(26th article in a series) If this Globalist criminal cabal defrauded the entire FISA process to target the President of the United States during his campaign, transition period and presid…
We are beginning with an immediate concession and I want to be crystal clear about it because it potentially extends an existing hypothesis for which there is an abundance of evidence – now 26 articles worth – into a direction for which there are copious questions but little in the way of actual tangible evidence. Moreover, I’m not an attorney and it’s not my area of expertise despite degrees in related fields. That said, this is another exploratory exercise to address relevant questions.
Before we get into it, if you are new please see the HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS at the bottom including the hypothesis for our position; otherwise you’re about ready to jump into the middle of the ocean with no shoreline in sight.
This is a bit of a longer read but it takes time to line-out and bring back together. Here’s your introduction from last evening:
If you’re looking for a backstory as to how we got to these questions below, you can refer to recent articles for deeper understanding HERE and HERE and the original article specific to the China/Harvard developments HERE.
Okay, let’s jump into the rabbit hole by establishing the foundation for our questions. Although this article mostly omits QAnon, throughout the QAnon fabric there is a considerable amount of FISA references, which I have reviewed ad nauseam; including last night and again this morning; and I didn’t even finish this morning deciding to write this instead.
If you’ve been letting Q steer your research, you, too, have been ahead of the FISA angles for a long time. Moreover, there has been a profuse amount of MSM articles speaking to the same FISA concerns. That will all serve you well here as we get into the minutia of details.
This particular article mostly sets QAnon aside and focuses on the convergence of the broader timeline, FISA abuse, Harvard University, China, bioweapons, impeachment, the President’s enemies and more; focusing on relying heavily upon more technical and legal aspects of FISA law applicable to this convergence. It will get interesting but I don’t know if we can take it beyond that with fidelity – at least not with the information we have available to us.
If we reference the ARTICLE I linked above, we take note of one very peculiar circumstance germane to Chinese nationals conspiring with a Harvard University professor to smuggle bioweapons in and out of China; and the latter not even being the part that’s most concerning! All of this is rooted in a Department of Intelligence / Federal Bureau of Investigation Tactical Intelligence Report – FBI Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate – Chemical and Biological Intelligence Unit. Note that the report dates back to 13 Nov 19, which comports with the broader, overarching timeline. Note the scope of the report – “Weapons of Mass Destruction” and “Chemical and Biological Intelligence Unit” and then recall that it overlaps with FISA, which overlaps with this entire treasonous effort ongoing since at least 2016.
This is an intelligence report that Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler presumably all had unfettered access to both BEFORE and during their efforts to focus on and drive a fraudulent impeachment. We rightfully presume this because the matter stood to SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT NATIONAL SECURITY and in the outlined areas above (WMDD/bioweapons), which fall under the purview their respective positions in the House (see point 1 below.)
Nonetheless, during this very specific time frame of this intelligence report in November of 2019, the Democrats were apparently too busy to pay attention to national security. Rather they prioritized driving a fraudulent, unconstitutional and incomplete impeachment to inexplicably be done before Christmas; only to have Pelosi peculiarly and amateurishly slam on the brakes and not transmit the actual Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for over a month. I’ve written much about this timeline (updated TIMELINE) and the insupportable nature of Pelosi’s bungled handling of it all.
This 13 Nov 19 intelligence report demonstrates two remarkable fact sets whereby the first may explain the second:
1 – It placed the FBI and presumably Pelosi, by means of her ex officio status membership to the HPSCI, and Schiff, by means of his chairmanship of that committee, and Nadler, by means of his chairmanship of the House Judiciary Committee, ALL IN A POSITION WITH FOREKNOWLEDGE OF THE COVID-19/CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK PRESUMABLY DATING BACK TO OCTOBER OF 2019 (AND YET THEY DID NOTHING WITH THAT INFORMATION.) Was that because it may have impacted an ongoing investigation, and if so, in what specific ways?
2- Attached to the intelligence report was an ANCILLARY INTELLIGENCE REPORT THAT WAS MARKED FISA; meaning that that the intelligence contained therein was acquired under the authority of FISA. The FISA process was the precise mechanism that the former corrupt Obama administration used to illegally conduct surveillance on the Trump umbrella and dating back to 2016 and most certainly even earlier.
Here is where curiosity stands to kill the cat and it is based upon five notions:
1- Our original hypothesis (see HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS below) establishes a nexus between impeachment and COVID-19.
