Journalist Kimberley A. Strassel is one of the few mainstream journalists writing about the collaborative 2016 DOJ/FBI “Trump Operation” with a sense of what is to come. Strassel likely understands where the story is going, and appears to have a solid grasp on the evidence trail, yet necessarily writes cautiously – the stakes are indeed quite high.

Today Strassel writes about the need for the Democrats to rehabilitate the Steele Dossier because the alternative origin, the truthful origin to the counterintelligence operation over the campaign of candidate Donald Trump, is a stunning political risk.

Two weeks ago the New York Times narrative said the Steele Dossier was nothing, irrelevant, and had nothing to do with the FBI beginning “Operation Trump”. Today, mysteriously, Democrats embrace the Steele Dossier as they justify the DOJ/FBI counterintelligence and surveillance operation over an opposing political candidate.

The motive is transparent. If Democrats do not embrace the Steele Dossier as a national security origin for the entire DOJ/FBI operation, the real motive is subject to exposure. That real motive is political. That real motive cannot be justified. That real motive presents a legal risk that must be avoided.

However, while Strassel’s outlook is almost guaranteed to be correct, there’s an angle that Democrats have likely not considered; and/or they will not easily be prepared for.

Let me put it this way, in the form of a question:

The Steele Dossier is the “least bad” option to justify the origin of the DOJ/FBI “Trump Operation”. However, what if the Steele Dossier is the finished product of the DOJ/FBI “Trump Operation”, not the beginning of an investigation?

What I mean by that is… our research indicates the “dossier” information is likely a fabricated story woven from loosely connected factual evidence derived from DOJ/FBI unlawful FISA-702 query use, and not vice-versa.

That is to say… The information within the dossier came from early 2016 FISA-702 abuses by contractors working for the FBI. It appears from the fact pattern that elements from the FISA-702 queries generated intelligence bytes that were later laundered by Christopher Steele and became elements within his completed intelligence ‘dossier’.

The “Dossier” did not precede the FBI’s FISA-702(16)(17) surveillance applications to the FISA Court; the Dossier was actually constructed from previous unauthorized FISA-702 queries. A self-fulfilling intelligence prophecy per se’.

As a consequence, if the Democrats embrace the Dossier, and congress exposes the origin of the material within the Dossier, the Democrats end up embracing the conspiracy within the origin of the Dossier.

Funny that.

I wonder if they’ve thought that through?

Let me take a prudent moment to clear some things up for those who are following this story closely.

First, the MSM is about two-weeks behind understanding the researched evidence you have read in our ongoing analysis of this story-line. They are currently debating “FISA Warrants”, without even beginning to fathom that FISA-702 queries don’t require FISA Warrants.

Additionally, the FISA Court doesn’t give FISA-702 “Warrants”, they give FISA-702 search or surveillance approvals.

Secondly, the conservative media are still scared of this story. The ramifications are almost too large to fathom. A sitting president (Obama) knowingly involved in the weaponization of the FBI and DOJ to target a political opponent? That’s a story that scares the hell out of the financial media. One of the reasons it scares them is they are still suffering from the long-term side effects of “Battered Birther Syndrome“.

Those who are willing to engage in this story are petrified of being called a “Conspiracy Theorist” (etc. and writ large). In a weird way now you know why this little political research website is called “The Last Refuge”. We discuss the evidence and downstream facts that others are frightened to mention. No big deal. Those tender voices read here to figure out where the story is going…. we leave the trail… they follow.

When the financial media arrive at the destination, they shout “look what we found”. Meanwhile we’re chilling on the perimeter up ahead, resharpening the machetes, watching them celebrate their discovery in the rear view. No biggie. I digress…. moving on.

Let’s explain FISA because the media is taking too long to understand complex facts within the story.

We’ll break down the term: “ FISA-702(16)(17) ” into the elements that will help you make sense of this story in the future.

FISA – Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act

702 – An American caught up in the process of Foreign Surveillance

(16) – A search query based on “TO” and/or “FROM”

(17) – A search query based on “ABOUT”

Again, to repeat, there are differing FISA rules for use of the NSA or FBI database depending on the originating intelligence compartment.

If a search is conducted from an intelligence agency of the U.S. government whose objective is to ensure “National Security” there are different FISA rules than a search from an intelligence agency not engaged in “National Security”.

The DOJ has a National Security Division. Their compartment rules on FISA searches and reviews are different from the DOJ Civil Rights Division. There are 30 DOJ divisions.

The FBI (a department within the DOJ) has a Counterintelligence Division that focuses on terrorism threats etc. A FISA search from within the Counterintelligence Division has different rules than a FISA search from the Science and Technology Division.

When a FISA-702 search is conducted based on the need for “national security” no approval from the FISA court is needed. Search away. If the FISA search is because of a “vital national security interest” the resulting search data can be opened without seeking permission from the FISA court.

♦A “FISA-702(16)” Search Result – would be a search result of the FBI (counter terrorism) database or NSA database that returns an American person as a result of a “To” or “From” (16) type data search.

EXAMPLE: Querying phone data (phone number) TO: Mohammed BadGuy or FROM: Mohammed BadGuy – might return a list of phone numbers that also contains an American persons phone number. That American person is protected by the fourth amendment. To look at the “upstream” connections of the American Person to other people, likely Americans, the search operator would need to ask permission of the FISA Court to review the upstream results.

