CTSO’s scope
Central to Obama is James Baker as a career FBI employee who ascended to General Counsel
Baker’s expertise in FISA, national security, intelligence policy and intelligence matters, counterintelligence respective to the initial DOJ/FBI investigation of President Trump opening as a counterintelligence investigation later laundered into a criminal one by the Mueller/Weissmann special counsel is critical to the broader attacks on Trump, which manifested on Twitter
Baker aggravates Twitter’s culpability in these matters with his service to Twitter as Deputy General Counsel and Vice President of Legal
The aggravation is, in part, evidenced by the genesis of the Trump/Russia collusion fabrication deriving from Hillary Clinton, as approved by Obama according to John Brennan’s own notes in July 2016
The FBI/DOJ leveraged Clinton’s fraudulently stated and Obama-approved allegations to predicate an investigation into President Trump that included FISA abuse, which threads through to the U.S. Supreme Court
Baker was appointed as FBI General Counsel by long-time Clinton confidant and fixer FBI Director James Comey
Comey ties directly to the 2016 election in his decision for the FBI not to prosecute Clinton for her private email server, which China presumably accessed for top secret U.S. intelligence and SAPs
Baker is the subject of a federal criminal leak investigation
Baker was compelled to testify in the John Durham Special Counsel trial of Michael Sussmann
Baker stands to factor into the Durham trial for Russian Igor Daschenko
The network evidenced in this report indicates that an Obama-based network extending into the Biden White House has technically been engaged in perception management by leveraging Twitter as an asset
The network and its asset Twitter appeared to function as a gateway to public information leveraged to target Trump and conservatives in stifling their free speech and censoring their content while advancing the same for the other side of the political spectrum

(Source links included on Edify page)

(Read more: Edify Research and Consulting, 9/15/2022) (Archive)

(Republished with permission)

September 16, 2022 - DOJ files motion to stop Special Master Judge Raymond Dearie's Mar-a-Lago doc review; he is also a former FISA judge that signed Carter Page's Title 1 FISA warrant

“The district court has entered an unprecedented order enjoining the Executive Branch’s use of its own highly classified records in a criminal investigation with direct implications for national security,” the Justice Department wrote in its motion Friday.

Judge Aileen Cannon on Thursday appointed former FISA Judge Raymond Dearie to oversee the review of the documents taken by the DOJ-FBI during the Mar-a-Lago raid.

The Trump legal team and AG Merrick Garland and the corrupt DOJ came to an agreement earlier in the week on a potential candidate to serve as the special master in the Mar-a-Lago case.

Judge Raymond Dearie was one of the FISA judges who signed the warrant to spy on Carter Page without cause. (Read more: The Gateway Pundit, 9/16/2022)  (Archive)

---

#MaraLago Declassified records indicate Judge Dearie, potential Special Master, approved final FISA June 2017 for @carterwpage. NOTE: This FISA is among most problematic because it did not share intel about Page’s work for USG + failed to disclose key concerns Steele reporting. pic.twitter.com/Zm6JD56Xi2

— Catherine Herridge (@CBS_Herridge) September 14, 2022

September 18, 2022 - The Clintons restart the Clinton Global Initiative, formerly used to hide and launder foreign donations to the Foundation

Today, we celebrate the @ClintonGlobal commitments that have transformed communities and countries since 2005.

Tomorrow, we re-convene our community at #CGI2022 to make the commitments that will change the future for millions more. pic.twitter.com/lngRKNGsTC

— Clinton Foundation (@ClintonFdn) September 18, 2022

September 20, 2022 - Unilever and BlackRock CEOs speak at a Clinton Global Initiative forum - We will "not back down" on Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) issues

“Unilever CEO Alan Jope declared his company would “not back down” on Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) issues during a Tuesday forum at the Clinton Global Initiative.

“In 1939, George Orwell wrote that we have sunk to such depths that stating the obvious is the first responsibility of every person and he was talking about a book on power written by Bertrand Russell,” Jope told former President Bill Clinton, according to the video posted to Twitter by Will Hild of Consumers First. “But it applies to today, because stating the obvious, that we have an emergency, we have a climate emergency, is becoming an unpopular thing to do.”

.@BlackRock CEO Larry Fink calls to “change the charters” of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, along with bringing together “all governments” to facilitate his global ESG transition: pic.twitter.com/MR4Hn9Q5p5

— Will Hild (@WillHild) September 20, 2022

“This anti-sustainability backlash, this anti-woke backlash is incredibly dangerous for the world,” Jope continued. “And the first thing Unilever will do is we will not back down on this agenda despite these populist accusations.”

Jope’s remarks came as part of a panel that also included Clinton, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink and Sustainable Energy for All CEO Damilola Ogunbiyi. BlackRock reportedly uses its investments to push companies to adopt ESG, with Fink calling for changes to the charters of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to support ESG.

The ESG framework pushes companies to prioritize social and environmental factors into their investment considerations instead of “simply considering the potential profitability,” according to Investopedia. Critics of ESG and other “woke” agenda items have pointed to crises in Ghana, where blackouts took place, and Sri Lanka, which suffered an agricultural crisis, as reasons to oppose the agenda.

.@Unilever CEO Alan Jope ADMITS @BlackRock was one of the main drivers helping them pushing their ESG agenda: pic.twitter.com/ciARHn1of6

— Will Hild (@WillHild) September 20, 2022

When asked by Bill Clinton about where the money is going to come from to facilitate a global ESG transition, one of the UN’s ESG Czars said:

“Just like how we found $17 trillion for COVID, the money must be there somewhere…” pic.twitter.com/q7KJhLcYl8

— Will Hild (@WillHild) September 20, 2022

(Read more: The Daily Caller, 9/20/2022) (Archive)

September 21, 2022 - FBI Special Agent Steve Friend files whistleblower complaint; pays price for exposing unjust 'persecution' of conservative Americans

(…) In his whistleblower complaint to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, obtained by The Post, Friend lays out multiple violations of FBI policy involving J6 investigations in which he was involved.

He says he was removed from active investigations into child sexual exploitation and human trafficking to work on J6 cases sent from DC. He was told “domestic terrorism was a higher priority” than child pornography. As a result, he believes his child exploitation investigations were harmed.

He also has reported his concerns about a politicized FBI to Republican members of Congress, among 20 whistleblowers from the bureau who have come forward with similar complaints.

Among Friend’s allegations:

• 

  Friend served as a SWAT team member. (Credit: Anna Friend)

  The Washington, DC, field office is “manipulating” FBI case management protocol and farming out J6 cases to field offices across the country to create the false impression that right-wing domestic violence is a widespread national problem that goes far beyond the “black swan” event of Jan. 6, 2021.

• As a result, he was listed as lead agent in cases he had not investigated and which his supervisor had not signed off on, in violation of FBI policy.
•  FBI domestic terrorism cases are being opened on innocent American citizens who were nowhere near the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, based on anonymous tips to an FBI hotline or from Facebook spying on their messages. These tips are turned into investigative tools called “guardians,” after the FBI software that collates them.
•  The FBI has post-facto designated a grassy area outside the Capitol as a restricted zone, when it was not restricted on Jan. 6, 2021, in order to widen the net of prosecutions.
•  The FBI intends to prosecute everyone even peripherally associated with J6 and another wave of J6 subjects are about to be referred to the FBI’s Daytona Beach resident agency “for investigation and arrest.”
•  The Jacksonville area was “inundated” with “guardian” notifications and FBI agents were dispatched to conduct surveillance and knock on people’s doors, including people who had not been in Washington, DC, on Jan. 6, 2021, or who had been to the Trump rally that day but did not go ­inside the Capitol.

