Why ‘Obamagate’ Could Become The Biggest Political Scandal In History, Part 2
In Brief
- The Facts:The facts in the Michael Flynn investigation, if we have the will and perseverance to investigate and fully process them, serve as an important case study into 'Obamagate' and potentially serious crimes committed by the Obama administration.
- Reflect On:Are we reaching a critical
mass of people investigating the truth, such that the truth will have no
choice but to be revealed, leading to the great awakening of all of
humanity?
This is the second part of an article published recently entitled ‘Why ‘Obamagate’ Could Become The Biggest Political Scandal In History.’
I would highly recommend reading that article first if you haven’t
already since it provides essential context for the following
discussion.
In the previous article, I put out the
notion that much of the unending criticism and disparagement towards
Donald Trump in the mainstream media and relentless effort to have him
removed from power by the Democratic party is best explained, in my
mind, as being driven by a powerful centralized force known as the Deep
State who are under threat of having their serious crimes of the past
uncovered.
-->Watch now: Sign up for the free 5G Summit starting and hear from 40 of the world's leading experts on the subject, all FREE! Click here to register now!
As we examine the evidence, it is
important to understand Deep State compartmentalization and the nature
of its influence in the various institutions it has sought to control,
which include the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of
government, the military, the intelligence agencies and others, with
particular emphasis on mainstream media and more recently social media.
The installation of individuals who have been born into this criminal
‘family,’ let’s call it, are totally devoted to the cause of world
domination through their brand of globalism. But these installations are
only the base of Deep State operations. The majority of individuals
whose actions support the Deep State agenda do not see the big picture
or their role in it. They are those whose influence has been bought, or
is being controlled as a result of blackmailing, or have simply been
convinced by their higher-ups that they are doing the right thing.
A company like CNN, for example, might
have ‘family’ members in key positions (i.e. Ted Turner, Jeff Zucker and
some others in top management) who are currently pushing an anti-Trump
agenda, and many of the rest of the company are chosen based on roughly
being aligned with a liberal agenda (after all, birds of a feather do
stick together). The use of various overt and covert methods allows the
entire organization to present somewhat of a unified front in step with
the Deep State agenda. For some, the threat of losing their job is
enough to keep them in line, even though privately they might not fully
believe in what they are doing. Others who show some talent and a strong
desire for power and influence may be brought deeper into the inner
circle based on money or getting ‘honey-trapped’ into compromising
positions through which they can be controlled.
My article ‘CNN’s Political Bias Exposed By Whistleblower’s Hidden Camera Footage‘
and the hidden camera footage of former CNN employee Cary Poarch is an
important lens into how the anti-Trump bias was carried out and
maintained throughout the organization. We see that privately amongst
employees, even though few were fans of Trump, that there is a lot of
pushback and incredulity at Jeff Zucker’s insistence that the Trump
impeachment was the only newsworthy event over the course of several
months, and should be front and center daily for reporters and
broadcasters. But by and large, because of the hierarchical structure
that is so essential for control, people have little choice but to go
along with the agenda, not realizing that they are actually the
footsoldiers of a much larger and more comprehensive plan than they
could ever imagine.
To say that this power structure has
been slowly and carefully built up over time within all influential
institutions would be an understatement; and attention has been paid to
ensure that those at lower levels have no access at all to higher and
more incriminating information. Although the top brass of the Deep State
pyramid do have an extremely high level of occult knowledge regarding
how to control and rule, they do not have a ‘lock’ on everything and
everybody in the world. Their goal has always been total domination but
they’ve never quite achieved it, and furthermore that goal is fading
quickly, as elaborated upon in articles more esoteric in nature here and here.
