This is likely. However, it's really challenging to understand the dynamic. Steele manufactured the key dossier claims, completely fabricated them, then needed to have an attribution, which is where Oleg comes in.
McCabe *KNEW* fabrication from outset w/ cover from FBI WFO.
McCabe *KNEW* fabrication from outset w/ cover from FBI WFO.
Conversations within OIG investigation are with FBI Agents who (motive =>) knew false origination and attribution underpinning application, but had to keep up appearances.
There are three layers of self-interest within the segments of IG report that surround Primary Sub Source.
There are three layers of self-interest within the segments of IG report that surround Primary Sub Source.
1. Motive of Steele for false origination.
2. Motive of McCabe to deny knowledge of Steele construct; and...
3. Motive of FBI to overlook 1 and 2 (2016) then pretend to discover in 2017. Which was really ex-post-facto CYA.
Which is why Oleg is "mistrustful" in 2017:
2. Motive of McCabe to deny knowledge of Steele construct; and...
3. Motive of FBI to overlook 1 and 2 (2016) then pretend to discover in 2017. Which was really ex-post-facto CYA.
Which is why Oleg is "mistrustful" in 2017:
The FBI knowledge (falsely attributed to post 01/12/17 as a CYA story) was irrelevant. In 2017, during the events (execution of ins policy), FBI (team McCabe) used the Dossier Jan, April, June.
Why? Because they knew it was fraud from day one.
Their knowledge was irrelevant
Why? Because they knew it was fraud from day one.
Their knowledge was irrelevant
The FBI knowledge was irrelevant *except* for the purpose of a CYA cover-story when they needed to deploy the ex-post-facto narrative about investigating the PSS and discovering the fraud.
The "discovery story" itself is a fraud manufactured by the same FBI officials.
The "discovery story" itself is a fraud manufactured by the same FBI officials.