Friend says he was punished after complaining to his bosses about being dragged into J6 investigations that were “violating citizens’ Sixth Amendment rights due to overzealous charging by the DOJ and biased jury pools in Washington, DC.”

His top-secret security clearance was suspended last week because he “entered FBI space [his office] and downloaded documents from FBI computer systems [an employee handbook and guidelines for employee disciplinary procedures] to an unauthorized removable flash drive.” (Read more: New York Post, 9/22/2022)  (Archive)

September 21, 2022 - The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals lifts hold on Mar-a-Lago documents

“In a stark repudiation of Donald Trump’s legal arguments, a federal appeals court on Wednesday permitted the Justice Department to resume its use of classified records seized from the former president’s Florida estate as part of its ongoing criminal investigation.

The ruling from a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit amounts to an overwhelming victory for the Justice Department, clearing the way for investigators to continue scrutinizing the documents as they evaluate whether to bring criminal charges over the storage of top-secret records at Mar-a-Lago after Trump left the White House.

The court also pointedly noted that Trump had presented no evidence that he had declassified the sensitive records, as he has repeatedly maintained, and rejected the possibility that Trump could have an “individual interest in or need for” the roughly 100 documents marked as classified.

The government had argued that its investigation had been impeded by an order from U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon that temporarily barred investigators from continuing to use the documents in its probe. Cannon, a Trump appointee, had said the hold would remain in place pending a separate review by an independent arbiter she had appointed at the Trump team’s request.

The appeals panel agreed with the Justice Department’s concerns.

(…) Trump’s lawyers had argued that an independent review of the records was essential given the unprecedented nature of the investigation. The lawyers have also said the department had not yet proven that the seized documents were classified, though they have notably stopped short of asserting — as Trump repeatedly has — that the records were previously declassified.

The Trump team this week resisted providing Dearie with any information to support the idea that the records might have been declassified, signaling the issue could be part of their defense in the event of an indictment.

But the appeals court appeared to scoff at that argument.

“Plaintiff suggests that he may have declassified these documents when he was President. But the record contains no evidence that any of these records were declassified,” they wrote. “In any event, at least for these purposes, the declassification argument is a red herring because declassifying an official document would not change its content or render it personal.” (Read more: WABI5)  (Archive)

September 26, 2022 - Adam Kinzinger joins board of Ukrainian organization suspected of running a fraud scheme

Kinzinger was ON THE BOARD of the Ukraine org that scammed people out of millions of dollars! https://t.co/xSXHOyK25b

— Jordan Schachtel (@JordanSchachtel) March 25, 2023

Was Adam Kinzinger a party to a massive fraud scheme? Sure seems cozy with these guys, who visited his office in September. https://t.co/I9o2wj8XgY

— Jordan Schachtel (@JordanSchachtel) March 25, 2023

Yikes https://t.co/fzWgTOEQxn

— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) March 22, 2023

It turns out Adam Kinzinger and Malcolm Nance have been promoting a guy for months who wasn’t actually a soldier and was just taking photos in front of destroyed tanks in Ukraine all along pic.twitter.com/e4UvZfSOvw

— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) March 22, 2023

September 29, 2022 - A federal court orders the FBI to "produce the information it possesses" re Seth Rich's laptop

Today, a federal judge ordered the FBI to “produce the information it possesses related to Seth Rich’s laptop.”

(…) This fight dates back to 2017 and includes two FOIA lawsuit. In the first lawsuit, the FBI produced no responsive documents. The parties knew the FBI had something, and so this sparked a second lawsuit – where the FBI somehow found 20,000 pages of potentially responsive documents. The court explains:

Of those 20,000 pages, the government found 1,596 pages of responsive documents, of which the government withheld 1,469 pages under various FOIA exemptions (privacy, law enforcement exemption, etc.).

The FBI also withheld the contents of Seth Rich’s personal laptop, which it possesses, in its entirety, alleging the privacy of Rich’s family in “preventing the public release of this information” outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

The court rejected that argument, stating “the FBI has not satisfied its burden of showing more than a de minimis privacy interest that would justify withholding information from Seth Rich’s laptop.”

It concluded:

(Read more: Techno Fog, 9/29/2022) (Archive)

October 4, 2022 - Bobulinski: I haven’t heard from FBI since before 2020 election despite promises of follow-up

“During an interview aired on Tuesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” former Hunter Biden business associate Tony Bobulinski stated that if Facebook, Twitter, or anyone else had reached out to him to verify the authenticity of emails sent to him in The New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story, he would have produced the email, with the metadata, within minutes, but no one did.

Bobulinski said, “I went to the second debate in Nashville between President Trump and Joe Biden. That night, I flew to D.C., and the next morning, there was a big debate. Do I voluntarily walk into the FBI or do I go sit down with Sen. Johnson (R-WI) and Sen. Grassley (R-IA)? My lawyers decided it was better that I voluntarily go in to sit and provide these facts. And so, on the morning of October 23, the morning after the debate, I spent five-plus hours sitting in a room with, at one point, I think as [many] as six federal agents, walking through all the facts of my knowledge of the Biden family, how I got involved in this, the trips around the world, CEFC, Chairman Ye, and stuff like that. At the end of that meeting, and remember, I voluntarily went there, so they were happy to take any information I provided to them. I wish I had pictures of the faces of the two main agents that were interviewing me. Because I would say something and you could just see the shock in their face and they would say, let’s take a minute, they’d get up and walk out of the room, and the agents would sort of convene and then come back and restart the interview. Because these facts are just for the sake of our country, for national security, at that point, he was candidate Joe Biden, now he’s the sitting President of the United States, the most powerful person in the free world, and daunting.”

He continued, “So, at the end of that five-plus hour interview, the head of station told my lawyers, listen, an individual named Tim Thibault is going to run point on all of this. We’re definitely going to have Tony come back in for a follow-up interview. It could be as early as next week. Some of the people that were in the room weren’t well-versed on all these facts, we may want to have people come in from Baltimore or Delaware. And I was ready to sit down with anybody that needed me to or travel wherever I wanted to. And so the head of station gave my lawyers Tim Thibault’s cell phone number. Tim was not there that day. … But my lawyers had an hour, hour-and-a-half call with him that Friday night, October 23. And subsequent calls through the weekend and the following week, when I was then coming on your show to provide the facts to the American people. And they were supposed to be working [on] a follow-up interview. And Tim Thibault, in his last discussion with my legal counsel [said], listen, we know Tony’s cooperating. We appreciate all the information he’s provided. We will follow up with you. We’re definitely going to have him come in for a follow-up interview or spend some more time on this. And I haven’t heard from them since.”

Bobulinski also said that his lawyers haven’t heard anything since. (Read more: Breitbart, 10/4/2020) (Archive)

October 6, 2022 - Huma Abedin says Hillary Clinton 'faced impossible standards' as a woman in politics

“Former campaign vice chair for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, Huma Abedin, told “The View” hosts on Thursday that Clinton faced “impossible standards” as a woman in politics.