[NOTE: *Exception* – the search was vital to national security. If so, the upstream phone numbers could be reviewed without asking FISA permission.]

♦A “FISA-702(17)” Search Result – would be a search result of the FBI (counter terrorism) database or NSA database that returns an American person (702) as a result of an “ABOUT” (17) type data search.

EXAMPLE: Querying everything in email ABOUT: Mohammed BadGuy – might return communication of an American who wrote a letter about Mohammed BadGuy or maybe he told a friend in a text to check out a media story about Mohammed BadGuy. To look at the email or text of the American, the search operator would need to ask permission of the FISA Court to see the email/text content.

[NOTE: *Exception* – the search was vital to national security?. If So, the email and text could be looked at without asking permission]

It was the 2016 FISA-702(17) “About Queries”, returns from searches, that were identified in 2016, by NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers, as being conducted by the intelligence community (FBI), by “contractors” and “individuals”, for reasons that were unauthorized; had nothing to do with National Security; and did not request FISA Court Approval.

Mike Rogers discovered FBI contractors doing FISA-702 “About Searches” that resulted in returns providing information on Americans. Those results were passed on to people outside government.

Pg 83. “FBI gave raw Section 702–acquired information to a private entity that was not a federal agency and whose personnel were not sufficiently supervised by a federal agency for compliance minimization procedures.” (2017 FISA Court Opinion – 99 Page Brief)

Someone inside the FBI was giving FISA-702 search results on U.S. individuals to a private entity that had nothing to do with government. Those 702 (American Citizen) results were not “minimized” and exposed the private data of the American citizen(s).

In addition, NSA Director Mike Rogers, who is also in charge of Cyber Command, discovered people within the intelligence community were doing “searches” of the NSA and FBI database that were returning information that had nothing to do with “Foreign Individuals”.

Rogers requested a full FISA-702 Compliance Review.

As an outcome of that review, the DOJ/FBI compliance officer noted FISA violations. Again, the FISA Court (page 84):

We do not know how many FISA-702 violations took place prior to NSA Mike Rogers initiating the full FISA-702 review in April 2016. Nor do we know who the insider FBI individuals were; or what results were passed on; or what was done with the results.

However, given the nature of what was taking place at the time (March, April, May, 2016) it appears likely this was part of the DOJ/FBI/Fusion-GPS collision to gather information on the candidacy of Donald Trump.

CTH received a tip that Fusion GPS (either ‘individuals’ or the company) were one of the “contractors” mentioned, additionally the “private entity” could also be inside the Fusion GPS network. Another “contractor” could possibly be CrowdStrike. From all appearances there were multiple people involved.

These ‘passed-along’ FISA-702 search results appear to be the seeds which were fertilized by Glenn Simpson, Mary Jacobs, Nellie Ohr; “unmasked” by Obama administration officials; and enhanced/laundered by Christopher Steele – to end with a “Steele Dossier” returned to the FBI via Counterintelligence Agent Peter Strzok, DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr, and DOJ/FBI lawyer Lisa Page, for their “insurance policy”.

The DOJ and FBI then took the dossier, full circle, back to the FISA Court to gain 702 surveillance authority and approval (media says ‘warrant’), upon the Trump Campaign (October 2016), and President-Elect (after November 8th, 2016).

There’s a Twitter Thread on The SUBJECT HERE

In October 2016, immediately after the DOJ lawyers formatted the FBI information (Steele Dossier etc.) for a valid FISC application, the head of the NSD, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin, left his job. Carlin’s exit came as the NSD and Admiral Rogers informed the FISC that frequent unauthorized FISA-702 searches had been conducted. Read Here.

All research indicates the intelligence information the DOJ and FBI collected via their FISA-702 queries, combined with the intelligence Fusion GPS created in their earlier use of contractor access to FISA-702(17) “about queries”, was the intelligence data delivered to Christopher Steele for use in creating “The Russian Dossier”.

IG Stimulated Releases of Information:

♦Release #1 was the FBI Agent Strzok and Attorney Lisa Page story; and the repercussions from discovering their politically motivated bias in the 2015/2016 Clinton email investigation and 2016/2017 Russian Election investigation.

♦Release #2 outlined the depth of FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page’s specific history in the 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton to include the changing of the wording [“grossly negligent” to “extremely careless”] of the probe outcome delivered by FBI Director James Comey.

♦Release #3 was the information about DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr being in contact with Fusion GPS at the same time as the FISA application was submitted and granted by the FISA court; which authorized surveillance and wiretapping of candidate Donald Trump; that release also attached Bruce Ohr and Agent Strzok directly to the Steele Dossier.

♦Release #4 was information that Deputy Bruce Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, was an actual contract employee of Fusion GPS, and was hired by F-GPS specifically to work on opposition research against candidate Donald Trump. Both Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr are attached to the origin of the Christopher Steele Russian Dossier.

♦Release #5 was the specific communication between FBI Agent Strzok and FBI Attorney Page. The 10,000 text messages that included evidence of them both meeting with Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to discuss the “insurance policy” against candidate Donald Trump in August of 2016.