Post

TheLastRefuge

@TheLastRefuge2

May 27, 2018 • 31 tweets • 10 min read • Read on X

Scrolly

1. Understanding "Spygate", the Big Picture.

[staying out of the weeds]

2. In the aggregate, the President Obama administration's "Spygate" (as it's being called) is not a difficult operation to understand.

3. As it originated, the intelligence apparatus, the Intelligence Community or "IC", both domestic and foreign, was used to conduct political opposition research against those who the former administration viewed as their *adversaries*.

4. It is what the political opposition research turned into that eventually becomes "Spygate".

5. The essential elements, the history of government using the intelligence apparatus to conduct political opposition research, is well established; so much so, it's no longer even debated. From FBI spying on MLK (60's) to the IRS sending 21 CD ROMS to the DOJ (2010).

6. The current "spygate" debate centers around the modern weaponization of that process using advances in technology for surveillance. See: Edward Snowden (NSA) *whistleblower* and/or even Reality Winner (NSA *contractor*) for a more modern context.

7. Oddly enough, the questions of "who", "what", "when" and "where", are not part of the argument. Even those defending the -clearly outlined and evidenced- activity cannot debate the events took place. They did.

8. The unresolved issue being debated is "why"?

9. Those who defend the action of IC surveillance on political opponents are reduced to saying government surveillance is necessary and it was done to protect the political target. It seems absurd, but that's their story/narrative and they're sticking to it.

10. This is where good old fashioned American common sense comes into play. If the IC objective was to protect their political opponent, then why didn't they protect their political ally with as much surveillance enthusiasm?

11. So here's a recap of how the process appears to have taken place. I shall endeavor to provide citations for every assertion of fact. The who, what, where and when. You can debate the "why". (Though the answer seems rather obvious)

12. In 2015 and 2016 political operatives within the intelligence community, known as *contractors*, as labeled by the IC and FISA Court, had "deliberate access" to NSA and FBI databases. scribd.com/document/34954…

13. In March 2017 the FISA Court, published a 99-page opinion (declassified w/ redactions in April '17) by Presiding FISA Court Judge Rosemary Collyer. In her opinion, Judge Collyer outlines the scope of the issue. scribd.com/document/34954…

14. According to Judge Collyer review, based on NSA compliance reporting, 85% of all database searches, "About Queries", that took place in 2015 through March 2016 (reporting period) were unauthorized unlawful violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

15. Access to these databases was how some people within the intelligence apparatus [FBI, DOJ-NSD (National Security Div) etc.] were doing political opposition research. This access was given to *contractors* by FBI and DOJ officials.

@Comey

16. An example of a contractor doing this type of work was later identified as Daniel Richman, the unpaid contractor and personal friend hired by FBI Director James @Comey and granted special access (swipe cards etc.) to conduct "special projects". foxnews.com/politics/2018/…

17. While Richman might not have been paid by the FBI, the information he was able to extract would have been very valuable. "had a security clearance as well as badge access" ... "Richman’s portfolio included the use of encrypted communications".

18. The term *contractors* is all over the Sypgate story. Stefan Halper was a contractor; Christopher Steele was a contractor; Fusion GPS was a contractor; crowdstrike was a contractor; Oleg Deripaska was an FBI contractor. Nellie Ohr, contractor. Etc.

19. In March 2016, right as the GOP nomination was narrowing to Donald Trump, NSA Director Mike Rogers was alerted to a frequency *uptick* in unauthorized FISA-702 searches within the FBI and NSA database.

20. A quick review showed FISA 702(16) "To/From" and FISA 702(17) "About" were the two audit queries of concern. On April 18th NSA Director Mike Rogers shut down contractor access to the system and ordered a full compliance audit. scribd.com/document/34954…

21. Oh snap. APRIL 2016 - Now the Spygate race begins. The political operatives (contractors) who were dependent on access to the database for their oppo-research have to start getting creative. Take the time and review this graphic, it is a flow-chart of what happened.