Co-host Ana Navarro said “politics have become a personality contest” and asked Abedin about Vice President Kamala Harris being “judged” by the same “phantom ideal woman” as Clinton.

“I know the challenge and you know this well that Hillary had to face just as a woman in politics,” Abedin said. “All these impossible standards, you know, she needs to be taller, shorter, talk this way. This is annoying, you know, she looks angry when she speaks. It was almost like you couldn’t win no matter what you said.”

Abedin said Clinton was never the “personality candidate” and said no one ever questioned whether she was “qualified.” (Read more: Fox News, 10/6/2022)  (Archive)

(Timeline editor’s note: Our timeline suggests the “impossible standards” that Hillary “faced” and had a hard time living up to, are the basic moral standards most people try to live by every day.)

October 6, 2022 - What of Charles Dolan and the Clinton Campaign in the upcoming Danchenko trial?

(…) Expect Charles Dolan to testify to his conversations with Danchenko and others relating to the dossier allegations at the trial. He’s already testified before a grand jury. For background, Dolan is described in the Danchenko indictment as having “maintained historical and ongoing involvement in Democratic politics.” His history includes serving as chairman of a national Democratic political organization, being a state chairman of Bill Clinton’s 1992 and 1996 presidential campaigns, and an advisor to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

Based on his ties with the Clintons, one would think that the Clinton Campaign would have known about Dolan’s contacts with Danchenko. However, the Danchenko indictment states “individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign did not direct, and were not aware of, [Dolan’s] meetings with Danchenko and other Russian nationals.”

That statement concerns Dolan’s lack of interactions with the Clinton Campaign. It still leaves unanswered the question of whether Danchenko had any contacts with the Clinton campaign, and whether the Clinton campaign was aware of Danchenko’s activities.

Two theories on that. It’s possible that the Clinton campaign received updates on the opposition research but otherwise isolated itself from these matters, preferring its lawyers at Perkins Coie and its contractors at Fusion GPS (and their sources) get their hands dirty. That would be consistent with what we saw in the Michael Sussmann trial, a real-time demonstration of how the Clinton machine uses the attorney-client and work-product privileges to manipulate the press, spread false accusations, and hide a number of sins.

It is also possible that the Clinton campaign had more knowledge about Danchenko than has been made publicly available. I bring that up because back in December, we discussed a curious filing by Durham, which confirmed that the Clinton campaign and “multiple former employees of that campaign” were subject to “matters before the Special Counsel.” In that filing, Durham discussed the potential conflict of interest of Danchenko’s lawyers, whose firm also represented the Clinton campaign and those former campaign employees.

Specifically, Durham raised these areas of inquiry that may become issues at the Danchenko trial:

• The Clinton Campaign’s knowledge or lack of knowledge concerning the veracity of information in the dossiers sourced by Danchenko;
• The Clinton Campaign’s awareness or lack of awareness of Danchenko’s collection methods and sub-sources;
• Meetings or communications between and among the Clinton Campaign, Fusion GPS, and Christopher Steele regarding or involving Danchenko;
• Danchenko’s knowledge or lack of knowledge regarding the Clinton Campaign’s role in the activities surrounding the Steele Dossier; and
• The extent to which the Clinton Campaign and/or its representatives directed, solicited, or controlled Danchenko’s activities.

All of those points are important, but that last one is particularly compelling and is worth repeating: “The extent to which the Clinton Campaign and/or its representatives directed, solicited, or controlled Danchenko’s activities.”

That implies the Clinton Campaign’s awareness of Danchenko and contacts with Danchenko. (After all, if the answer was “no,” then there would be no conflict.) Thus the potential conflict described by Durham:

“the Clinton Campaign and [Danchenko] each might have an incentive to shift blame and/or responsibility to the other party for any allegedly false information that was contained within the Company Reports and/or provided to the FBI.”

All this reminds us of a question we have previously asked. If the Clinton Campaign was being informed of the work by Fusion GPS, what of the likelihood that the Clinton Campaign was informing the work of Fusion GPS?

And here’s a follow-up question: from whom did Danchenko get the name Sergei Millian?

Furthermore, one has to ask whether those Clinton Campaign/Danchenko contacts, if they existed, stopped after the election – or whether they continued through Danchenko’s 2017 interviews with the FBI.

Will these issues be raised, and will we get answers on the Clinton Campaign’s ties to Danchenko (or Danchenko’s “sources”)? As outside observers, we can’t – and won’t – make guarantees. There’s danger in false promises just like there’s danger in false hope. Durham, however, has suggested the possibility of former representatives of the Clinton Campaign testifying at trial, stating:

“in the event that one or more former representatives of the Clinton Campaign are called to testify” at trial, Danchenko and the witness “would be represented by the same law firm, resulting in a potential conflict.”

(Read more: The Reactionary/Techno Fog, 10/6/2022)  (Archive)

October 12, 2022 - The FBI asks for more time to release Seth Rich laptop documents

“Yesterday the government asked for more time to respond to U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant’s September 29, 2022 order directing the FBI to produce all records related to Seth Rich’s laptop. Somewhat relatedly, the FBI is withholding three reports produced by CrowdStrike in August of 2016 regarding the purported hack of the Democratic National Committee.

The order itself is pretty straightforward, at least with respect to Seth’s personal laptop, because it directs the FBI to “produce the information it possesses related to Seth Rich’s laptop and responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA requests within 14 days of this Order.” On the other hand, the order does not discuss Seth’s work laptop, which is also in the possession of the FBI.

I’m waiting for the FBI to explain what it thinks needs to be clarified, then I may be filing my own motion for clarification. Meanwhile, the FBI has cited only one narrow basis for withholding the records related to Seth’s laptop, namely his privacy. I’m not sure why it takes four weeks and an appellate lawyer to figure out why the judge did or didn’t get that issue right.

In any event, I’m reminded of something that I learned almost thirty years ago when I was a newspaper reporter: people with nothing to hide don’t try to hide nothing. (Read more: Lawflog, 10/13/2022)  (Archive)

October 13, 2022 - Danchenko Trial Day 3: Charles Dolan and Danchenko handling agent, Kevin Helson testimonies; FBI paid Danchenko $200,000

Charles Dolan Jr. is the first witness on the stand. Kielty will be examining for the government.

Dolan goes through his background. Involved in the 1980 presidential campaign for President Jimmy Carter.

Dolan also worked as a political consultant for Congressional campaigns and the Democratic Governors Association. He has joined a government relations firm and served as a liaison between lobbying operations and public affairs communications operations.

He reportedly worked for DC-based PR unit Powell Tate as well as Ketchum Inc. in early 2000s for 4-5 years. Beyond Jimmy Carter’s presidential campaign, Dolan says that he has worked as a paid advisor or a volunteer for every DNC campaign since Carter’s besides Obama campaign.

While working for Ketchum, Dolan worked closely with Russia because Ketchum represented the Russian federation. His role at Ketchum was to attract foreign investment. Dolan had regular conference calls with Dmitry Peskov, who is the press secretary for Russian President Putin.

Dolan had meetings with Russian ambassadors and people at embassy as well as various ministers. As far as Dolan’s personal interactions with Peskov, the 2 men met 1-2x per year. When Kielty asks what Dolan talked about w Peskov, Dolan stutters & says: “Things we were working on.”