Because the Deep State agenda fundamentally based in deception they
have to be constantly working to suppress the truth, which has an
annoying habit of shining through illusory constructions.
advertisement - learn more
The Michael Flynn Case
It is with this understanding that we
need to look at the evidence being declassified in the Michael Flynn
case, where we see the involvement of a host of players, including FBI
director James Comey, Assistant Director Andrew McCabe, agents Peter
Strzok, Bill Priestap, Lisa Page, and other top players from the
Department of Justice, the other intelligence agencies, and Barack Obama
himself. These players don’t get together regularly in a ‘Deep State’
meeting to discuss a ‘Deep State’ agenda. Rather, these players go about
their jobs, for the most part legally, until such time as they are
needed to do something. The instructions from their superior, for the
most part, have at least an appearance of being legitimate. Orders given
to subordinates are couched in an established narrative that suggests
the legality or at least the ‘necessity for the greater good’ of
following the orders.
Since the Deep State knows that their
actions should generally have a believable supporting narrative and an
arguably ‘legal’ predicate, you can understand how uncovering the
criminality is somewhat of a painstaking, detailed process. One piece of
evidence may be ambivalent, which is why it is important to piece
together all the small signs of impropriety in order to establish a
pattern of intentional deception. In my opinion, the indiscretions that
were committed in the Michael Flynn case indicate to me that there was
quite a bit of desperation to derail Michael Flynn’s role in the Trump
administration, and a lot of people had a hand in trying to make this
happen.
Fact: A clear predicate to investigate Flynn was never established
The FBI opened a counterintelligence
probe of Flynn in August 2016, supposedly on the grounds that he might
be a clandestine Russian agent. That is what they have said, but they
have never cited any evidence that would materially substantiate their
alleged suspicions. Flynn is a retired three-star Army general and
decorated combat commander, who had by then written a book that
identified Russia as a committed global adversary of the United States.
Pure suspicion, the product of one’s mind, is not a sufficient
predicate to open an investigation on any U.S. citizen, let alone an
Army general that has served the country for over 30 years.
Now remember that Flynn was
unceremoniously dumped by Barack Obama two years earlier as Director of
the Defense Intelligence Agency. It seems more reasonable to me that
they were investigating Flynn on this pretext in order to keep a close
eye on him, trying to find something on him that they could use on him
later in case they needed to. So little incriminating evidence was found
that could be used against Flynn that the FBI’s then-director, James Comey,
authorized closing the investigation dubbed “Crossfire Razor” in
December 2016, and the paperwork to do so was completed on Jan. 4, 2017.
Fact: FBI Agent Peter Strzok overruled and kept the Flynn Investigation open
Court documents released on April 30th,
2020 revealed that FBI agent Peter Strzok sent the following text
message to the investigating agent on that same day, Jan. 4, 2017:
“Hey if you haven’t closed RAZOR, don’t do so yet. Pls keep it open for now.”
The internal FBI documents detailed a pattern showing multiple efforts to uncover criminal activity by Flynn, as outlined in this Washington Times article:
FBI officials reached out to another agency, likely the CIA, to conduct a similar search of its records for possible ties between Flynn and Russia. Just like the FBI, that agency found “no derogatory information” on Flynn.The FBI also used at least one confidential human source to monitor Flynn during the investigation. But leads offered by the informant also failed to turn up criminal activity, the memo said.Based on the lack of evidence, the FBI closed the investigation but noted it would consider reopening it if new information was uncovered.Yet, Mr. Strzok, the case supervisor, pushed to keep it open, according to the memo. In another text to an unknown person, he noted that the FBI’s leadership was involved and they still “need to decide what to do with him [with respect to] the [Redacted].”
In my opinion, this alone should
demonstrate that there was a rather urgent ulterior motive to find
something incriminating on Flynn, even if they had to invent it.
When Strzok kept Crossfire Razor open on
January 4th, 2017, Flynn was an official in the Trump transition who
was designated to become the president’s national security adviser.
Strzok also knew that Flynn had had communications in December with
Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, which has been cited as a reason to
be suspicious of Flynn. However the government was already monitoring
Kislyak, so they knew what had been said in those conversations and
recordings showed that Flynn did nothing inappropriate. There was no
grounds to reopen or continue the counterintelligence investigation or
to begin a criminal investigation.
This other notion that the DOJ was looking to charge Flynn criminally with violating the Logan Act, a
moribund, unconstitutional prohibition against freelance diplomacy,
seems rather absurd. In the DOJ’s 150-year history, the Logan Act has
never been charged. No one has ever been convicted for violating it;
there has been no case since 1852.