2- FISA abuse was highly enmeshed with impeachment and served as one of the mechanisms the Democrats/Obama administration used to construct it.
3- There is a FISA overlap that may link impeachment to the China/Harvard/bioweapons scenario – we don’t know.
4- The OIG has found 29 FISA abuses as discovered from “judgmentally selected” samples taken from 8 different field offices – what did they find?
5- The FBI/DOJ still has not released all relevant FISA materials and documents – what do they have?
I want to know the details of the FISA classification in the attached ancillary intelligence report. What are they? Do they overlap the FISA abuses or the surveillance attributable to the former corrupt Obama administration spying on the Trump umbrella and likely a whole host of others?
Here’s where I get way off the rails with questions and again, I don’t know the answers here. I’m exploring this. I’m also imploring those whom may have the requisite skills, knowledge and access to do just that – determine the answers.
Based upon our assumption that the Globalists are sinking to the bottom of an S-curve as I reported HERE and HERE, it’s reasonable to state that the entire Globalist structure is eroding at the foundation and causing a ripple effect of transitional events. If convention holds, that transition would eventually lead to drastic measures by drastic folks. I’ve argued that the President has cleverly trapped these miscreants inside of their own political construct and as Winston Churchill was reported to have said, “If you’re going through hell, keep going.” I think the President may have forced them to “keep going.” We shall see.
The assumption that these Globalists did in fact keep going is a logical one as I wrote about in the last article. Losing (although they’re on a streak right now) isn’t acceptable to these people,
“Perhaps there is a reason that Hillary reportedly chose to utter these words on that fateful night, “If that fucking bastard wins, we’ll all hang from nooses.”
So, if they in fact kept going through hell and to their last ditch, Hail Mary play, the question becomes, “What is that Hail Mary play?” I’ve asserted it’s COVID-19 – that’s what this entire series of articles has transitioned into.
Okay, then, so how did they potentially do it? I don’t know for sure and I have no evidence beyond my suspicions, but there may be a way. First, I’d encourage you to read these three articles HERE, HERE and HERE; the former also having also been posted by QAnon. From these articles, I’ll frame it up below.
Consider this from an OIG report dated March 2020 and entitled ‘Management Advisory Memorandum for the Director of the Federal Bureau of InvestigationRegarding the Execution of Woods Procedures for Applications Filed with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Relating to U.S. Persons‘ (SOURCE),
As a result of these findings, in December 2019, my office initiated an audit to examine more broadly the FBI’s execution of, and compliance with, its Woods Procedures relating to U.S. Persons covering the period from October 2014 to September 2019. As an initial step in our audit, over the past 2 months, we visited 8 FBI field offices of varying sizes and reviewed a judgmentally selected sample of 29 applications relating to U.S. Persons and involving both counterintelligence and counterterrorism investigations.
Look at what happened: The FISA fraud associated with the failed Mueller investigation ‘opened the door’ (looking at you, Q-types) to discovering other aspects of FISA abuse. Is THIS the selected mechanism to reveal such a drastic set of circumstances as what is outlined in our hypothesis? Was the decision to rightfully follow up on their own disastrous impeachment and use it to outline their own criminality, which then leads to a broader OIG investigation, which then envelops the originally intended target – the bioterrorism angle? Did all of this ‘boomerang’ back on them? Perhaps? (Looking at you again, Q-types.)
Here’s the relevant aspect from above, emphasis ADDED – “reviewed a judgmentally selected sample of 29 applications relating to U.S. Persons and involving both counterintelligence and counterterrorism investigations.”
Whom made the judgements and on what criteria? Which cases got included in the 29 and why? Why did they “judgmentally” decide to include “counterterrorism investigations” as a part of a review designed to investigate FISA abuse perpetrated against the President, who is not accused of counterterrorism? Aside from the fact they are often entangled and inseparable from the other and that there are likely other logical and pragmatic explanations, we’ll still ask, why?
Here’s another an important fact to remember and it’s a substantial one that may impact the circumstances here. Recall that the FBI opened its investigation into President Trump as a counterintelligence one and for a very deliberate reason. That reason was to circumvent the more stringent threshold needed to establish a criminal investigation (in other words, it was a circumvention of Constitutional protections.) It still doesn’t explain the COUNTERTERRORISM angle, though, and given the WMDD/bioweapon components outlined in the FBI’s Tactical Intelligence report as overlapping the FISA classification, further scrutiny is certainly justifiable.