While working with Ketchum, Dolan traveled to Russia 1-2 times per year, and through this work with the Russian Federation he was also involved in the G20 summit. Dolan also worked with Walt Disney in Russia helping to get their cable TV network and broadcast underway.

Around 2015 Dolan was employed at KGlobal, a PR firm in D.C. Danchenko met Dolan through Fiona Hill of the Brookings Institute who, per the Brookings Institute website: “[is] a senior fellow in the Center on the United States and Europe in the Foreign Policy program at Brookings.

She recently served as deputy assistant to the president and senior director for European and Russian affairs on the National Security Council from 2017 to 2019.

From 2006 to 2009, she served as national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at The National Intelligence Council.” Fiona Hill had previously been appointed by Trump as deputy assistant to the president and senior director…for European and Russian affairs on his National Security Council staff. Hill left the White House on July 15, 2019.

Back to how Dolan and Danchenko met.

Danchenko was trying to help his former schoolmate Olga Galkina find a PR firm. During March or April of 2016, she met with Dolan in the company of Danchenko. Dolan says he met with Galkina to discuss KGlobal doing business with the company she worked for.

Dolan also mentioned Gregg Hartley, a Republican lobbyist. Dolan said that his communications with Danchenko occurred over email and phone, plus having breakfast and lunch together at times.

Dolan said that he would communicate with Danchenko to check on Olga Galkina. Dolan understood that Danchenko was working as a political risk operative in London, where Orbis is based.

Dolan learned of Christopher Steele and Christopher Borrows of Orbis through Danchenko, who said in an email that Dolan would meet Steele and Borrows at some point if he was in London or if Steele and Borrows came to Washington, D.C.

Government Exhibit 702 is an email from Danchenko to Dolan dated April 29, 2016. Danchenko thanks Dolan for lunch and says he forwarded Dolan’s letter to Steele and Borrows.

He makes the point that he’ll introduce the 3 men if they ever are in London or D.C., respectively.
Danchenko says he didn’t get his new passport this month so he would be available for breakfast on May 20 or 13; he also said he’d be in Russia the first half of June. Mentions the Hotel Peter across the street from the Central Bank…

Dolan says he never met Christopher Steele in person and didn’t work with Orbis Business Intelligence which is Steele’s company.

Keilty* brings up Government Exhibit 703, an email dated April 29, 2016, from Danchenko to Dolan with an attachment and subject line is: Business Intelligence.

The email roughly read: “FYI, sample byproduct of my due diligence practice. Confidential: We don’t post these projects online.” The attachment is an Orbis document prepared by Danchenko; Dolan says he didn’t know what the document was about.

Note mentioned in the middle of this information: In May of 2016, Dolan finalized a trip to Cyprus to meet with Olga Galkina and make a presentation to her boss. Dolan’s PR firm, KGlobal, signed a contract with Galkina’s company.

Dolan says he kept communicating with Danchenko, and was approached by the Young Presidents’ Organization (YPO) to set up a conference in Moscow. Dolan felt that Danchenko would be useful.

YPO, according to Dolan, is an organization that sets up networking events to connect CEOs of various companies. Dolan mentions his relations with Steven Kupka, a D.C. attorney who was involved in YPO. Kupka wanted to organize a visit to Moscow.

The YPO conference scheduled for October 2016 was to be called “Inside the Kremlin.” Dolan was to be involved due to his extensive experience in Russia. The conference purpose was to introduce business people to Russian government officials.

Dolan approached Danchenko because he’s fluent in Russian and knows English well. At one point, they scouted hotels and venues in Moscow for the attendees to gather.

Dolan recalls meeting with Danchenko in Moscow in June 2016 and having lunch together. He reiterates their communications involved emails, phone calls, lunch, and breakfast, and would both attend the YPO conference. In fact, Danchenko was a speaker there.

In July 2016, when Dolan went to Cyprus for 3-5 days to meet w Danchenko’s friend Galkina for purported business with her company, Dolan confirms to Keilty he did “superficially” discuss upcoming US Presidential election with Galkina. Dolan specifically says they spoke about HRC.

After his visit in Cyprus, Dolan returned to the U.S., continuing to be in contact with Danchenko and planning the YPO conference.

Government Exhibit 712A is an email dated August 19, 2016 at 1:08 PM from Danchenko to Dolan. Danchenko says:

“Hi Chuck,

“Here are the bios of two of four. Who were the others?” This is referring to the people speaking at the YPO conference.

Danchenko then writes: “Could you please ask someone to comment on Paul Manafort’s resignation and anything on the Trump campaign? Off the record of course! Any thought, rumor, allegation. I am working on a related project against Trump.

I asked Gregg three months ago but he didn’t say much although shared a couple insights.

Thanks a lot!

Best,

Igor”

The “Gregg” that Danchenko is referring to is the aforementioned Gregg Hartley, Republican D.C. lobbyist.

Next, Keilty shares Dolan’s response. It roughly says: “Let me dig around on Manafort. Pretty sure the new team wanted him gone asap and used the recent NYT story to drive a stake in his heart.”

There an add’l reply after from Dolan to Danchenko that includes:

“Hi Igor,

I had a drink w a GOP friend of mine who knows [some things]. . . Corey Lewandowski who hates Manafort and still speaks to Trump & regularly played a role. He is said to be doing a happy dance for it.”
There was also a following paragraph that said “a number of people wanted Manafort out.”

At the end of the email, Dolan attached a Politico article about Paul Manafort.

On the stand, Dolan testifies under oath to Keilty that he actually never met this “GOP friend,” but got his story from cable news.

Dolan says he felt like embellishing the story because he knew Danchenko was working in political risk and inferred that Danchenko had helped him before so he was trying to return the favor.

Government Exhibit 713B is Danchenko’s response email to Dolan regarding the Manafort information.

Dated August 20, 2016, Danchenko wrote: “Our goals clearly coincide.” He adds that any additional insights from Dolan would be greatly appreciated.

Dolan’s ultimate response to Danchenko asking for more information was, “Thanks, I’ll let you know if I hear anything else.” Dolan testifies that he did not provide more insights on Manafort.

Dolan says that he probably would’ve been involved in the Clinton campaign but at that time was not.

Despite Danchenko writing to Dolan that he was working on an important project, Dolan did not know if Danchenko was working for anyone in particular.

Dolan makes it a point to note that this email exchange was one of 50 emails he had received from various people and didn’t put too much thought into it.

Dolan met with the Special Counsel on numerous occasions. He claims that he knew about the Steele dossier because his client at the time of its publishing, Galkina’s company, was named in the report.

Government Exhibit 112, a page from the dossier, dated August 22, 2016, Paragraph 3 reads: “Speaking separately, also in late July 2016, an American political figure associated with Trump and his campaign outlined the reason behind Manafort’s recent demise. . .”

The paragraph cites nearly verbatim what Charles Dolan wrote in his email to Danchenko about Paul Manafort. Coincidentally, Dolan’s email with the Manafort information was sent to Danchenko on August 20, 2016. So two days later, the information ended up in the Steele dossier.

There’s more discussion of Dolan describing his relationship with Danchenko. Dolan mentions a time that he saw Danchenko was at a park near his house with his daughter, so he went to go meet with him. Note: Dolan casually mentions picking up over the counter drugs for Danchenko.

