Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
TheLastRefuge Profile picture
@TheLastRefuge2
Sep 29, 2020 • 20 tweets • 5 min read • Read on X
1. Do not overlook the importance of this Deep State two-step admission by IG Michael Horowitz.

He is calling out FBI Director Chris Wray big time !!

oig.justice.gov/reports/manage…
2. 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.”
3. The release is titled: “Management Advisory: Notification of Concerns Identified in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Contract Administration of a Certain Classified National Security Program”.

oig.justice.gov/reports/manage…
4. On the surface of the current release the OIG is 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.

It's the bulk metadata NSA database.
5. However, in the background of this current release it appears the OIG is using this public notification as a CYA of sorts. Meaning the OIG is saying publicly they have advised the FBI of “concerns” with this database being abused.
6. Indeed, we know the OIG was reviewing FBI contractor access to the NSA database as a result of both FISA judge Rosemary Collyer and FISA judge James Boasberg reports.
7. It was little discussed on January 19, 2019, when the OIG revealed “Misconduct by Two Current Senior FBI Officials and One Retired FBI Official While Providing Oversight on an FBI Contract.”

oig.justice.gov/reports/2019/f…
8. As specifically, and in my opinion *intentionally* noted by the OIG, the FBI used their intelligence authority to “classify” their response to IG Horowitz warning; and now Horowitz is informing the public of that opaque FBI approach.
9. Essentially, this can be looked at as Horowitz calling out the FBI for hiding information, yet the IG is using carefully worded public information to do so.
10. The FBI hid their response to the IG warning behind the cloud of “classification”, leaving the IG with no alternative except to say the classified response (March 2020) has to be accepted as the final FBI response to the IG warning.
11. Horowitz: […] "The classification marking of the working draft report ... have contributed to the delays in finalizing this review."
12. Horowitz: "So that we can begin the process of resolving issues that we identified during the review ... we have determined that it would be in the OIG’s and the FBI’s interests to conclude our review by treating the OIG’s working draft report ... as a management advisory."
13. Horowitz: "Further, based on the oral and written feedback previously provided by the FBI on the working draft report, we consider the 11 recommendations contained within the working draft report to be final and their status “resolved.”
14. The IG is then saying to the FBI you have 90 days to tell us what you did to address the contractor access abuses.

The OIG is covering his ass, and telling us why.

oig.justice.gov/reports/manage…
15. Keep in mind this contractor access to the bulk NSA metadata is a big deal. All of the FISA audits in the past six years have pointed out FBI contractors abuse their access to the database and unlawfully extract information without following fourth amendment protections.
16. The scale of the abuse is actually stunning; and now the OIG has reviewed the same FBI process and found the same issues uncorrected.

The FBI is attempting to retain an unlawful process.
17. The valid purpose of the NSA database has been exploited to: (1) gain opposition research on political entities; AND (2) the NSA database is being exploited to retrieve information useful for financial gains (insider information).
18. The FBI contractors inside the network are in the business of selling information which they obtain from their access to the NSA database.

Horowitz and FISC says it needs to stop.
Wray says notsomuch.
19. Everyone inside the system is compromised by the extracted data. We can only imagine the blackmail material floating around DC in the hands of those who weaponize it and refuse to relinquish power.

FUBAR !
20. This database is the source, the root source, of all things currently happening in/around politics.

Whoever controls it, controls EVERYTHING !

/END

• • •

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

Keep Current with TheLastRefuge

TheLastRefuge Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TheLastRefuge2

TheLastRefuge Profile picture
Jun 19
1.) As DNI Mrs Tulsi Gabbard has:

♦ chased down intelligence community leakers,
♦ released the JFK files,
♦ released Joe Biden’s domestic terrorism surveillance plan,
♦ intercepted an NIC plot to impeach President Trump (confirmed by Rubio),
♦ taken control of the Presidential Daily Briefing,
♦ and more recently begun to confront the weaponized corruption within the IC Inspector General organization.