Fact: James Comey Knowingly Broke Protocols To Interview Flynn
So we know that by early January of 2016
Comey had already considered the Flynn matter closed. What could have
transpired between January 4th, the day Strzok lobbied to keep the Flynn
case open, and January 24th, when James Comey deciding to bypass all
proper protocols and send FBI agents into the White House to interview
Michael Flynn? And not just any FBI agents, by the way. The lead
interviewer was none other than Peter Strzok.
If you’re like me, you look at this and
think that it was Peter Strzok who asked James Comey to send him in to
interview General Flynn. Or, to take it a step further, some higher
authority told James Comey that Strzok was going in to
interview General Flynn, and furthermore got Comey to agree to bypass
the normal channels, avoid telling Flynn that he was the subject of an
investigation, and make Flynn feel that he didn’t need his lawyer
present.
If we watch the following clip of James
Comey from a December 2018 interview talking about the way he sent the
agents to the White House, a few things about it make more sense under
the circumstances suggested here.
Now let’s first acknowledge that Comey
is pretty good at calmly and coolly creating a narrative that holds
together pretty well. Yet, no amount of coolness or swagger can help
answer the question: why indeed would he risk his reputation and
knowingly breach protocol which would undoubtedly bring the righteous
scorn of the incoming administration? Under the circumstances, there was
no apparent urgency to be interviewing Flynn, especially since Comey
himself had previously considered the matter closed, and no new and
compelling evidence had arisen since then.
The only thing that makes sense is that
Comey was told to do this post-haste from a higher authority, and
Comey’s role would be to put out whatever fires needed to be put out as a
consequence. Under these conditions, the interesting freudian slip
that Comey makes in the interview about sending the agents into the
White House the way he did becomes very telling:
“Something we, I probably wouldn’t have done or gotten away with in a more organized investigation, (pause) a more organized administration.”
In fact, the way things are done here
indeed suggest that the investigation was disorganized and, frankly,
desperate. It almost seems as though Peter Strzok took things into his
own hands and forced this interview before he felt it was too late.
But how could Strzok, Comey’s subordinate, have the power to do this?
This is where it gets interesting. There is compelling evidence here that Peter Strzok has secretly been working for the CIA, and may continue to be in their employ to this day:
Peter Strzok worked 24 years for the CIA. His job title was Chief of their Counterespionage Group. The FBI never had such a unit. A joint CIA/FBI position was created by Congress in 1996. Strzok was “a senior FBI official” by being the CIA’s Chief of Counterespionage.
Those who have researched into the Deep
State generally agree that, unlike the other institutions it has sought
to influence, the Deep State is essentially run through the CIA. That
gives the sequence of events here has a logical through-line. You can
read more about the CIA’s role in the Deep State here.
Now if Peter Strzok is getting his
marching orders from the CIA, it would be likely that then-CIA Director
John Brennan ordered Strzok to get something on Flynn, as a matter of
great urgency. Brennan would know full well what Michael Flynn would
find out and the information that he would have access to if he became
the National Security advisor. We will go more deeply into this later.
Fact: The FBI then sought to trap Flynn in a lie
The recent release on April 29th, 2020 of a handwritten note likely written by former FBI head
of counterintelligence Bill Priestap goes a long way to revealing why
Strzok kept the case open. It has Priestap asking whether the goal of
interviewing Flynn was “truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?”

Preventing him, with prejudice, from
becoming the National Security advisor, and keeping him tied up
endlessly in defending himself in court, if not getting jail time,
appears to have been the focused goal. By and large, they succeeded in
their mission. Flynn admitted to lying to the FBI. He resigned from his
position at the White House on February 17th.
Then he was forced to cooperate with the
Mueller investigation, where he had to meet with the DOJ lawyers of the
Mueller team a total of 19 times. 19 times! For what? That seems a
little excessive, doesn’t it? Especially if we examine the actual
content of the ‘lies,’ according to the charging documents:
- “On or about Dec. 29, 2016, FLYNN did not ask the Government of Russia’s Ambassador to the United States…to refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the United States had imposed against Russia that same day; and FLYNN did not recall the Russian Ambassador subsequently telling him that Russia had chosen to moderate its response to those sanctions as a result of his request.”
- “On or about Dec. 22, 2016, FLYNN did not ask the Russian Ambassador to delay the vote on or defeat a pending United Nations Security Council resolution; and that the Russia Ambassador subsequently never described to FLYNN Russia’s response to his request.”
What have these ‘lies’ got to do with
Flynn being suspected of being an agent of Russia? What do they have to
do with Russian collusion in the 2016 election? Absolutely nothing. Why
would the Mueller investigation have to interview Flynn 19 times? Think
logically.
Furthermore, an examination of the
interview with Peter Strzok shows that Flynn’s statements were
equivocal. That creates significant questions about whether inaccuracies
in his description of the Kislyak discussions were honest failures of
recollection, not lies. The interview happened about a month after the
Kislyak communications. In the interim, Flynn had hundreds of
conversations with foreign counterparts. It would have been a challenge
for anyone to remember the words of a conversation under those
circumstances; and, in their legerdemain, the FBI strategically refused
to refresh Flynn’s recollection by playing recordings or showing a
transcript.
Strzok went out of his way to deceive
Flynn about the purpose of the interview, at which he hoped to trip him
up. It is rote for FBI “302” reports — used to summarize witness
interviews — to start by recounting that interviewing agents advised the
subject of the nature of the interview. But they did not do that with
Flynn. He was discouraged from consulting counsel and from reporting the
FBI’s request to speak with him to his White House chain-of-command. He
was not given the customary advice of rights — the FBI, after officials
acknowledged among themselves that they owed it to Flynn to advise him
that a false statement could be grounds for prosecution, willfully
withheld this admonition from him.
Speaking of the “302” report, written by
the agent accompanying Peter Strzok: the “302” used in the prosecution
of Michael Flynn was not the original, but rather was edited–by Peter
Strzok himself. Text messages between Strzok and his lover/accomplice
FBI lawyer Lisa Page from February 2017 reveal this.
“Lisa, you didn’t see it before my edits that went into what I sent to you. I was trying to completely re-write the thing so as to save [redacted] voice and 2) get it out to you for general review and comment in anticipation of needing it soon… [I’m] trying not to completely re-write [it].”
Only after Michael Flynn fired his legal team on June 6, 2019 and hired attorney Sidney
Powell a week later did it eventually come to light that the original
“302” was never made available to the defense. Through Powell’s work,
there are a lot of signs that shows that Flynn’s previous lawyers did
not do their job properly. Powell has consistently requested the
original 302, only to finally hear from the DOJ that the FBI ‘lost and
destroyed’ the original 302!
Would
the original “302” makes it abundantly clear that Michael Flynn
actually did nothing wrong, and the edits done by Peter Strzok were
clear attempts to fuel the incrimination of an innocent man? All roads
point to that, Let’s be clear. An organization like the FBI cannot and
would never ‘accidentally’ lose and destroy valuable information. Every
time we hear that an organization like the FBI has ‘lost,’ ‘misplaced,’
or ‘accidentally destroyed’ important self-incriminating evidence, it
doesn’t take a genius to see ‘coverup’ written all over it. The main
problem is, most people don’t have the time or patience to look deeply
enough into the evidence to draw the obvious conclusions they provide.
And coverups will continued to work up until there is a sufficient
desire on the part of the general public to investigate the facts in
detail and piece together the evidence in a way to build their own
narrative about what is going on behind the scenes.
The Evidence Is Overwhelming
For those who maintain the validity of
the mainstream narrative that the Obama Administration did not commit
any crimes before, during or after the transition of the Trump
administration into the White House, I would ask you this simple
question: does the mainstream media ever say ‘you don’t have to trust
us, look at the evidence yourself and draw your own conclusions’? The
answer is no. They do not. By and large they try to assure you that THEY
can be trusted, and you shouldn’t bother to do all that investigative
work yourself. After all, their information comes from trusted ‘sources’
and well-connected ‘officials.’ You may have noticed that more and more
you are not told who these people actually are.