22. Contractor FusionGPS and its founder, Glenn Simpson, is a solution. Glenn Simpson, Fusion GPS, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, become critical aspects of the next phase. They know each other and have worked collaboratively on projects for years. ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/…

23. On April 19th, 2016, the day after the FBI stopped allowing access to the FISA database, the wife of Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson, Mary B Jacoby, went to the White House. white-house-logs.insidegov.com

24. After months of oppo research, including what appears to be access to FISA-702(17) “Search Queries“, the wife of Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS), Mary B. Jacoby, with years of Russia-angled reporting –including Donald Trump– visits the White House 4/19/16 tabletmag.com/jewish-news-an…

25. Clinton Campaign hires FusionGPS April 2016.
Fusion GPS hires Nellie Ohr wife of DOJ-NSD Bruce Ohr.
Bruce Ohr has access to FBI/NSA database.
Bruce Ohr is #4 in DOJ
Bruce Ohr can hire contractors.
Fusion GPS then sub-contracts Christopher Steele.

26. In 2016 DOJ-NSD has no oversight. In 2015 the OIG requested oversight and Sally Yates responded with a lengthy 58-page legal explanation saying, essentially, ‘nope – not allowed.’ All of the DOJ is subject to oversight, except NSD.
see pdf -> ignet.gov/sites/default/…

27. Again, look at the flow chart noting the approximate timeline for #Spygate events.

28.
April '16 Clinton hires Chris Steele
May '16 Nellie Ohr gets HAM radio license.
June/July '16 FBI Agent Strzok meets w/Steele
June '16 FISA warrant denied (?)
July 31st '16 FBI counterintelligence op begins
Oct. '16 Strzok+Ohr meet w/Steele
Oct. 21st '16 FISA warrant granted

29. And all of this *activity*, doesn't yet even outline/involve the use of spies or intelligence agents, yet it is being sold as an operation to protect candidate Donald Trump from possible Russian interference with his campaign and the 2016 election?

30. #Spygate is an outcome of FBI/DOJ authorized contractors being impeded in their database access, and combined with 'Crossfire Hurricane' the need for the weaponized intelligence community to *justify* enhanced and targeted surveillance and political spy operations. /END

Addendum for clarity.

1. "Spygate" is the evolution of going from passive collection of opposition research to the active creation of something, "Russian Collusion", that didn't exist in the observation.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

More from @TheLastRefuge2

TheLastRefuge

@TheLastRefuge2

Nov 15, 2025

Interesting. 🤔 Keep in mind this is 2019, Epstein texting Rep, Democratic member of Congress, Del. Stacey Plaskett of the U.S. Virgin Islands, shortly before Epstein 'killed himself'...

Also Interesting... in 2019: JPMorgan Chase notified the Treasury Department of more than $1 billion in transactions related to “human trafficking” by Jeffrey Epstein dating back 16 years after the notorious sex predator killed himself in 2019, a lawyer for the U.S. Virgin Islands told a federal judge at a hearing.

“Epstein’s entire business with JPMorgan and JPMorgan’s entire business with Epstein was human trafficking,” Mimi Liu, an attorney for the Virgin Islands, told Judge Jed Rakoff in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on Thursday, according to a transcript reviewed by CNBC.

cnbc.com/2023/09/01/rep…

On April 18, 2023, Elon Musk meets Linda Yaccarino for the first time.

April 26, Elon Musk meets Chuck ‘six-ways-to-sunday’ Schumer. “We talked about the future,” Musk told reporters after exiting the meeting that lasted about an hour. {link 1}

April 28, Attorney General of USVI triggers subpoena to Musk about Epstein. {link 2}

First weeks of May, USVI investigators trying to serve Epstein subpoena on Musk.

May 12, Musk hires DEI advocate Linda Yaccarino as Twitter CEO.

1. reuters.com/world/us/elon-…

2. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

Early December 2022, USVI Attorney General Denise George announced a $105 million settlement with the estate of Jeffrey Epstein [link 1].

The USVI case against Epstein was based on anti-criminal enterprise, sex trafficking, child exploitation and fraud laws of the Virgin Islands. We can assume AG George gained a lot of information in the discovery phase deep inside the Epstein finances that ultimately led to the settlement.

Following the settlement with the estate of Epstein, Attorney General George now announces a lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase for “knowingly” enabling the sex trafficking operation of Jeffrey Epstein.

AG George is specifically saying JPMorgan Chase was fully aware of what Epstein was doing.

1. usvidoj.com/u-s-virgin-isl…

2. yahoo.com/news/us-virgin…

Read 5 tweets

TheLastRefuge

@TheLastRefuge2

Oct 30, 2025

Judge James Boasberg signed off on the search warrants against congress.

Boasberg issued blanket orders to the cell phone companies not to reveal the search warrants.

Boasberg is a FISA Court Judge.

Boasberg authorized one of the Carter Page title-1 surveillance warrants.

Boasberg hired Mary McCord as amicus to the court.

After appointing Mary McCord to take up a defensive position for herself and the FISA Court (cover), Judge Boasberg then becomes the presiding judge in the case against the FBI agent who falsified the FISA application, Kevin Clinesmith. Boasberg gives Clinesmith a slap on the wrist and a few months’ probation (more cover).

Boasberg told John Durham (Bill Barr) allowing a target to escape prosecution is part of the penalty upon the DOJ for wrongful assembly of the FISA application; a nice way to cover the issue.

t.co/FXXV4c89kE

This is the same Judge Boasberg gave J6 FBI agent provocateur Ray Epps a sentence of probation.

This is the same Judge Boasberg who established a horrible precedent by forcing Vice-President Mike Pence to testify before a DC grand jury about his conversations with President Trump (breaking executive privilege).

While on vacation, Boasberg attended the criminal indictment hearing of President Trump.

Judge Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking DHS, Customs and Border Patrol and ICE from deporting illegal aliens and narcotrafficking gang members belonging to Tren de Aragua (TdA), a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.

There were calls for Boasberg to be impeached.

Immediately, the same day President Trump noted Boasberg should be impeached, Chief Justice John Roberts jumped to his defense:

..."“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,” Roberts said Tuesday in a rare and brief statement issued just hours after Trump publicly joined demands by his supporters to remove judges he called “crooked.”

politico.com/news/2025/03/1…

Fuck off with this nonsense telling me Roberts is NOT protecting Boasberg.

Keep in mind, Mary McCord operates in all three branches of government: Deputy AAG in charge of the DOJ-NSD (executive); on both impeachment committees by Schiff/Nadler and the J6 committee of Thompson (legislative); as amicus to the FISA court (judicial). That's why she is "untouchable."

Mary McCord's husband worked in the office of Justice Roberts. Mary McCord is partnered with Norm Eisen. Norm Eisen hosted John Roberts in Europe and travelled with Justice Roberts as friends.

There is no apple. It's all worms.

https://x.com/julie_kelly2/status/1763663963076608500

https://x.com/julie_kelly2/status/1763663963076608500

theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/03/2…

Read 7 tweets

TheLastRefuge

@TheLastRefuge2

Oct 24, 2025

1. Dear @jkenney, to understand President Trump’s position on Canada, you have to go back to the 2016 election and President Trump’s position on the NAFTA renegotiation.

If you did not follow the subsequent USMCA process, this might be the ah-ha moment you need to understand Trump’s strategy.

🧵 begins....

2. During the 2016 election President Trump repeatedly said he wanted to renegotiate NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. Both Canada and Mexico were reluctant to open the trade agreement to revision, but ultimately President Trump had the authority and support from an election victory to do exactly that.

In order to understand the issue, you must remember President Trump, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer each agreed the NAFTA agreement was fraught with problems and was best addressed by scrapping it and creating two seperate bilateral trade agreements. One between the USA and Mexico, and one between the USA and Canada.

In the decades that preceded the 2017 push to redo the trade pact, Canada had restructured their economy to: (1) align with progressive climate change; and (2) take advantage of the NAFTA loophole. The Canadian government did not want to reengage in a new trade agreement.

Canada has deindustrialized much of their manufacturing base to support the ‘environmental’ aspirations of their progressive politicians. Instead, Canada became an importer of component goods where companies then assembled those imports into finished products to enter the U.S. market without tariffs. Working with Chinese manufacturing companies, Canada exploited the NAFTA loophole.

Justin Trudeau was strongly against renegotiating NAFTA, and stated he and Chrystia Freeland would not support reopening the trade agreement.

President Trump didn’t care about the position of Canada and was going forward. Trudeau said he would not support it. Trump focused on the first bilateral trade agreement with Mexico.

3. When the U.S. and Mexico had agreed to terms of the new trade deal and 80% of the agreement was finished, representatives from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce informed Trudeau that his position was weak and if the U.S. and Mexico inked their deal, Canada would be shut out.

The U.S Chamber of Commerce was upset because they were kept out of all the details of the agreement between the U.S. and Mexico. In actuality the U.S CoC was effectively blocked from any participation.