Keilty brings up Government Exhibit 1202, the January 10, 2017, Buzzfeed article all about Trump’s “alleged” ties to Russia with the Steele dossier attached to it.

Conversation under seal.

Morning after Buzzfeed article published, on Jan 11, 2017, Dolan testifies he received many calls from # of people. Keilty asked if Dolan spoke with Danchenko that day. Dolan, stuttering on the stand, says he called Danchenko because he, “Was curious where the article came from.”

Keilty asked if Galkina was involved in the Steele dossier, to which Dolan responds that he isn’t sure but, “heard she was.”

In the January 11, 2017 phone call between Dolan and Danchenko, Dolan says that Danchenko told him that he would find out where the Steele dossier came from, but never got back to Dolan.

No further questions.

Sears begins cross-examining Dolan. Sears asks, “Besides Fiona Hill, how did you meet Danchenko?” Dolan says maybe through the Brookings Institute.

Regarding Dolan’s relationship with Olga Galkina, Dolan says he spoke to Galkina without Danchenko for most of their relationship, which began in D.C. in March 2016.

Sears probes that the YPO October 2016 conference was not always held in Russia? Dolan confirms that the conference was regularly held in various capitals around the world; just so happened to occur in Moscow at that time.

Dolan says that he and Danchenko were together at the October 2016 conference in Moscow and that Danchenko was a speaker there.

During cross examination, Dolan claims that the first time he ever saw the Steele dossier was in the January 10, 2017 Buzzfeed article, and that he was unaware Danchenko was working on the project.

Regarding Dolan’s October 31, 2021 meeting with the Special Counsel, Dolan says he doesn’t recall if he told the Special Counsel at the time that he didn’t think anything in the Steele dossier was from him.

Defense Exhibit 250 is shown. In August of 2021, Dolan still didn’t see anything in the Steele dossier that was from him.

On September 7, 2021, Dolan brought emails he had to the Special Counsel interview. Sears asks if they pressured Dolan to say that information in the dossier came from him? Dolan agreed that the information in the dossier was “very similar.”

Dolan doesn’t recall that he was being told by the Special Counsel that he was the subject of this investigation. Sears suggests that Dolan was upset upon finding out; Dolan still seems confused and says he’s not familiar with these terms, but hesitantly says, “Yes.”

Dolan says that the government reminded him that he needed to tell the truth. Dolan agreed that he had zero insider knowledge about Paul Manafort; he simply read articles and consumed news.

Dolan says that he had “no phone calls” about specific issues [related to the Steele dossier) or anything about the Trump campaign’s alleged connections to Russia.

Sears asks: “Wasn’t it your understanding Danchenko was writing a book?”

Dolan doesn’t agree and clarified that his understanding was that Danchenko was a political risk analyst and simply responded, and per Sears’ rhetoric, “threw [Danchenko] a bone” with the Manafort story.

Dolan reiterates that the specific email exchange with Danchenko was “1 of 50 that he had” with various individuals that day.

Sears asks Dolan if he’s aware that the government issued subpoenas for most of Dolan’s communications. Dolan testifies under oath that he never communicated with Danchenko about anything that was in the Steele dossier.

[END OF CROSS-EXAMINATION]

Keilty begins his redirect of Dolan and brings up the August 20, 2016 email where Dolan talked about “having a drink with his GOP friend” who Dolan alleged had dirt that could be useful for Danchenko, followed by the Manafort story.

Keilty makes it a point to tell Dolan that he said nothing about cable news in that email, only the GOP friend. This email was a response to Danchenko’s August 19, 2016 email asking Dolan for any “truth, rumor, etc.” about Manafort.

Keilty: “You think Danchenko was after you for open source research?”

The government retracts question just as the defense objects.

A few short reiterations of previously stated queries.

No further questions.

Kevin Helson, Danchenko’s handling agent, is called to the stand.

Helson has worked for the FBI for 20 years. He has a bachelors degree in chemistry and microbiology. He worked at the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation until 2002 before signing on to the FBI.

“Russia” is Helson’s assigned area within the FBI. Helson says his job is to identify individuals who are in U.S. under false pretenses or are acting against U.S.

In 2016, Helson worked in Washington, D.C. field office. He was asked to join Crossfire Hurricane, Helson declined.

Durham asks if Helson was aware in mid-September 2016, there was a Yahoo News article that the FBI was investigating Carter Page, or anything about Christopher Steele. Helson says that he was later aware but not part of the project.

At the end of January 2017, Helson was approached by people from Crossfire Hurricane (Steve Somma* and supervisory intelligence analyst Crossfire Hurricane). For context, Helson confirms to Durham that Auten worked out of headquarters but that Helson worked in the D.C. field office.

Helson’s supervisor gave him a task to meet with Igor Danchenko and eventually bring him on as a confidential human source (CHS). Auten and others related to Crossfire Hurricane were reportedly concerned about follow-up questions from the Steele dossier…

…that merged with Helson’s own projects out of the D.C. office, since Helson’s assigned focus area is matters of intelligence related to Russia.

In late Feb or early March 2017, Kevin Helson, Steve Somma, and Jason Ruehle (Danchenko’s co-handling agent to Helson) had initial meeting with Danchenko to set stage for future meetings & discuss questions regarding the Steele dossier. Helson says this lasted less than an hour.

Durham asks Helson if he had any trouble understanding Danchenko, to which Helson says that Danchenko spoke fluent English and that he had no difficulty communicating with him.
Helson says he didn’t know much about the Steele dossier, and if he wanted to know anything, other people involved in the project had to provide him with the information. Helson makes it a point to note that Crossfire Hurricane later became known as the Mueller investigation.

In conversing with Durham during the examination, Helson discusses his own methods of assessing whether a subject is lying or not based on the idea that, “It’s harder to keep a lie straight during multiple times of telling the same story.”

Durham asks how Helson first became familiar with the names Sergei Milian and Chuck Dolan. Helson somehow found out about them and needed to look it up.

Helson says during his working relationship with Danchenko, his goal was to obtain any new information that could corroborate the Steele dossier. Helson says Danchenko didn’t provide corroborating information.

Durham asks Helson if he’s aware how much of the Steele dossier was attributed to Danchenko. Off the top of his head, Helson says 80%.

Special Counsel John Durham pulls Government Exhibit 1502, which is the LinkedIn message from Igor Danchenko to Anastasia Gnezditskaia where he says he was responsible for 80% of the raw intelligence & 50% of the analysis. Helson says he had no reason to doubt that this is true.

Durham: “Do you recall if Danchenko was to be a paid CHS or not?”

Helson: “[That was dependent upon] what information he gave.” Helson said he probably would become paid over time.

Helson recalls that Danchenko was not paid during their initial meeting in the Alexandria, Virginia, field office, and that when Danchenko was paid for the first time it was less than $3,000.

Helson expected, given that he was eventually paid, that Danchenko would be giving full disclosure, truthful, and as forthright as possible.

Durham shows Government Exhibit 118 paragraph #1. Which reads: “Your client agrees to supply complete and truthful info and testimony to all persons in this matter, as well as other proceedings, etc. …
and that the client must not withhold any info or attempt to protect any person or entity through false info or false implication.”