Up
until the rise of the internet and social media, this has been an easy
game for them to play. The mainstream media has long had domain over
‘normal’ perception, and have made the general public comfortable with
that perception, because it is the same perception they have had since
their childhood. This always gave them some kind of tacit authority to
ridicule as ‘conspiracy theory’ (a CIA term designed
to dissuade people from looking deeper) all attempts to investigate
what is going on behind the scenes. The mainstream media is the greatest
tool the Deep State has used in the coverup of high-level crimes. Note
that CIA involvement in mainstream media is now well documented and
incontestable, as discussed here and here.
With the rise of the internet, it is a
lot easier to proliferate facts and important details. This is helping
us realize that, by and large, the mainstream media do not provide all
the important details in making their case. With respect to Michael
Flynn, they keep pounding away at the fact that he admitted to lying.
And then they ridiculed the idea that he was withdrawing his guilty plea
as though it was some sort of legal ploy. But note–they never provide
the real reasons that Flynn has withdrawn his guilty plea. They don’t
talk about the serious failings of his original legal defense team, the
withholding of exculpatory information by the original DOJ prosecutors
and the FBI, the serious overreach of Judge Emmet Sullivan that
continues to this day. Each one of these aspects of the Michael Flynn
case is rife with evidence of malfeasance worthy of its own deep
investigative article.
And that’s just the Michael Flynn case.
The same can be said about the cases of Carter Page, George
Papadopoulos, and Paul Manafort. All three of them were surveilled as a
consequence of FISA warrants that are being shown to have been obtained
illegally and without a reasonable predicate.
And then illegal FISA warrants are only
the tip of the iceberg in terms of the use of Russia as the
tried-and-true ‘Boogey Man’ to get a majority of the public against
Donald Trump and his administration, as a means to find a way to get him
out of office. This is not at all to say that Russia is truly a
harmless ally. Not at all. But that is the subject of a far different
discussion. What is being said here is that the proposition that “Donald
Trump was colluding with Russia” was a completely fabricated premise
that the Deep State have been trying to substantiate since before the
2016 election. And again, logic would dictate that the only reason they
would ever devote so much time, money and human resources to this
deception is because they saw it as the only way they would be able to
continue to hide their serious criminal activities.
The Oval Office Meeting
As a for-instance, there was an
extraordinary meeting in the Oval Office on January 5th, just one day
after Peter Strzok made the move to keep the Flynn investigation open,
possibly on orders from CIA Director John Brennan as we discussed above.
The ‘official’ story Comey told the House Intelligence Committee was
that he alerted CIA Director John Brennan as soon as he learned
about the Flynn calls. Regardless, what is said to have happened in
this meeting is that President Obama was briefed by Brennan and Director
of National Intelligence James Clapper about Michael Flynn. The story
is that they were concerned about Flynn’s phone calls, though that seems
to be a smoke screen now as we know the intel agencies had recordings
of those phone calls all along and there was nothing incriminating
within them. What makes more sense is that Brennan and Clapper were
trying to impress upon Obama the urgency of preventing Michael Flynn
from becoming Trump’s National Security Advisor.
At the end of the meeting, the president
asked FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates
to stay behind. Joining them were Vice President Joe Biden and National
Security Adviser Susan Rice. Yates recounted during a 2017 interview
with special counsel Robert Mueller’s team that Obama began by saying
“he had learned of the information about Flynn” and his conversations
with Kislyak regarding the sanctions on Russia.
This was very surprising to Yates, who
as the Justice Department’s No. 2 official oversaw the FBI but had not
been told about it. She was obviously on a ‘need-to-know’ basis about
this matter from some higher authority. One can only speculate what
exactly was said during this meeting, but here is where James Comey may
have been told that the Flynn investigation needed to remain open and
Comey had to redouble his agency’s efforts to find something on Flynn.
