What a difference one single report makes. We have gone from seeing the smug, arrogant and pious assertions from senior level former Obama-era intelligence officials predicting the fall of President Trump for "collusion," to weeks later, after Robert Mueller determined after a nearly two year investigation, there was no conspiring or coordination between the Trump campaign in 2016 and Russia, to now finger pointing, preemptively admitting to "mistakes," and brutally turning on each other in an attempt to scurry away from the noose tightening around their necks.
Say what you will about Robert Mueller, and much of the criticisms are justified, but he is a prosecutor that understands that it is never a good idea to jump onto a sinking ship. His report, while still taking backhanded stabs at President Trump, reflected his survival instincts when he stated throughout his report, multiple times, no U.S. citizen, including President Trump and his campaign officials, "conspired" or "coordinated" with Russia to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.
THE SINKING SHIP WAS THE ENTIRE RUSSIA COLLUSION HOAX
Once Donald Trump was elected as President, senior level officials from a variety of intelligence agencies understood their actions prior to the 2016 presidential election would come under the microscope, and rushed to create a false narrative, frame and trap Trump campaign officials in an attempt to overthrow a duly elected President.
It worked. Every investigation happening right now, from the DOJ Inspector General reviewing the actions of top Obama intelligence officials, to the recently reported appointment of U.S. Attorney John Durham to investigate possible FISA court abuses by those senior officials by providing false information to the court to obtain multiple warrants to surviel Carter Page, as well as other actions senior members of the intelligence agencies took, all stemmed from Comey's bright idea to leak information to prompt the appointment of a special counsel.
Comey basically drove the Titanic (the Russia collusion hoax investigation) right into the iceberg who we will call Inspector General Horowitz
Which may be why now, everyone seem to be turning on Comey.
AS THE NOOSES TIGHTEN THE RATS SCURRY
As Comey points the finger at former CIA director John Brennan, claiming Brennan insisted the unverified and discredited Steele dossier, which was used by Obama intel officials to obtain the FISC warrant on Crater Page, Brennan is now claiming that it was included in the intelligence community assessment on 2016 Russian interference at Comey's insistence.
Sources familiar with the records told Fox News that a late-2016 email chain indicated then-FBI Director James Comey told bureau subordinates that then-CIA Director John Brennan insisted the dossier be included in the intelligence community assessment on Russian interference, known as the ICA [...]
But in a statement to Fox News, a former CIA official put the blame squarely on Comey.
"Former Director Brennan, along with former [Director of National Intelligence] James Clapper, are the ones who opposed James Comey’s recommendation that the Steele Dossier be included in the intelligence report," the official said.
Q And I did want to just kind of keep it basic, but I did want to kind of jump to this while we're on it, because we've been calling this an investigation. I know, I'm sure your familiar with some discussion of whether you ever instructed Director Comey to call the Midyear Exam investigation a matter.
Are you familiar with his -- I think he's testified to this -- that you instructed, I believe in September of 2015, Director
Comey to call the Midyear Exam investigation a matter?
A I heard his testimony on it and that was the first time that he had ever indicated to me, in my understanding -- he may have told others -- that he had that impression of our conversation.
Q So you do not believe you ever instructed him to call it a matter?
A I did not. I have never instructed a witness as to what to say specifically. Never have, never will.
In the meeting that I had with the Director, we were discussing how best to keep Congress informed of progress and discuss requesting resources for the Department overall. We were going to testify separately.
And the concern that both of us had in the meeting that I was having with him in September of 2015 was how to have that discussion without stepping across the Department policy of confirming or denying an investigation, separate policy from testifying.
Obviously, we wanted to testify fully, fulsomely, and provide the information that was needed, but we were not at that point, in September of 2015, ready to confirm that there was an investigation into the email matter -- or deny it. We were sticking with policy, and that was my position on that.
I didn't direct anyone to use specific phraseology. When the Director asked me how to best to handle that, I said: What I have been saying is we have received a referral and we are working on the matter, working on the issue, or we have all the resources we need to handle the matter, handle the issue. So that was the suggestion that I made to him.
Other recently reported tidbits include, but are not limited to;
• Judicial Watch recently released documents obtained via FOIA requests, described as "four pages of documents from the U.S. Department of Justice showing a conversation between former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs Kathleen Kavalec and former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, discussing the targeting of Donald Trump with Steele dossier material."
• In another newly released transcript of a congressional interview, former FBI Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson said "she was normally responsible for signing off on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act applications before they reached the desk of her superiors for approval. Anderson said the “linear path” those applications typically take was upended in October 2016, with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates signing off on the application before she did. Because of that unusual high-level involvement, she didn’t see the need to “second guess” the FISA application."
All this is happening as the upcoming DOJ IG report is expected to be released by end of May or early June, which is already being described as "devastating" for many of the deep state members mentioned above, and perhaps even more that have not been named yet.
Even before the report's release, enough information has been revealed by Independent Media, where 64 percent of American voters believe the FBI knew the Steele dossier was unreliable prior to to the FBI using it to obtain the warrant to spy on the Trump campaign.
Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe the FBI knew a controversial dossier was unreliable when they used it to obtain a search warrant against President Trump’s 2016 campaign. A ScottRasmussen.com national survey found that skepticism is shared by 86% of Republicans, 64% of Independents, and 47% of Democrats (see crosstab results).
Forty-nine percent (49%) favor having the Department of Justice investigate whether the FBI illegally spied on the Trump campaign. Twenty-nine percent (29%) are opposed and 22% are not sure. Support for an investigation comes from 64% of Republicans, 52% of Independents, and 34% of Democrats.
Just 34% of voters know that the compilation of the dossier was paid for by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
Now imagine those numbers after the IG report drops, and after president Trump declassifies much of the underlying documentation.
ONGOING FUNDRAISER:Despite generous donations, the still dwindling advertising revenue over the course of the last two years has forced us to completely deplete all our savings just to survive and continue to keep All News PipeLine online.
So ANP is accepting reader donations. PLEASE HELP KEEP ANP ALIVE BY DONATING USING ONE OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS.
One time donations or monthly, via Paypal or Credit Card: