Changes

*In an attack on Chairman Nunes, Louise Mensch<ref>http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/louise-mensch-my-mind-is-messed-up-after-taking-hard-drugs-7920094.html</ref> now gives the names of the four individuals whom the FISA warrant was denied in July 2016, emphasizing the new cover story to justify the wiretaps, not as political spying, but against "unwitting" foreign "agents of influence." This may give legal cover for using foreign intelligence apparatus for domestic spying, but does not justify the criminal civil rights violations in leaking an American citizens name "incidentally" caught up in a foreign intelligence gathering operation. Instead, Mensch accuses Nunes of leaking information about FBI and NSA surveillance operations.<ref>https://patribotics.blog/2017/03/27/boris-epshteyn-named-in-july-fisa-application-did-nunes-obstruct-justice/</ref>  

*In an attack on Chairman Nunes, Louise Mensch<ref>http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/louise-mensch-my-mind-is-messed-up-after-taking-hard-drugs-7920094.html</ref> now gives the names of the four individuals whom the FISA warrant was denied in July 2016, emphasizing the new cover story to justify the wiretaps, not as political spying, but against "unwitting" foreign "agents of influence." This may give legal cover for using foreign intelligence apparatus for domestic spying, but does not justify the criminal civil rights violations in leaking an American citizens name "incidentally" caught up in a foreign intelligence gathering operation. Instead, Mensch accuses Nunes of leaking information about FBI and NSA surveillance operations.<ref>https://patribotics.blog/2017/03/27/boris-epshteyn-named-in-july-fisa-application-did-nunes-obstruct-justice/</ref>  

*'''28 March.''' Limited immunity deal reached between Adam Waldman and the DOJ's [[David Laufman]] for Julian Assange. The text of the deal reads: {{Quotebox|"Subject to adequate and binding protections, including but not limited to an acceptable immunity and safe passage agreement, Mr. Assange welcomes the opportunity to discuss with the U.S. government risk mitigation approaches relating to CIA documents in WikiLeaks’ possession or control, such as the redaction of agency personnel in hostile jurisdictions and foreign [[espionage]] risks to WikiLeaks staff.<br><br>Derived directly from this discussion of risk mitigation, Mr. Assange is also prepared to discuss (within the source protection boundaries expected of a journalist and publisher operating at the highest level of integrity) (i) a description of CIA information in the possession or control of WikiLeaks; (ii) the risks of third parties who may have obtained access to such information (not withstanding the foregoing, for the avoidance of doubt this category specifically and others generally will not include any information that may effect WikiLeaks obligations to protect its sources) and (iii) information regarding the timing of further publications in so far as they relate to the risk mitigation approaches developed.”<ref>https://www.scribd.com/document/382555272/LaufmanWaldmanProffer3-28-17#from_embed</ref>}} Not included in the written proffer was an additional offer from Assange: He was willing to discuss technical evidence ruling out certain parties in the controversial leak of Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election. "Mr. Assange offered to provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the DNC releases," Waldman told John Solomon writing in ''The Hill''. "Finally, he offered his technical expertise to the U.S. government to help address what he perceived as clear flaws in security systems that led to the loss of the U.S. cyber weapons program."<ref>https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/394049-coming-up-tuesdays-rising-how-the-doj -almost-offered-an-immunity-deal-to-julian</ref> '''Comey nixes the deal - Russia hacking the DNC narrative intact.'''

*'''28 March.''' Limited immunity deal reached between Adam Waldman and the DOJ's [[David Laufman]] for Julian Assange. The text of the deal reads: {{Quotebox|"Subject to adequate and binding protections, including but not limited to an acceptable immunity and safe passage agreement, Mr. Assange welcomes the opportunity to discuss with the U.S. government risk mitigation approaches relating to CIA documents in WikiLeaks’ possession or control, such as the redaction of agency personnel in hostile jurisdictions and foreign [[espionage]] risks to WikiLeaks staff.<br><br>Derived directly from this discussion of risk mitigation, Mr. Assange is also prepared to discuss (within the source protection boundaries expected of a journalist and publisher operating at the highest level of integrity) (i) a description of CIA information in the possession or control of WikiLeaks; (ii) the risks of third parties who may have obtained access to such information (not withstanding the foregoing, for the avoidance of doubt this category specifically and others generally will not include any information that may effect WikiLeaks obligations to protect its sources) and (iii) information regarding the timing of further publications in so far as they relate to the risk mitigation approaches developed.”<ref>https://www.scribd.com/document/382555272/LaufmanWaldmanProffer3-28-17#from_embed</ref>}} Not included in the written proffer was an additional offer from Assange: He was willing to discuss technical evidence ruling out certain parties in the controversial leak of Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election. "Mr. Assange offered to provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the DNC releases," Waldman told [[John Solomon]] writing in ''The Hill''. "Finally, he offered his technical expertise to the U.S. government to help address what he perceived as clear flaws in security systems that led to the loss of the U.S. cyber weapons program."<ref>https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/394049-coming-up-tuesdays-rising-how-the-doj -almost-offered-an-immunity-deal-to-julian</ref> '''Comey nixes the deal - Russia hacking the DNC narrative intact.'''

*FBI interviews [[Daniel J. Jones]], ex-Dianne Feinstein staffer. Jones tells the FBI he has raised about $50 million from about 10 wealthy donors in California and New York, and has retained the services of Christopher Steele and FusionGPS to keep the Trump-Russia collusion narrative alive.<ref>''Russian Active Measures'', March 22, 2018, p. 112-113 footnote 5.</ref>

*FBI interviews [[Daniel J. Jones]], ex-Dianne Feinstein staffer. Jones tells the FBI he has raised about $50 million from about 10 wealthy donors in California and New York, and has retained the services of Christopher Steele and FusionGPS to keep the Trump-Russia collusion narrative alive.<ref>''Russian Active Measures'', March 22, 2018, p. 112-113 footnote 5.</ref>