The Trump “Dossier” - Case Studies In Domestic Spycraft: Liars, Hookers And Bears


October 26, 2017 - San Francisco, CA - – Yesterday DC engaged in what has become a predictable, periodic and ritualized kabuki-like dance as it pretended to be shocked by a Washington Post story - which has now seemingly vanished - detailing how the “Trump dossier” [which alleges that the President of the United States had engaged in all manner of perverse and subversive activities with Putin-linked cohorts to “steal” the election from the “legitimate” successor to Obama, Hillary Clinton] was nothing but fallacious propaganda bought and paid for by the Hillary For President campaign, her lackey Democrat National Committee, then run by Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and "oddly" assembled in Putin’s Russia by ex-KGB and FSB [Russian state security] spooks.

As the media had been representing the 36 page document for 18 months, the information contained therein was so egregious and damaging that the near-instant removal of Mr. Trump was all but guaranteed…though the FBI used the half-witted hit piece to manufacture a Special Counsel and a FISA warrant just to be sure.

This author would be willing to wager more than a few greenbacks that few who are keenly interested in national political developments [which includes those of us who are paid to write about them] considered the WashPost’s story in itself revelatory.

No, what was misleading at first, was that one of the Democrat party’s two main 4th Estate allies would essentially “blow the whistle” on a matter that was already fully understood but little spoken about. But upon reflection it becomes easy to see through the WashPost’s artifice, that instead of this being a grade-school like, amateur effort to throw Mrs. Clinton “under the bus” to “save” the party, it was in fact published with the idea of getting some damaging information out there [the modified limited hang-out in ancient DC jargon] in an attempt to indemnify Clinton against further revelations…so that months from now, Clinton, if queried about the matter, might be able to partially deflect it claiming it was “old news, that there is nothing of interest here and it’s time to move along.”

That said, what follows is the real story, as detailed by a few pages reprinted from our recently published book, Uncle Joe, FDR and the DEEP STATE [Amazon, less than $10, check it out] which we hope will provide the necessary context and clarity to understand the “Trump Dossier” story that the WashPost so inelegantly dumped yesterday in an attempt to hide it in plain sight.

First let us consider a central player in this affair, Senator John McCain, ostensibly a Republican, but in actuality a gun-for-hire, half-crazed purveyor of influence, whose actions in constantly attacking members of his own party, and his key role in the following operation, strongly point to the Deep State being an equal opportunity employer.

Actually, the closer one scrutinizes these matters the incestuous nature of the Democrat and Republican parties becomes apparent, so let’s take this piece by piece…

Of import, McCain has substantial ties with Ukraine. He was awarded by Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko the “Order of Ukraine” and has made numerous visits to the country.

The “Affiliated Senior Fellow at the McCain Institute," is David J. Kramer - a leftie out of the Obama administration - who was, “a member of the Ukraine Today media organization's “International Supervisory Council,” the enterprise has since folded.

Why is Ukraine important?

Politico, reported in January of 2017, that Ukrainian officials [led by Poroshenko] were secretly working with the Clinton campaign to discredit then candidate Trump. [source, Kenneth P. Vogel and David Stern, Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire ]

The article, a gem-like blockbuster of an expose, prints out to 18 pages.

A few words of caution before we proceed; don’t let the comic book-cum tabloid nature of some of the allegations contained in the “dossier” cause you to lose sight of the evil intent that underlies the plot. It remains a deadly serious component in the attempt to convict the President of the United States on false charges, presenting facts not in evidence to create a story consistent with the current plot-line, that Trump is guilty of treason, having forged a quid-pro-quo alliance with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.

We begin:

Sir Andrew Wood, the former British ambassador to Moscow meets with U.S. Senator John McCain [UK Daily Mail] making him aware of a “dossier” assembled by a former MI6 agent Christopher Steele [sources at MI6 say he never retired] that contained salacious [risibly so] material regarding President Trump. McCain, not terribly familiar with the concept of ethics, manages to get the “dossier” passed along to then FBI director James Comey sometime near the beginning of 2017, compounding the offense by calling it an act of patriotism.

The content of the file was a loosely guarded secret in DC, having been shopped around town for some time to the usual suspects, hard lefties such as David Corn of Mother Jones, the Old Gray Lady herself - the New York Times, American law enforcement and basically anyone who would listen, including BuzzFeed which eventually published it.

Launching the scheme, Steele’s company, Orbis Intelligence, was commissioned to prepare the study by an American company, Fusion GPS, a Democrat op-research outfit. At the inception of the undertaking, reports seem to indicate that the initial contract was paid for by the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign [or big-money donors acting on her behalf] but then might have received funding from other sources [see, Grassley, Letter of Inquiry to Fusion GPS ].

Comey’s FBI has admitted to also paying Steele for the “research” meaning that he was likely reimbursed numerous times for the same shoddy work, a neat trick, perhaps one of the reasons why he left his home in the middle of the night and has apparently now gone to ground. So rapid was his departure that lights were left on and his cat was left for safe keeping with a neighbor .