These are actions, not words, and those actions speak boldly.  Suffice to say, her effectiveness has placed a target on her back.
2) Chased down intel community leakers.

theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/05/0…
3) Released the JFK files and released the Joe Biden domestic terrorist surveillance program.

theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2025/04/1…
Read 8 tweets
TheLastRefuge Profile picture
Jun 12
1) Do you remember the last G7 in Canada? 😀
2) Image
Image
Image
3) Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 11 tweets
TheLastRefuge Profile picture
Jun 9
1. At sporadic times of inconsequential normalcy, on the streets of Russia you will see two distinct types of people asked for identification, Asians and middle eastern males. When asked why, the average, ordinary grey-person in Russia going about their business, ambivalently has no idea.

Russia is a massive country.

To the southeast they are bordered by China, Mongolia and Asia, they even have a small border with North Korea. To the southwest they have the “stans,” most notably Kazakhstan; this region is the source of most domestic terrorists who attack inside Russia. To the West they have Ukraine and the EU nations.

From the standpoint of Russia, they have Asians on their East, Turks/Arabs on their South and EU supported Nazis on their Western flank.

Keep in mind, despite the breakup of the Soviet Union the muscle memory from World War II is still very much a part of their social compact.Image
2. Consider Arlington Cemetary for scale. If you were to build an Arlington type cemetery for all the Russians killed in World War II, the 27 million gravesites would envelop a landmass bigger than Washington DC. These realities underpin Russian perspectives.

Russia is drawn into an alignment with China not by desire, but rather by necessity.  Most ordinary Russians do not like China, and they would prefer not to purchase Chinese industrial or manufactured goods.  Russian President Vladimir Putin is well aware of this, and I believe U.S. President Donald Trump is aware also.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said publicly it should be U.S. policy to support separating the two biggest nuclear powers, China and Russia as a matter of strategic U.S. interest.  President Trump said, “I’m going to have to un-unite them, and I think I can do that, too,” shortly before his election in November. “I have to un-unite them.”

In a very downplayed statement earlier this year generally hidden/ignored by media, the former Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and current Secretary of State -also National Security Advisor- Marco Rubio, said “Ukraine was a proxy war for the United States against Russia.”  Despite the U.S. media intentionally hiding the statement, Moscow immediately noticed and affirmed the accuracy.Image
3. Ukraine launched a covert attack against Russian air force bases last Sunday June 1st.  President Trump was not informed of the attack in advance and was unaware it was going to take place.  In the aftermath, President Trump and Secretary Rubio stayed quiet.

Three days after the attack, Wednesday, June 4, President Trump held a 90-minute phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Last week the New York Times received “an eight-page internal F.S.B. planning document” … “that sets priorities for fending off Chinese espionage.”

[…] Ares Leaks, a cybercrime group, obtained the document but did not say how it did so. That makes definitive authentication impossible, but The Times shared the report with six Western intelligence agencies, all of which assessed it to be authentic. The document gives the most detailed behind-the-scenes view to date of Russian counterintelligence’s thinking about China.

[…] Russia has survived years of Western financial sanctions following the invasion, proving wrong the many politicians and experts who predicted the collapse of the country’s economy.

[…] The Russian document describes a “tense and dynamically developing” intelligence battle in the shadows between the two outwardly friendly nations.

[…] Read one way, the F.S.B. document lends credence to the theory that, with the right approach, Russia can be cleaved away from China. The document describes mistrust and suspicion on both sides of the relationship."

nytimes.com/2025/06/07/wor…
Read 4 tweets
TheLastRefuge Profile picture
May 29
From the New York trade court ruling:

"...[...] in 1962, Congress delegated to the President the power to take action to adjust imports when the Secretary of Commerce finds that an “article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.” Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Pub. L. No. 87-794, § 232(b), 76 Stat. 872, 877 (codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1862(c)(1)(A)). This delegation is conditioned upon an investigation and findings by the Secretary of Commerce, and agreement by the President. See id. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, requires that the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) take action, which may include imposing tariffs, where “the rights of the United States under any trade agreement are being denied” or “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country” is “unjustifiable and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” 19 U.S.C. § 2411(a)(1)(A)–(B). The USTR may impose duties also where the USTR determines that “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country is unreasonable or discriminatory and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” Id. § 2411(b)(1). This power is conditioned on extensive procedural requirements including an investigation that culminates in an affirmative finding that another country imposed unfair trade barriers under § 2411(a)(1)(A) or (B) or § 2411(b), and a public notice and comment period. See id. § 2414(b)."...