Helson discusses with Durham his process of collecting information during meetings with Danchenko—by getting record of what was being said and for nuanced things, needed a recording. Helson tells Durham that Danchenko was unaware he was being recorded.

Government Exhibit 151 is a recording; G.E. 151T is the transcript. There was some information in the recording related to the Steele dossier, Helson says, but not all of it.

Government Exhibit 118-11 is a stipulation for the aforementioned recording and translation, wherein both parties agreed that both were a true and accurate copy of a meeting between Danchenko, Helson, and Ruehle. This is one recording among numerous.

Trenga instructs the jury that if there’s any discrepancy while looking at the transcript and the recording to go by the recording.

Durham asks if Danchenko had a copy of the dossier in front of him in each instance that the Steele dossier was discussed. Helson says yes.

Per the FBI recording of the meeting recorded in G.E. 151 and G.E. 151T, Durham asks Helson if it’s relevant that Danchenko said he himself would “record things when speaking with people in case he ever needed them.” Helson concurs this is relevant and [odd].

Durham asks Helson if or when Sergei Milian came up. Helson says that Milian came up at one of his first meetings with Danchenko. Durham asks if Helson is familiar with Report 2016/95; Helson says he looked at this during trial prep.

Helson adds that in March of 2017, Brian Auten raised an issue about Milian, saying there were discrepancies in the information about him.

Government Exhibit 152 and 152T are a recording and transcript.

Durham: “Was there any record that could corroborate that Danchenko received [the] anonymous phone call?”

Helson: “That would have requiring looking at phone records.” Helson says that they had asked Danchenko to provide any phone communication records, which he says would include apps, but Danchenko produced nothing.

Durham: “Was it then your job to get the records?”

Helson said that he wasn’t allowed to legally obtain the phone records of Danchenko since Danchenko was voluntarily providing the FBI information. Helson said to obtain the records legally, they would have needed a predicated investigation and they didn’t have that.

Back to Government Exhibit 152 and 152T; in the recording, Danchenko mentions that he uses WhatsApp.

In this recording, it’s also the first time that Helson says he inquired about Milian’s part of the dossier.
Durham asks if Helson ever recorded Danchenko in conversations outdoors. Helson says it’s difficult to record outdoors because of picking up outside noise but also because the FBI seeks to limit outdoor communications [with brevity].

Durham asks Helson about the electronic Dropbox where Danchenko was supposed to provide documents to the FBI. Helson says that Danchenko provided a “wide depth” of information, and that himself and Ruehle were in “receive mode” during their meetings with Danchenko.

Helson says they allowed the intelligence team to analyze the information.

Durham asks if Danchenko provided corroborating info for the Steele dossier. Helson says no.

Helson says that the information he received depended upon what was received from the Crossfire Hurricane team and later the Mueller investigation. Helson says that eventually the Steele dossier talk “faded off” as a topic they discussed.

Durham asks Helson if Danchenko ever provided supporting documents about the alleged anonymous call from Milian or communications.

Durham pulls Government Exhibit 164 and 164T. In this recording, Helson asks Danchenko about his relationship with Milian. Helson: “There was an email and I think there was a call with a guy up in New York who you thought was Milian?”

Danchenko responds that he doesn’t have Milian’s number; doesn’t remember. Danchenko says, “He never showed up in NY.”

Danchenko provides the email to Helson: “sergio@russianamericanchamber.com”

Durham asks Helson if he ever found out how Danchenko obtained these email addresses. Helson says: “No.”

Back to the recording. Danchenko provides Helson with a phone number that he says is one of Milian’s with a Georgia area code.

It’s very evident in this recording that Danchenko was avoiding having a conversation.

Durham: “It would’ve been helpful to know how Danchenko got Milian’s email addresses and for the dossier, right?”

Helson agrees.

Prior to dealing with Danchenko, Helson says he was unaware of Milian’s prior history with FBI.

Durham shows G.E. 204; it’s an email from Danchenko to MilianGroup July 21, 2016. The subject is “Question about Trump + China”.

Helson says Danchenko never provided him this email.

Durham: “Seeing this email would’ve been important to the investigation, yes?” Since Milian is an alleged sub source of the Steele dossier.

Helson agrees with Durham.

Durham then shows Government Exhibit 205 and 205T; the translation is there because this email was originally written in Russian. It’s from Sergei Milian to Dmitri Zlodorev. Dated July 26, 2016. Milian is asking Zlodorev “Who is Igor?” After receiving an email from him.

Helson does not know if Crossfire Hurricane team ever had a record of whether Milian was in fact even in the U.S. during July 2016. This is relevant because of the allegations that Danchenko said he was supposed to meet with Milian toward the end of July and he “never showed up.”

Government Exhibit 206 and 206T is Zlodorev’s response to Sergei.

Government Exhibit 207 and 207T is an email from Danchenko to MilianGroup dated August 18, 2016.

It opens with:

“Hello Sergey,

I wrote to you several weeks ago. We are contacts on LinkedIn.”

Later in the email Danchenko wrote: “If there’s any opportunity let’s meet.” Zero reference to phone app or anything that Milian never showed up to a meeting.

Helson says that any communications between Danchenko and Sergei would’ve been relevant.

Durham asks if Helson had these communications, would it have changed the investigation? Helson says yes.

On July 21, 2016, Danchenko wrote an email asking Milian about a construction company from Switzerland. To Helson’s knowledge, Danchenko was not in business with this construction company.

Durham asks Helson if he has knowledge of the communications between Danchenko and Milian between July 21, 2016 and August 18, 2016.

Helson says he expected he would’ve been provided those but he was not.

Helson believed documents Danchenko provided that he would say how he was communicating (either thru regular phone calls or thru phone apps).

Durham brings up Government Exhibit 610 & 610T. It’s a Facebook exchange that was originally in Russian between Galkina and Danchenko.

Galkina: “Call me in exactly 15 minutes. It’s regarding Chuck and me.”

Danchenko: “I will try. If I can get thru directly. Possibly Viber or WhatsApp.”

Gov Exhibit 611 is a Facebook message from Igor asking recipient if they have Signal after he referred to something as a “Delicate topic.” According to Helson, Signal is an “encrypted app in which parties can communicate back and forth. The conversations erase when you’re done.”

Government Exhibit 102. On October 24, 2017, there was an in-person meeting with Danchenko in Alexandria, Virginia. Helson raised questions about Danchenko’s communications with the alleged anonymous caller that Danchenko believed was Milian.

His reasoning for believing that the caller was Milian was because he listened to a YouTube video of Sergei Milian speech and in his opinion it sounded just like him. Danchenko said he has no in-person meeting with Milian.

The FBI confronted this because it didn’t line up with what Steele said. Danchenko refuted Steele’s take but never corrected him. Danchenko told FBI he never met with Milian in person. However, Danchenko claimed he spoke on the phone a few times with who he believed was Milian.

Durham: “How confident are you (Helson) that on October 24, 2017, Danchenko said he spoke to Milian on the phone a couple times?

Helson: “Very confident.”

G.E. 103 confirms on November 2, 2017, Helson and Danchenko had an in-person meeting and they discussed Milian again.

Durham: “Why did you have to go back to the Milian piece?”

Helson: “Brian Auten said there were inconsistencies between what Danchenko said regarding his contact with Milian versus what Steele said.”

Durham: “Going off of what Danchenko told Steele, right?”

Helson: “Steele thought Danchenko and Milian met in-person but Danchenko never corrected him.”

Durham: “Based on your interactions with Danchenko, was there ever any indication that there was other information besides what came from Steele? Did Charles Dolan ever come up?”

Helson: “Yes. I didn’t know of Dolan until I found out through Crossfire Hurricane.” Helson said that Danchenko never brought up Charles Dolan to him.

Durham probes: “Isn’t it the goal to corroborate what’s in the Steele dossier?”

Helson: “Yes, to identify the source.”

Durham: “Would it have been helpful to have a U.S. citizen whose info was in the dossier?”

Helson: “Yes. Much easier.”

Government Exhibit 171T. June 15, 2017. The third recorded conversation between Helson, Danchenko, and Ruehle.

Eventually after Helson was Danchenko’s handler, he learned of the emails between Danchenko and Dolan.

Durham shows email G.E. 712A August 19, 2016 from Danchenko to Dolan asking him about info on Paul Manafort and how Danchenko said he was working on a project on Trump. As well as Dolan’s reply to Danchenko G.E. 712B with the “Drink w GOP friend of mine & Paul Manafort” info.

Prior to June 15, 2017, Helson said he had not seen these emails; he said no one on Crossfire Hurricane gave this to him.

Durham: “With respect to his email, wouldn’t it have been good to know this during June of 2017 and prior?”

Helson: “Yes.”

Durham pulls up G.E. 714, the dossier report 216/105. Paragraph 3 is the paragraph that is nearly identical (with superfluous language to polish it up) language that was in Dolan’s email to Danchenko about Paul Manafort.

While looking at this, Durham is asking Helson questions about how he gathered information to corroborate the dossier. Helson, with the request of Mueller’s investigative team, obtained questions to ask Danchenko by Brian Auten and Amy Anderson.

G.E. 171 & 171T is recording & transcript from June 15, 2017 between Helson & Danchenko.

Helson: “For whatever reason, they’re either missing you? Or they’re not finding . . . We’re trying to figure out. . You said something to Steele. . . Do you know Chuck Dolan?”

(Long pause)

Danchenko: “Yes. I’ve known [of] Chuck for 12 years… a couple years [close].” Danchenko says Dolan was always in Russia,

Helson: “You never talked to him about anything shown in the dossier, right?”

Danchenko: “No.”

Helson asks when was last time Danchenko saw Dolan. He replies September of last year in Moscow, but then pulls an exact time.

Helson: “I wasn’t expecting an exact time!” He then asks if Dolan is close to the Kremlin.

Danchenko suggests Dolan is close to Putin professionally.

Durham asks Helson what Danchenko’s demeanor was during this interaction and Helson responds: “A bit of hesitation and a noticeable pause.”

Durham: “Did Danchenko ever mention immediately after the Steele dossier was published in Buzzfeed on January 10, 2017, that Dolan reached out to Danchenko on January 11, 2017?”

Helson: “No.”

Durham: “You would’ve wanted to know that, right?”

Helson: “Yes.”

Durham and Helson briefly talk about the FBI interview with Olga Galkina in D.C.

Helson’s intent was to obtain any knowledge he could find to corroborate the dossier.

Durham asks about how Danchenko referenced his communications in forms (apps, etc.) how he would send screenshots of conversations to Helson.

Helson: “Yes.”

Durham brings up how on New Year’s Day in 2017, Danchenko met with Dolan in a park. “What was your impression of this?”

Helson found it to be interesting. Helson was under the impression that Danchenko introduced Galkina to Dolan.

When Helson asked Danchenko if Dolan would know Steele, he replied: “I think he would.” However, Danchenko did not mention business interactions with either to Helson.

Durham: “Would you learn of Dolan’s connections to Dmitry Peskov?” (Putin’s press secretary)

Helson: “Yes.”

Government Exhibit is a May 17, 2017 2-page report with 3 screenshots of a conversation between Galkina and Danchenko. On bullet point 4, there’s a note that “Galkina claims she can’t travel til September but [Danchenko] made a good pitch.”

G.E. 120 mostly redacted doc. There’s a part discussing Danchenko speaking on social media and another portion. “At this point the development . . . Trump collusion and the gov’t . . . ”

“All of Danchenko’s info was obtained through conversations with colleagues and friends.”
Durham: “Do you recall that Danchenko discussed Dolan’s relationship to Peskov?”

Durham and Helson are talking about “Russian disinformation” in relation to Peskov’s role as Putin’s press secretary.

It’s noted that even as a paid informant, Danchenko did not get Helson any information on Dolan [to corroborate the dossier].

Government Exhibit 605 is a picture of Danchenko and Dolan together in Russia from June 14, 2016. This had been posted to Facebook.

The day the photo was posted to Danchenko’s profile, Galkina tried to arrange a [vicinity?] for Danchenko.

In March 2017, Helson said he first asked Danchenko about Dolan. Danchenko said Dolan was, “A nice guy, a friend.”

Then on September 22, 2017, Danchenko’s story changed and he told Helson that Dolan “has dubious connections in Russia.”

Helson attributed this to the fact that he was simply asking Danchenko about people around him who could be a security risk.

Durham makes a point to conclude that a well-coordinated conspiracy, Report 95 was used on a FISA application, unvetted, against an American citizen.

No further questions.

During cross-examination, Sears probes that, “Wasn’t Danchenko SHOCKED at how Steele presented what he said in the dossier?” Helson agreed. The two men agree that Danchenko never vouched for the information.

Defense Exhibit 100 discusses what the motivations were for Danchenko to become a confidential human source. Helson said: “Patriotism.” Both Helson and Danchenko had concerns for his safety.

Sears states that Helson and Danchenko had a working relationship from March 2017 to October 2020.

Sears asks Helson about the “one time” that Danchenko allegedly acted erratic.

He supposedly walked into an in-person meeting and demanded more money, jumping up and down and very upset.

Sears says that Danchenko later apologized for this and it was revealed that his wife and lawyer had been telling him he should be asking for more money due to his having children and being at risk. Helson confirms this.

Sears reminds Helson he testified to OIG that Danchenko was “gold” as human source following “single erratic behavior incident” because Helson would have known going forward if there was a time that Danchenko was lying. According to Helson, Danchenko never acted like that again.

Helson also said that the Crossfire Hurricane team never raised an issue about information Danchenko had provided Helson. However, Helson says that there were times Danchenko couldn’t recall where something or someone came from source-wise in the dossier.

Sears is pushing that Danchenko, as far as Helson was aware, had never known about or seen the Steele dossier until it was published in Buzzfeed on January 10, 2017.

During this interaction, Helson says he legally wouldn’t have been able to obtain all of Danchenko’s communications unless he had voluntarily provided them himself. Danchenko would later tell Crossfire Hurricane that he deleted nearly all of his communications.

Helson reportedly TOLD Danchenko to scrub his phone. He says following the January 2017 FBI interview, Danchenko was instructed on multiple occasions to scrub his phone because he’d be, “A target to Russians.”

Sears asks Helson about Danchenko’s relationship with Dolan. The two men agree that Danchenko said he approximately knew Dolan for 10 years based on Russia connections.

Danchenko knew that Dolan worked for Ketchum, who did PR for the Kremlin. According to Helson, Danchenko reportedly said Dolan was “naive to Russia.”