When they went to talk to the Canadians the CoC was warning them about what was likely to happen. NAFTA would end, the U.S. and Mexico would have a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA), and then Trump was likely to turn to Trudeau and say NAFTA is dead, now we need to negotiate a separate deal for U.S-Canada.

Trudeau was told a direct bilateral trade agreement between the U.S and Canada was the worst possible scenario for the Canadian government. Canada would lose access to the NAFTA loophole and Canada’s entire economy was no longer in a position to negotiate against the size of the USA. Trump would win every demand.

Following the warning, Trudeau went to visit Nancy Pelosi to find out if congress was likely to ratify a new bilateral trade agreement between the U.S and Mexico. Pelosi warned Trudeau there was enough political support for the NAFTA elimination from both parties. Yes, the bilateral trade agreement was likely to find support.

Read 8 tweets

TheLastRefuge

@TheLastRefuge2

Oct 6, 2025

The CBS move was easy to see coming.

Larry Ellison previously said he "would never let Elon Musk fail." Ellison is Musk's financial backstop.

Musk will never stake a position against Oracle, Google or Thiel's interests.

Ellison then began moving toward TikTok. K-Street funded to assist with lobbying. Trump circle directly part of the assist (Sacks, Lutnick, Musk).

David Ellison simultaneously begins moving toward Paramount (CBS). There is no distance between father and son. Trump circle then assists (Hollywood tariffs).

Ideologically social media and boomer media target operations complete. Now watch what happens with CNN.

At the end of this construct, AI enmeshed with govt., and Social Media data, via national security and Palantir.

L Ellison wins. D Ellison wins. Musk wins. Thiel wins. Sacks wins. Ackman wins. Alex Karp wins. Bibi wins.

The Kentucky Derby is won by horses, but it’s the owners who get the prize money.

Read 4 tweets

TheLastRefuge

@TheLastRefuge2

Sep 30, 2025

Inside the released report by John Durham, the special counsel outlined how former FBI Director James Comey was intimately involved in the creation of the Carter Page FISA application.

Durham noted that Comey kept asking the DOJ National Security Division and FBI counterintelligence investigators, “Where’s the FISA, we need the FISA.” However, John Durham never interviewed James Comey or Andrew McCabe.

The former FBI Director and Deputy refused to cooperate or give testimony to John Durham. So, how did John Durham have details about the demands of Comey?

The answer is found in the footnotes.

Durham reviewed transcripts of interviews given by Andrew McCabe to the Office of the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, who previously investigated FBI conduct in the origin of the Carter Page FISA. Durham pulled quotes from that transcript. [Footnote #1207, page 199 – Durham Report]

justice.gov/storage/durham…

QUESTIONS: If Andrew McCabe gave testimony to the OIG about the motives and impetus of FBI Director James Comey in pushing for the Carter Page FISA application, why did the OIG report never outline those transcribed interviews? Why was the interview transcript never included in the 2019 OIG report?

[ NOTE: A transcribed interview of Andrew McCabe exists in the OIG office. @DNIGabbard through @AGPamBondi can request the transcription and release it to the public.]

However, let me answer the questions without the customary pretending from the DC professional political class. The short version is that OIG Michael Horowitz was protecting the DOJ and FBI. The longer version is a coverup that includes Rod Rosenstein, Bill Barr and ultimately yes, John Durham.

“Where’s the FISA? We need the FISA?” ~ James Comey

You see, the DOJ-NSD and FBI CoIntel needed to find a safe and legal justification for previous spying on the Trump campaign.

The Clinton operation and 2016 FISA Title 1 surveillance of former CIA operative Carter Page became the fraudulent justification for that intent.

Because “FISA Title I” surveillance authority against a U.S. citizen is so serious (the U.S. government is essentially calling the target a spy), only a few people are authorized to even apply for such surveillance warrants. One of the four people authorized to make such a Search Warrant request is the Asst. Deputy Attorney General as head of the National Security Division of the DOJ.

In September and October of 2016 a few critical things were happening:

1. NSA Director Mike Rogers was about to inform the FISC of the FBI spying operation using the NSA database.

2. CIA Director John Brennan was informing President Trump of the risk factors associated with the Clinton/FBI operation (that included #1).

3. The DOJ-NSD was quickly assembling the FISA Court application, sans Woods File, to be used against Carter Page. The Clinton/Steele Dossier was going to be used in lieu of the mandatory Woods File.