Surely if these sorts of maneuvers were
being discussed they would have to all agree on a ‘cover’ story to
explain what this meeting was all about, convened as it was only 15 days
before president-elect Donald Trump was to take office. Just the fact
that the outgoing administration is focused on this matter rather than
tending to the transition in a way that would most benefit the American
people would raise eyebrows. It seems almost the result of paranoia
that Susan Rice would send an email to herself only a few hours after
Donald trump’s inauguration iterating the story that was made for public
consumption, if in fact news about this meeting ever came out.

Rice insists in an email to herself that
things are being done ‘by the book.’ She repeats that phrase 3 times in
this short email. As they say in Shakespeare’s Macbeth, “Methinks the
lady doth protest too much.”
If we refer back to the gold mine of
hidden information that keeps on giving, the text messages between Peter
Strzok and his accomplice/lover Lisa Page, we find out that the
official story that Barack Obama ‘is not asking about, initiating, or
instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective’ as a matter of
course is severely put into question. In a Sept. 2, 2016 text exchange,
Page writes that she was preparing talking points because “potus wants
to know everything we’re doing.” For those who don’t know, ‘POTUS’ is an
acronym for ‘President of the United States’.
What They Might Be Trying To Hide
Again, I would love to dive more deeply
into the nature of the crimes that will hopefully get revealed as
“Obamagate” unfolds through the current Senate Judiciary Committee
hearings and the investigative work being done by prosecutor John Durham
and others, but I’m unfortunately past my time limit and length limit
for one article. As I’ve said before, this is the nature of searching
for the truth behind a well-constructed wall of deception. It is a slow
and difficult process, and there is little money available to pay
journalists whose sole objective is to find the truth, while there is a
virtually unlimited supply of money for those willing to participate in
the skillful suppression and obfuscation of the truth.
Let me just say for now that the
ultimate goal of the Deep State is the creation of a global authority,
in which those at the top of the Deep State pyramid simply continue to
appoint themselves as the rulers of the planet, very much aligned with
the doctrine of the “divine right of kings.” What is different in this
day and age is that information, and not brute force, is the true
measure of power. In order to accomplish total control over the world,
it has been necessary to slowly build a comprehensive and weaponized
surveillance grid throughout the world. The surveillance grid in China,
built on the back of American technology that has been strategically
leaked to China by Deep State American actors (think the supposed
Chinese ‘hack’ of Hillary Clinton’s private server which contained
classified information as one example) seems to be the model that the
Deep State was looking to proliferate worldwide, both technologically and politically.
Now getting this done in the United
States would probably be the biggest challenge, but through the Obama
administration a lot of progress was made in building the domestic
surveillance infrastructure and actually putting it into practice. In an
article I wrote entitled ‘The Hidden Reason The ‘Russia Collusion’ Investigation Ever Got Started,‘ I provide evidence that a surveillance system secretly referred to as The ‘Hammer,’
designed by software design genius Dennis Montgomery for foreign
surveillance, was weaponized and turned against the American people. The
following is from the article, which I would call a must-read if you
want to get to the heart of ‘Obamagate’:
Montgomery eventually discovered that his surveillance system was being used against the American people. And so on August 19th, 2015, Montgomery turned whistleblower and alerted FBI Director James Comey’s office in 2015 that President Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan and Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper had turned the super-surveillance system that Montgomery designed for foreign surveillance into a domestic surveillance system. Montgomery asserts that Obama, Brennan, and Clapper used ‘The Hammer’ in a diabolically intrusive manner in order to spy on the American people and collect massive amounts of surveillance data for “leverage” and “blackmail.”
It should not come as any surprise that
James Comey sat on the voluminous whistleblower testimony he received
from Montgomery and to this day this information has not been officially
acknowledged. As indicated in the article, the information has only
come out through the work of brave investigative journalists that my
article gets much of its information from whose sole motivation is to
reveal the truth.
I would like to reiterate what those
journalists have said, and what all those whose sole objective is to
uncover the truth have said: You don’t have to trust me. In fact you
shouldn’t. Please do your own research. Follow the facts where they lead
you to. Be a relentless seeker of the truth. Once a critical mass of
people do that, all this deception will no longer have a place to hide.
Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!
Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.
Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.


No comments:
Post a Comment