In reference to Danchenko saying in October 2017 that Dolan had dubious connections to Russia, Sears and Helson agree that Danchenko then provided the FBI with the names of the “dubious Russia contacts.”

It’s noted that Steele did not contain Danchenko’s identity as the primary source of the dossier, but that Danchenko concealed his own identity.

During Helson’s testimony to the OIG, Sears reminds him that he said Danchenko never struck him as “someone who would lie.”

Danchenko never told Helson that he lied to Steele about his meeting Milian; Danchenko simply never corrected Steele.

About 10 months after Danchenko met with FBI, he told them that he was going to meet with Steele. The FBI was having Danchenko fish information from Steele.

Sears asks Helson if he was trying to drive a wedge between Danchenko and Steele; he replies, “Yes.”

According to Sears & Helson, Danchenko had concerns about giving more info to Steele because he supposedly embellished info Danchenko originally gave to him for the dossier.

Items that Danchenko said were rumors, Steele wrote as fact. Sears is animatedly suggesting that according to Danchenko, Steele was obsessed with “proving the dossier to be true” and that Danchenko eventually “expressed concern about Dolan and Galkina’s relationship.”

Sears: “Danchenko is charged with lying, saying he never spoke to Dolan about anything in the Steele report.”

Helson: “Correct.”

Defense Exhibit 102 is debrief notes from the June 15, 2017 recorded meeting between Helson and Danchenko. Helson’s wrote in a note that Danchenko had known Dolan for “2 years more closer.”

Helson had asked how long it had been since Danchenko had spoken to Dolan. He mentioned the Moscow trip in 2016 and then the January 1, 2017 meeting in the park.

Defense Exhibit 103. Helson does not know if Danchenko ever saw Report 105, which was all about Dolan.
Auten also did not ask Danchenko about it. No one apparently ever focused Helson’s attention on

Paragraph 3 of the dossier report that was all about Paul Manafort; nearly verbatim to what Dolan had written in his reply email to Danchenko.

Government Exhibit 120 is very redacted but begins w/: “At this point in the development source understands the priority is to obtain any and all info that would indicate collusion between Trump’s campaign, administration, & the Russian government or any of its representatives.”

It continues: “Speaking on social media. He keeps asking when I am visiting. On good terms. Asking him about Romeo and Juliet setting.”

In reference to the anonymous phone call with Milian, Danchenko told Auten he emailed Milian after the alleged scheduled meeting that Milian never showed up for, but he did not tell Helson or show him that email.

The issue is again raised that there was contradictory information about Danchenko’s meeting with Milian due to what Steele said, which is why Helson had an October 24, 2017 meeting with Danchenko and then another on November 2, 2017.

Sears: “Did you believe Danchenko knew what Steele told the FBI about his communications with Milian?”

Helson: “I don’t recall.”

Testifying to OIG on Oct 21, 2019, Helson states Danchenko said Steele was completely wrong about his relationship w/ Milian & that Danchenko was not happy w/ Steele about what he put in dossier. Sears insists that Danchenko lying about this could compromise relationship w/ FBI.

Referring to how Danchenko’s August 2016 email to Milian read that the two men never met, Sears argues that if Danchenko had written in the email that they had talked a few weeks back (alluding to the purported anonymous 10-15 call…

…that Danchenko believed to be Milian), Milian may have never called him again if he was trying to remain anonymous.

Sears brings up the Amtrak records of Danchenko going to New York and that Milian was supposedly flying into JFK airport on July 27, 2016.

Helson was unaware of late July FB message from Danchenko to his wife about the giraffes at the Bronx zoo that said “Another meeting later.”

Sears also raises Milian reached out to @GeorgePapa19 around same time that Danchenko believed he received an anonymous call from Milian.

In two of Helson’s Field Office Annual Source Reports, he wrote that any inconsistencies in Danchenko’s report were minor. Steele’s motivations came into question. Helson testified to the OIG that Danchenko’s had “real information” that was helpful to the FBI.

Defense Exhobit 109 stated that Danchenko reported critical reporting that added in a top FBI investigation. It also said that some of Danchenko’s reporting has been added to 25 IRs. An IR is an intelligence report.

Defense Exhibit 110 is a payment amount of $10,000 for the confidential human source, Danchenko, for reporting he provided during January of 2018. He was involved in 5 separate investigations, and his information…

…led to recognizing cyber actors [affecting] the 2016 election, according to the FBI. Danchenko reportedly assisted in uncovering “ongoing-maligned influence.”

Notes that former AG Bill Barr was launching an investigation into how the FBI handled Carter Page. Helson was concerned that the publishing of the redacted January 2017 interview would damage Danchenko.

Helson wrote a memo in July of 2020 that he disagreed with the move to release this. “Internet detectives” figured out who had been interviewed.

On October 21, 2020, Helson drafted an electronic communication to give a lump sum payment of $346,000 to Danchenko, since he would now have safety issues and had provided information for at least 25 FBI investigations.

The lump sum payment request was denied. Danchenko’s total lifetime payments would have been around $565,000 if he had actually received the $346,000.

Sears argued that the FBI didn’t have as much information until Danchenko, which Helson agrees with.

Helson says that they never thought Danchenko was partisan because said some of the things Danchenko brought to FBI were items that would negatively affect Trump. In other words, they’re inferring Danchenko tried to prevent those things from occurring.

No further questions.

In redirect, Durham calls out Helson, because he said there was no derogatory info on Danchenko in reports, but this wasn’t true. Durham raises that there is an open espionage case on Danchenko at that time.

References 65/8, a counterintelligence report. Durham asks if Helson bothered to obtain access to the report and see what it was about. Helson says that he spoke with Laura Pino about it and she said it was hearsay.

Durham: “Did you read the underlying documents? Is it not true that Human Validation recommended that Helson read the file.”

Again, Helson claiming he didn’t have access. Despite his knowledge that there was a witness, Helson said someone countered the witness.

Durham: “Danchenko’s Visa had expired. Did you know whether or not he stayed in the country anyway?” Durham raises the need to determine whether or not there was fraud committed with his immigration status in the states.

Durham: “Did Crossfire Hurricane, Mueller, or ANYONE do what was recommended?”

Conversation under seal.

Helson said he only checked Danchenko’s travel records going forward at that point, not backward.
Durham: “Did you check his financials to find unsolicited reporting that would have [indicated] the FBI might NOT be the primary audience for his reporting?”

Helson: “No.”

Durham: “Did you look into anything regarding his Visa or immigration status?!”

Helson: “No.”

Durham: “Did you polygraph? He could’ve been tasted by a foreign government entity to get intelligence?”

Helson: “No.”

Durham is pissed.

Sears cuts in and tries to say it that Helson disagreed with people trying to invalidate Danchenko as a human source.

“Did you know this woman from Human Validation Unit was an army counterintelligence officer in Europe.”

Helson says this doesn’t make her an expert on Russian intelligence officers in U.S.

Durham probes that Helson maybe opposed this being a 65A case instead of 105.

Durham: “Do you recall any of you or any of your colleagues attempting to corroborate the report? Did you do ANYTHING when the FBI mistakenly thought Danchenko left the country.”

Helson said it was never resolved.

[END OF DAY 3]

(@realtoriabrooke/Twitter, 10/13/2022)   (Archive)