While Comey was saying, "where’s the FISA? We need the FISA?" Pressure was building on the office of the Asst. Deputy Attorney General in charge of the DOJ-NSD, that's John Carlin.

Subsequently, Asst. Attorney General John P Carlin resigned as head of the DOJ-NSD.

Did Carlin resign in fear? Seems likely.

washingtonpost.com/world/national…

A few years later, while COVID was raging and few people were paying attention, OIG Horowitz released a COVID delayed letter and summary report about the FBI spying operation [technically, exploiting the NSA database].

On its face the OIG release outlines a review and finding, actually a warning, by Horowitz’s office about FBI contractor access to “a certain national security database.”

The OIG report was titled: “Management Advisory: Notification of Concerns Identified in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Contract Administration of a Certain Classified National Security Program.”

The advisory part is particularly interesting when absorbed through the prism of prior information.

oig.justice.gov/reports/manage…

On the surface of the release, the OIG was noting concerns and a warning shared with the FBI about ongoing contractor access to the NSA database. Thus, a “classified national security program” becomes defined.

However, in the background of the release it appears the OIG was using this public notification as a CYA of sorts.

Meaning the OIG was saying publicly they have advised the FBI of “concerns” they carried with the FBI abusing access to the NSA database.

Within the report you will note the IG calls out the FBI because the FBI hid their response to the IG warning behind the cloud of “classification.”

This left the IG with no alternative except to say the classified response has to be accepted as the final FBI response to the IG warning.

The IG goes on to say to the FBI you have 90 days to tell me what you did to address the contractor access abuses.

In reality OIG Michael Horowitz was covering his ass and telling us why. Perhaps that's why Horowitz was removed from his position recently and sent to the IRS office where Secretary Bessent could keep an eye on him.

Keep in mind this contractor access to the bulk NSA metadata is a big deal. All of the FISA audits in the past eight+ years have pointed out how FBI contractors continue to abuse their access to the database and unlawfully extract information without minimization efforts required by fourth amendment protections.

The scale of the abuse is actually stunning; and the OIG reviewed the process and found the same issues that existed in 2015 and 2016 remained uncorrected five years later.

/END

Read 4 tweets

TheLastRefuge

@TheLastRefuge2

Sep 30, 2025

1/ During the period of Nov 2015 to April 2016, the Obama administration, through the FBI under James Comey and Andrew McCabe, was conducting a political spying operation against all republican presidential primary candidates using the power of their offices.

The intent was two-fold. (1) Tracking the candidates to identify activity; and (2) conducting opposition research to be fed to the campaign of Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton.

This surveillance activity was happening in concert with Comey, McCabe and a small group inside the FBI, running a defensive operation for the issues surrounding Hillary Clinton's prior use of private email servers -which included classified information transmission- during her tenure as Secretary of State.

SOURCE: DNI

dni.gov/files/document…

2/ Documentary evidence of the Obama spying operation surfaced as an outcome of the NSA compliance officer discovering the FBI activity.

The compliance officer reported the activity to National Security Agency Director, Admiral Mike Rogers.

The spying operation is not an issue of FISA-702, or any FISA system or process. However, the availability of FBI access to the NSA database is what triggered the discovery of the spy operation.

That FBI access is created under the auspices of FISA, but FISA-702 or any aspect therein was not the issue.

The issue was the spying operation. FISA and using the NSA database to conduct the electronic surveillance, was simply the tool to exploit the electronic communication (metadata) of the targets.

The Obama administration was spying on their political opposition and telling the Clinton team the results of their surveillance.

The United States government was spying on candidates for office in order to control the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

3/ After Director Mike Rogers was made aware of the operation, the exploitation of the NSA database, the NSA Director blocked the FBI from access and begun an investigation.

That investigation culminated in Director Mike Rogers informing the regulatory body in charge of protecting the database from exploitation.

FISC:

With the NSA now collecting the private electronic communication of Americans, the FISA Court was assigned the responsibility of oversight; intended to protect the growing metadata library and ensure the 4th Amendment provisions to the constitution were maintained.

The FISC oversight was intended to stop the government from reviewing the private records of Americans, the NSA database, without a warrant.

Read 5 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

TheLastRefuge

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @TheLastRefuge2

TheLastRefuge

TheLastRefuge

TheLastRefuge

TheLastRefuge

TheLastRefuge

TheLastRefuge

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!