This is one reason why the ruling can be overturned. The Sec 301/302 investigation was completed by the USTR, with extensive citation.

NY Court citation:

cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/file…

USTR Citation 400 pages:

ustr.gov/sites/default/…Image
The court literally ignored the USTR investigation, AND the Dept of Commerce review and investigation of the same based on the USTR published findings.

This ruling will not pass inspection by a higher court, and as to the motive of the 3-judge panel.... follow the $$$, there are trillions at stake.

This is a ruling to the benefit of the multinationals.Image
USTR Citations for lengthy review:

ustr.gov/issue-areas/pr…
Read 4 tweets
TheLastRefuge Profile picture
May 19
1. The original agreement between Clinton and Obama going back to 2008 was for Obama to take the nomination, the presidency and then eventually support Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election bid. 

Obama would be President. Obama would appoint Clinton to Secretary of State, Hillary would then use her office to build wealth for herself and her family, and then HRC would exit the Dept of State to begin her presidential run.

John Podesta would enter the Obama administration as Hillary left in 2013.  Podesta would look out for Hillary’s interests from his position inside the Obama White House.  The Clintons and Obamas never fully trusted each other. 

Barack Obama would put all the mechanisms into place that would transition his administration into Hillary Clintons’.  That was always the plan running in the background.Image
2. In 2015 Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had a check-in meeting; just touching base to firm up the goals and objectives as Hillary began her campaign launch.  Podesta left the White House to take up position inside the campaign, and Team Obama would maintain Clinton’s interests as planned without an insider.

All of President Obama’s appointments in after 2015, were essentially through the prism of assisting Hillary Clinton to win in 2016.  Attorney General Loretta Lynch (tarmac meeting), Deputy AG Sally Yates, Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and FBI Director James Comey were all part of that.

This is a key point missed by many. In the last two years of Obama, the cabinet and top-tier members of the administration would align their institutional interests to that of Hillary Clinton.

Technically Hillary had eyes and ears all over the White House at the time, and with Hillary Clinton being a foregone conclusion per the expectations of Washington DC, everyone would fall in line during the transition from Obama to Clinton. 

Again, this was the general plan.  Obama would show up in 2016 to campaign for Hillary and all would be seamless.Image
3. The FBI was aware of the plan for transition from Obama to Clinton, hence their role in eliminating the threat later presented by the Clinton, as Secretary of State, laptop scandal and the subsequent issues of classified information. 

Remember, Clinton’s motive as Secretary of State was to sell her position for material wealth; that’s why she used a personal email, maintained her own servers, and generally controlled how her activity could be monitored and tracked. [Also, she didn’t fully trust Obama]

The FBI activity was to support, defend and facilitate the Clinton effort. This is again a key to understanding "Russiagate"...

After March 2016 (Super Tuesday) it became obvious Donald Trump was going to win the Republican nomination. Trump would be Clinton's opponent.

Using access to the NSA database, the U.S. Govt., specifically "FBI Contractors", began doing political surveillance of Donald Trump's campaign. This intel was then sent to the Clinton team. Clinton would benefit from knowing the communication inside the Trump campaign. All of that intel was in the metadata captured by the NSA and searched by the FBI contractors.

All of this activity was political surveillance, using govt resources to feed the Clinton team the info.Image
Image
Read 5 tweets
TheLastRefuge Profile picture
May 17
1. OK lawyers, hear me out on my plan to address lower court 'nationwide injunctions' (or TROs) and tell me the flaw.

How about, before any lower court can issue a "nationwide" injunction, they have to get permission or approval from the SCOTUS Justice that presides over that region?Image
2. That singular justice decision (if approved) is then scheduled for a full SCOTUS review every-other-Friday.

[They can work out the communication structure by themselves, even using skype or similar]

Any nationwide injunction issued -hopefully fewer- would be approved by a SCOTUS justice, and then eventually reviewed by the full court.
3. Yes, that means some DEI justices (Sotomayor, Jackson, Kagan), would likely approve regional injunctions. However, the ruling only applies to that region, not nationally.... Until full court approval.

Yes, in the issue of criminal illegal aliens, it essentially means that some regions would be unsafe as deportation processes would be stalled, while in the other regions the repatriation could continue without the TRO applying.Image
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

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

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(