Fusion GPS itself has some intriguing associations.

For example, it had been previously hired by the Russian Bear to lobby against American legislation [the Magnitsky Act, a law providing for sanctions against Russian human rights violations]. By law, Fusion was acting on behalf of a foreign government and was therefore obligated to register under the Foreign Agent Registration Act, but failed to do so according to information developed by Senator Charles Grassley .

Digging deeper…

Most deliciously we have the curious matter of Natalia Veselnitskaya, a non-English speaking Russian attorney [now definitively tied to Russia’s FSB - the former KGB -

with a shadowy mission including meeting with Donald Trump Jr., promising she had “anti-Hillary dirt”] whose visa application for entry into the United States had been denied…that was, until the Obama Administration actively became involved - with a supposed nobody - and started pulling some strings.

“Former President Barack Obama's Justice Department allowed Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya to enter the U.S. without a visa, enabling her to lobby President Trump’s campaign officials and others in Washington last year. The department cleared the Kremlin-linked lawyer under ‘extraordinary circumstances,..’” [source, Anna Giaritelli, Obama allowed Russian lawyer into US under 'extraordinary circumstances' , Washington Examiner].

Another intriguing aspect of Ms. Veselnitskaya’s CV is that she’s had a long-standing, working relationship with…Fusion GPS which admits that, “it did work on a lawsuit that involved Veselnitskaya for more than two years…[with her]…” [source, Josh Rogin, Inside the link between the Russian lawyer who met Donald Trump Jr. and the Trump “dossier” , Washington Post]

The level of intrigue here is so deep that we will likely never be able to fully plumb its depths, but the stand-out, uncontested facts are that we have a sea of operatives, all positively ID’d as being either directly connected with “Putin’s Russia” or having demonstrated extreme animus against President Trump, colluding to chum the waters with the hope of swiftly removing him from office, for among other things…incredibly…working behind the scenes with…the Russians.

Comey was not acting alone, having a major ally, so before we proceed, a brief codicil is necessary to understand the all encompassing nature of the effort to slime President Trump and the original source of the agitprop, the Russians.

CIA Director, John Brennan’s [at one time having been an admitted communist as well as allegedly being a closeted Muslim] fingerprints appeared to be visible from the start of this affair. He might have even set the ball rolling before Comey became involved.

According to the UK Guardian:

“…GCHQ’s [France’s General Directorate for External Security] then head, Robert Hannigan, passed material in summer 2016 to the CIA chief, John Brennan…[it was]…deemed so sensitive it was handled at ‘director level’…In late August and September Brennan gave a series of classified briefings to the Gang of Eight [Congress’ top leadership]…He told them the agency had evidence the Kremlin might be trying to help Trump to win the presidency…Brennan did not reveal sources but made reference to the fact that America’s intelligence allies had provided information. Trump subsequently learned of GCHQ’s role…[the source claimed that]…FBI’s director, James Comey, altered his position after the election and Trump’s victory, becoming “more affirmative” and with a “higher level of concern.” [source, British spies were first to spot Trump team's links with Russia , Guardian UK]

Despite the machinations of America’s top spooks, the “dossier” was so absurd that it didn’t pass the smell test - to anyone with a seasoned nose - and few treated it seriously, except of course those whose intent was to use it as an instrument of attempted political assassination. Within the 35 page document, rife with grammatical and spelling errors, is a section alleging that Donald Trump at some point in time had paid Russian hookers to urinate on a bed that had been slept in by President Obama and his wife. If you find that assertion believable [the entire file is available online] then you can stop reading right now.

Attesting to the origin of the document, we turn to someone who should know, Professor Paul Roderick Gregory, a long-time observer and expert on Russian political and business affairs and a Hoover Institution fellow .

In a January 13, 2017 piece in Forbes, The Trump Dossier Is Fake - And Here Are The Reasons Why , he wrote:

"As someone who has worked for more than a decade with the microfilm collection of Soviet documents in the Hoover Institution Archives, I can say that the dossier itself was compiled by a Russian, whose command of English is far from perfect and who follows the KGB (now FSB) practice of writing intelligence reports," Gregory continued. "The anonymous author claims to have “trusted compatriots” who knew the roles that each Kremlin insider, including Putin himself, played in the Trump election saga and were prepared to tell him."

But though this crazy quilt of cut-and-paste allegations was privately being laughed about in many corners, Comey [“the DC Boy Scout”] was far from done. He used the FBI’s paid for, discredited hit-piece to obtain a FISA court warrant to surveil someone at the barest fringe of the Trump campaign, Carter Page, about whom no action has been initiated, nor is any expected.

Yet the drumbeat continues…

And The Cradle Will Rock - Comey’s Altitude Sickness

Over the previous year, through the Summer of 2016 and up through the Fall election, FBI Director James Comey had begun a pattern of acting far outside his statutory authority in numerous matters, most publicly, regarding the non-investigation of the Hillary Clinton email scandal.

