“TO ACHIEVE THEIR NEFARIOUS ENDS”
by Joseph DeMaio, ©2019
It seems that Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz has discovered that a lawyer at the FBI altered the language of a document – another person’s email – adding the lawyer’s own language to facilitate the granting of a FISA Court wiretap surveillance warrant (or perhaps its renewal, as yet unclear) against one of President Trump’s aides, Carter Page. Is this not the species of Deep State deceit and criminal conduct which conservatives and President Trump have been warning about for years, only to be marginalized as “conspiracy theorists?”
Former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara, an Obama appointee who departed after President Trump’s election and now serving as a senior CNN legal analyst, said that the news was “alarming.” Bharara added that “[i]f there was an FBI agent sworn to uphold the constitution who can be proven to have altered a document in connection with a legal proceeding, including the obtaining of a FISA warrant, that’s really serious. It doesn’t get more serious than that…. it’s a terrible thing.” (Emphasis added).
Indeed, The P&E editor poses the critical question: if Deep State perfidy is capable of installing a usurper into the presidency based on a forged and fraudulent “birth certificate” – and (thus far…) getting away with it – what possible reason exists to think that, through its agents and operatives in the FBI, the same Deep State would now be incapable of altering the words of a document being submitted to the FISA Court in order to fortify efforts to obtain or renew a FISA wiretap surveillance warrant?
Hint: there is no such possible reason, because fraud, deceit and Machiavellian “ends-justify-the-means” are infused into the Deep State’s DNA. Hey, it worked to get Obama into the Oval Office, where he could carry out his promise to fundamentally transform the United States of America, so why not try it again now as part of the underlying “soft coup” to rid the presidency of Donald Trump?
As to IG Horowitz’s report, due out in December, the individual suspected of altering the words of the subject email was first reported by The Washington Post to be one Peter Strzok, the same Strzok of “we’ve got an insurance policy” fame. But now, after additional fact-checking, text-scrubbing (ironic…, no?…) and likely late-night consultations with The Post’s lawyers, The Post Internet-posted story has itself been altered. The Post article now references the suspected culprit as merely a “low-level FBI lawyer who has since been forced out of the agency, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss material that has not yet been made public.” Already, this sounds like a responsibility-deflecting arabesque.
The lawyer now being reported as the likely individual who altered the email is one Kevin Clinesmith. The CNN report noted that while the ultimate significance of the altered email is not yet known – indeed, we do not yet know precisely how the email was altered – it asserts that “the alterations [note the plural] were significant enough to have shifted the document’s meaning….” (Emphasis added)
Faithful P&E reader, remember that phrase that the “alterations were significant enough to have shifted the …[email’s] meaning,” because that observation has consequential meaning, as discussed hereafter.
Even the Gray Trollop is covering the story, noting that the altered email was a component of the wiretap renewal process. The GT article notes that “Mr. Clinesmith took an email from an official at another federal agency that contained several factual assertions, then added material to the bottom that looked like another assertion from the email’s author, when it was instead his own understanding.” The GT article adds that “Mr. Clinesmith included this altered email in a package that he compiled for another F.B.I. official to read in preparation for signing an affidavit that would be submitted to the court attesting to the facts and analysis in the wiretap application.”
Accordingly, three as-yet unanswered questions emerge: (1) whose email was “borrowed” from another “federal agency” to serve as the template for the forged, altered email; (2) if Clinesmith was a “low-level FBI lawyer,” who was the “higher-up” person in the FBI instructing him to “compile a package” for the wiretap warrant renewal; and (3) who was the “FBI official” to whom the “package” was delivered for that official to “read in preparation for signing an affidavit” to be submitted to the FISA court? Inquiring minds – not to mention the electorate at large – need to know.
Perhaps these questions will be answered when the Horowitz report is released, but do not bet the farm on it: one of the favorite mechanisms utilized by officials when releasing information to the public is the “redaction” tool. Let us see if Mr. Horowitz employs that artifice to keep the public in the dark as to the details above-noted.
However, returning to the phrase from the CNN report that “… the alterations were significant enough to have shifted the document’s meaning…,” P&E readers will recall that this is precisely the mechanism used by Mr. Jack Maskell at the Congressional Research Service in authoring a CRS memorandum in 2009 and two CRS “Reports” (2010 and 2011) concluding that Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. was eligible to the presidency as a “natural born citizen.”
As discussed here; here and here, Mr. Maskell’s use of an ellipsis to “shift the meaning” of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939), in order to “fudge” Mr. Obama’s purported constitutional eligibility – his actual birthplace aside – with the objective of convincing the 535 members of the Senate and House of the same conclusion, is not a great deal unlike Mr. Clinesmith’s effort to concoct a document intended to assist in convincing the FISA Court to issue and/or renew the Carter Page surveillance warrant.
Moreover, the subsequent effort by Mr. Maskell and/or his superiors at the CRS – or other “collaborative” entities, such as, say, private law firms in Washington, D.C. invested in the success of the Deep State – to “cover their tracks” by restoring, in 2016, the language deleted eight years earlier from the Supreme Court’s Elg decision, simply underscores the lengths to which Deep State actors will go to achieve their nefarious ends.
While Obama, mercifully, no longer occupies the Oval Office, the fruits of his illegitimate usurpation – a one-time congressional “transition expense” payment of $3,277,000; a lifetime pension of $230,000 per year, which can only go up; lifetime staff and office expenses, medical care or health insurance, and Secret Service protection — continue to this day. And they say crime doesn’t pay? Really? Is this a great country, or what?
That which is now being revealed by leaks from the anticipated Horowitz report seemingly puts congressional Democrats, the majority of the mainstream media and large swaths of the “Resistance” on a collision course with the general concept of sedition. Unless they change course – or have their course changed for them – they may eventually also run into the concept of “seditious conspiracy,” a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 2384.
For now, however, it would seem that the best course of action is to sit back, relax and wait for the full spectrum of Deep State defalcations surrounding the origins of the pogrom against President Trump to be revealed. Get some popcorn and keep following The P&E for relevant updates.
Oh, yeah…, and for the umpteenth time: vote very carefully in November 2020.