We know the Obama administration was having success in it’s broader spying operation with FISA and 702 abuses. Recall that I’ve long contended – as have others – that the Obama spying operation likely goes back to early in his first term. Ergo, so long as the 2016 election winner wasn’t a DSSG/MIC asset, there was always going to be something akin to what we’ve seen Trump endure since 2016.
So if the FISA mechanism was reliable, effective and controllable, why would Obama’s people decide to deviate from it? If they had something that they were already using with success and in-part because of the personnel they had put in place; then why would they deviate from that? They wouldn’t, or at least, I wouldn’t; not with the stakes at hand.
So then, is it possible that FISA works both ways and Obama and his team discovered that not only was it a great tool for spying but that due to it’s incredibly high security classification and compartmentalization, that it could also be a great cover-up mechanism?
FISA could possibly work both ways: to DISCOVER crimes -OR- to COVER crimes.
So, that’s the subjective, rationalization aspects of this consideration but what about the mechanisms and the technical aspects of it all? It hinges on this – the same weaknesses that facilitated the abuses are the same ones that could facilitate any cover-up.
Therefore, I want to know if the FISA application to the China/Harvard scenario is actually a cover-up mechanism. When you examine how the federal apparatus makes serious things go away forever (JFK, 9/11, etc.), look no further than to things like OIG reports. It often resembles something like a serious crime followed by a long and drawn-out investigation whereby the offenders admit to some mistakes and are held lightly accountable; but also that “no reasonable prosecutor” would actually pursue charges, which are then declined. Heard that before?
Here’s the important take away and again, it’s a monumental one. Understand what is actually going on in this scenario. It’s the opening of a investigation to VACUUM-UP ALL OF THE EVIDENCE AND SEAL IT AWAY FOREVER (or until those whom care are dead, I suppose.)
My point is, if Obama was abusing FISA to spy and he effectively controlled and manipulated that process confidently, could that same process have been used to hide crimes? That could be achieved by means of establishing a false predicate to open a sham investigation into specific targets – targets actually of interest to the larger operation. Or, it could even be that someone already under a 702 investigation and perhaps someone associated with the President’s enemies, contacted one of the couriers or someone from Harvard and the FISA authority extended and overlapped them. No matter and if so, it could be such that there is no intent to actually and legitimately investigate them or their activities, but rather to use the FISA classification to shield them and their activities behind the permanent veil of secrecy that a FISA classification provides.
Why wouldn’t they? These Globalists literally had nothing to lose and in order to do it, agents wouldn’t necessarily even have to defraud the FISA court.
We are focusing of section 702 of the applicable law and again relying on Jeff Carlson’s work HERE, with EMPHASIS added.
1- FISA Surveillance is a bit more complicated. Which makes FISA more susceptible to manipulation and abuse.
2- Section 702 – Subsection of Title VII – Procedures for surveillance of Foreign Persons outside the United States. Section 702 is effectively synonymous with Title VII.
3- Title VII of the FISA Act provides for the most common type of FISA surveillance.
4- Section 702 permits the government to target for surveillance foreign persons located outside the United States for the purpose of acquiring foreign intelligence information.
5- Oversight of Section 702 collection is conducted by the FISA Court, which reviews the government’s Section 702 certifications, targeting procedures and minimization procedures for compliance with statutory and Fourth Amendment requirements.
6- The DOJ’s National Security Division (NSD) maintains oversight of the Intelligence Agencies (such as the FBI) use of Section 702 authority. The NSD and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) jointly conduct reviews of the Intelligence Agencies Section 702 activities every 60 days.
7- The NSD – with notice to the ODNI – is required to report any incidents of Agency noncompliance or misconduct to the FISA Court.
8- Unlike Title I and Title III FISA surveillance, Section 702 collection is not subject to individual formal FISA Court approvals.
9- Due to frequency of collection, instead of issuing individual court orders, the FISC approves annual certifications submitted by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence that specify categories of foreign intelligence information the government is authorized to acquire pursuant to Section 702.
10- The Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence must also certify that Intelligence Community elements will follow targeting procedures and minimization procedures that are approved by the FISC as part of the annual certification.