On July 5, 2016, just a few weeks after having made the announcement that his agency was re-opening the investigation [in itself highly irregular as it is official DOJ policy not to comment on such matters] Comey called a

press conference during which he proffered a series of “offenses/irregularities” that seemed to foretell charging documents indicting the Democrat nominee. During this performance, the Director’s body language - hinting at a blockbuster announcement - was worthy of a Shakespearean actor.

At the end of his presentation, though, instead of referring the matter to the AG for final disposition he, to the surprise of many who were watching the eerie event live, recommended against charging her, stating that the apparent offenses lacked “intent.”

Informed members of the public, not to mention legal commentators, of all political stripes, were left slack-jawed since the supposedly exonerating “lack of intent” relied upon a non-existent legal standard, especially in cases where there was a pattern of intentional and reckless disregard for the handling of state secrets, in Hillary's case including information pertaining to America’s most highly secured intelligence operations, Special Access Programs [SAPS].

The upshot of this was that “Lurch” Comey publicly elbowed the AG aside, despite the fact that Lynch, as head of the DOJ [and the rather significant fact that she was Comey’s boss] was the only party who had the constitutional authority make such a determination.

Comey’s erratic behavior engendered such a sense of crisis among the FBI’s directorate that on May 9, 2017, Deputy Assistant Director of FBI Rod J. Rosenstein felt moved to draft an extraordinarily critical document castigating the then Director’s behavior to such a degree that it amounted to a recommendation to dismiss him:

“Almost everyone agrees that the Director made serious mistakes; it is one of the few issues that unite people of diverse perspectives. The director was wrong to usurp the Attorney General's authority on July 5, 2016, and announce his conclusion that the case should be closed without prosecution…It is not the function of the Director to make suck an announcement…The

Director now defends his decision by asserting that he believed attorney General Loretta Lynch had a conflict. But the FBI Director is never empowered to supplant federal prosecutors and assume command of the…Department…Although the President has the power to remove an FBI director, the decision should not be taken lightly…[pregnant pause]…I agree with the nearly unanimous opinions of former Department officials. The way the Director handled the conclusion of the email investigation was wrong. As a result, the FBI is unlikely to regain public and congressional trust until it has a Director who understands the gravity of the mistakes and pledges never to repeat them. Having refused to admit his errors, the Director cannot be expected to implement the necessary corrective actions.” [emphasis added, source, Candice Norwood and Elaine Godfrey, Rosenstein's Case Against Comey, The Atlantic]

On that same day, Comey was fired by the President.

But the intrigue had just begun; the now ex-Director would exact his revenge. Whether it was a contingency for this eventuality or had long been planned, given the way the cards were played, it certainly appears to be the latter.

Previous to his firing, President Trump and Comey had a private meeting during which many topics were covered, including mention of the investigation of Trump’s former national security advisor, Lt. Gen Michael Flynn.

Sometime subsequent to the meeting, the FBI Director then assembled what he now represents as “contemporaneous notes” [doing so on a government computer] regarding what had allegedly transpired during the meeting. Such conversations and any documents containing transcripts or ‘contemporaneous notes” clearly fall under the definition of Executive Privilege, meaning that they are undoubtedly protected governmental communication, the leaking of which is a felony.

Nonetheless within these “notes” Comey alleged that the President had attempted to obstruct the Flynn investigation, although both men agree that the President only asked if it would be possible to give Flynn a bit of a break since the matter seemed minor, an accusation that Flynn had lobbied on behalf of Turkey in the past.

In an astounding public admission of criminal action, Comey stated in Congressional testimony that he gave a copy of the documents to his “close friend,” Daniel C. Richman, the Paul J. Kellner, Professor of Law at Columbia Law School and a former federal prosecutor, upon the agreement that Richman would then hand them off to the New York Times, a “dead drop” lifted from a bad movie script.

“I asked a friend of mine to share the content of the memo with a reporter,” Comey told Collins. “I didn’t do it myself for a variety of reasons, but I asked him to, because I thought that might prompt the appointment of a special counsel.”

According to plan, this is exactly what transpired and thus the President of the United States now faces a “Special Counsel/Inquisition/fishing trip” headed by ex-FBI Director Robert Mueller, who has hired a number of highly biased Democrat prosecutors one of whom, Jeannine Rhee, actually represented the Clinton Foundation in a racketeering case.

Despite the fact that these stories read like LSD laced parodies of a John le Carré novel and that all of the above players either can be connected to Russia or have contracted “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” it remains the Deep State’s drum-beat that Donald J. Trump, with the help of Russian operatives, hacked the election and now continues to act as an agent of influence answering to Vlad Putin.

These vignettes should provide the reader with a sense of how the Deep State operates, not only entirely above the law but in this and numerous other cases, actually in collusion with U.S. intelligence agencies, federal “law enforcement,” and unsurprisingly, their trusty scribes at the WashPost/NYT and among cable television’s self-righteous talking suits.

©2017 LLC, William Mayer. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law.