Relevant to the extracts above, here’s the cast of players:
Foreign persons outside US: Chinese nationals
US target/s: Harvard personnel
FISA Court: overseen by Chief Justice Roberts (sole appointment authority)
Attorney General: Loretta Lynch
ODNI/NSA: James Clapper (until 20 Jan 17)> Mike Dempsy (until 16 Mar)> Dan Coats (until – 15 Aug 19)
DOJ National Security Division: John Carlin (until 15 Oct 16)> Mary McCord until Apr 17)
Intelligence/CIA: John Brennan
Intelligence/FBI: James Comey (until 09 May 17)> Andrew McCabe (until 02 Aug 17)
So the question becomes this – Is it possible that a cohort comprised of some or all of the above along with others could have conspired to use the FISA process to shield the exchange of bioweapons with China? As you consider your answer, recall the following:
1- FISA is the most extensively used type of surveillance making it the most susceptible to manipulation and abuse; also making it an entangled and nebulous environment in which to hide things.
2- The FISA parameters are contextually appropriate (foreign targets, US targets, etc.)
3- The FISA court is overseen by the USSC Chief Justice and this is important for three reasons: 1) he has sole authority to appoint all FISA judges, 2) all FISA violations get reported to him and 3) this all makes FISA a highly classified and compartmentalized CLOSED LOOP that stands behind the most stringent veil of secrecy.
4- Examining all of the players above, many already had exposure to legal jeopardy; perhaps in severe form, prior to our assertion coming to fruition; and in fact, if this assertion ever proves true, the planning aspects would have preceded the November 2019 timeline by considerable time thus backing it all up to the Obama administration.
5- 702 intelligence collections are NOT SUBJECT TO INDIVIDUAL FISA COURT AUTHORITY and this opens portals for abuse as we outlined. Instead, the authority to operate rests on an annual certificate. This equates to loose parameters, loose oversight and ample opportunity to stray far from the Constitution; even into criminal if not treasonous territory.
So, with all of that under consideration, I’ll ask you again –
If this Globalist criminal cabal defrauded the entire FISA process to target the President of the United States during his campaign, transition period and presidency under the stated objective to DISCOVER alleged crimes, then is it reasonable to think that this same cartel of criminals may have also used the same, effective, reliable and controllable FISA process to throw COVER to their criminal Hail Mary play, which hypothetically is COVID-19?
Before you answer, remember what I wrote in the last article, and I’ll leave it at that,
Three months and one day from the vote to impeach, the most historic presidency and economy the US has ever seen has been reduced to shambles….. and they want you to believe it was merely a coincidence. If you believe that, you get what you deserve. Otherwise, realize that America is being ushered-in to the next ‘new normal’ just as it was with 9/11.
If you’re brand new, there is a recommendation as to where to begin catching up posted at the very bottom.
Hypothesis (developed over time with emerging research):
Our hypothesis asserts that this political construct was inserted into President Trump’s administration during compulsory Obama/Trump transition meetings on 13 Jan 17. That’s the same day the MSM decided to release the cooked-up Flynn/Russia story preemptively and with Flynn taking part in those meetings. Unsurprisingly, the immediate talking points from Obama administration officials and others in-the-know were about the disrupted, off-kilter, reluctant and awkward nature of the meeting. How convenient for them to build their future MSM talking points into the meeting by designing and timing those dynamics. Since the insertion point, a mountain of correlated and interconnected evidence further propels this hypothesis as represented in this growing catalog of article.
28 Mar 20 Update: What used to be a looser conversational group has grown and, over the course of this pandemic, has become a small team of folks working together most of the day every day. Much of what I’m writing recently is a product of that collective work and/or my own opinion as influenced by that group.
Requisite disclaimer – This has now grown into a sizable series of articles on the COVID-19 coronavirus. Understand that all of this began simply with some curiosity about whom may stand to gain or benefit with the discovery of a promising treatment identified as Remesdivir – no more and no less; it’s that simple.
There was never an intent to write a single article; much less a series of them. The rabbit hole into which I placed myself diverged many times over transitioning into a mess of global entanglements that converted this work from an exploratory exercise to one hunting for evidence to scaffold an hypothesis. The content, therefore, is affected and takes a different tone and direction. For deeper understanding, here is the CATALOG of all articles in this series.
At this point, I’ve covered so much ground that attempting to recapitulate it to introduce each new article has become too cumbersome. Please refer back to the catalog for a deeper contextual backdrop to what appears above. To save time, I would encourage you to START WITH THE NINTH ARTICLE (it serves as a recapitulation of the first eight and launches the effort in another direction, which is where we are right now and which is seemingly in the midst of a global 9/11; assuming the fulcrum point of the truth continues to shift in favor of my suspicions relative to the evidence uncovered thus far.)
Series Articles order