Examining the FISA Target’s Lifelong Ties to the Intelligence Community – A Necessary Prologue to the OIG Report


Carter William Page is a Naval Academy Trident Scholar and certain non-descript ‘US Person’ at the center of all things CrossFire Hurricane. From his FISA surveillance warrant which predated the Election, to Trump’s “wiretap” claims, to James Wolfe indictment, to Nunes Memo, to unprecedented public release of FISA, to impending OIG Report, to Kevin Klinesmith impending indictment, and so much more to come, Carter Page is central to all.

This report highlights Carter Page’s life-long ties to the United States Intelligence Community as they concern his status as a target of FISA surveillance in 2016-2017. If Inspector Horowitz was moved to seek answers regarding allegations of Joseph Mifsud’s ties to Western Intelligence, then similar allegations regarding the Target of the FISA warrant itself surely deserve double such attention and scrutiny. 

Unfortunately, Carter Page claims zero interest from the OIG or other relevant DOJ contacts to hear his side of the story. Carter has recently took to the airways to again forcefully allege “a quarter century of service” to the USG while threatening a court injunction if not given at least a review process afforded to other government related actors that are being named and scrutinized in the same document.

It is in this vein that this Trident Scholar Report is presented. The report highlights a quarter century of factual data concerning Carter Page and is partitioned into three parts which will examine: 

  • 1) 1989-1999: Background & Grooming as a US Naval Intelligence Officer
  • 2) 2008-2020: ‘Innocent Citizen’ at Center of Multiple CI Investigations 
  • 3) 2016-2020: Contemporary & Continuing Displays of Intelligence Tradecraft & Assistance to USG

Taken alone, any single Part of the tripartite report would suffice as package of exculpatory information serious enough to remit the existing FISA apps as “deficient for lack of exculpatory disclosure”. Taken together as a whole, the three Parts illustrate a FISA target that looks and behaves more like an active US Intelligence Agent than a SVR recruit. 

It is against this backdrop that any self-referential audit of the FISA process, subject so zero outside scrutiny, is to be read and critiqued. 



“You know the primary driver for me and why did I get involved in Russia? When I was growing up in the 1980’s I came in off the street on my skateboard and I watched the summit meetings between Reagan and Gorbachev where they are negotiating arms control treaties to decrease nuclear weapons. I thought this is the beginning of a new era and something that’s of the highest significance and importance for the future of both of our respective countries and also the world, just given the threat. I was very motivated by that and it was something that really inspired me. Watching one of the summit meetings between the two leaders of the Soviet Union and the U.S., I saw a couple of Naval officers standing behind the president. U.S. Naval officers, and I thought that’s interesting, maybe that’s some kind of way of getting involved and helping out. That was one of the main reasons I wanted to go to the Naval Academy. So I ended up doing that, I was a political science honors major. I was always interested in politics and international relations.” — Carter Page

In accordance with his stated teenage dream, Carter Page attended the US Naval Academy in Annapolis, from 1989-1993. The prestigious institution is arguably more selective than top Ivy League schools, as prospective candidates must be nominated by members of Congress, the President or Vice President, the Secretary of the Navy, or be the child of a Medal of Honor Recipient. 

Carter mentioned he was “an intern for Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, liberal Senator from New York,” but it is unclear if it was he who nominated Carter to the Academy. 

Within the Academy, Carter was a Distinguished Graduate (top 10% of his class) and was chosen for the Navy’s Trident Scholar program which gives selected officers the opportunity for independent academic research and study.  As a Trident Scholar, the Carter Page wrote treatises on National Security and the balance of classified information between the co-equal branches of Government. 

“My senior year I was chosen for this fellowship called the Trident Program where you do independent research. And I studied Strategic Defense Initiative, the STI program that Reagan did.” 

Additionally, in preparation for his report, young Carter was already impressing Admirals with his promising tradecraft. Steve Frantzich, Carter’s advisor on the above paper at the Naval Academy: 

“It has been a long time. What I do remember is that it shook up some of the Navy folks who did not like the access and information he got indicating the clear political aspects of procurement. An admiral (I believe his name was Johnson) came over to his oral presentation and confronted him as to how he got the information. Carter was a very resourceful student who got an internship on the Hill (I believe it was the Armed Services committee) and made some close acquaintances. Whatever one thinks of his politics, Carter is a very bright and capable individual.”

The prestigious Trident Scholarship allowed Carter to serve at the Pentagon, acting as Navy’s working group representative on Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy, focusing on negotiations with Russia under Rep. Les Aspin, D-Wis. As chair of the Committee, Aspin was spending billions to help disarm Russia. Shortly before congressman Aspin became Clinton’s defense secretary. Carter Page also worked briefly with the Clinton Administration transition team in 1992-1993. 

Post-graduation, Carter served as an Intelligence Officer in the Navy for five years. His first year and a half was at the Pentagon continuing work on Nonproliferation Policy until he obtained his Master of Arts degree in National Security Studies at Georgetown University, which he received in 1994.

From 1994-1998, Page served multiple tours in the Middle East and Europe. This included a tour in western Morocco as an intelligence officer for a United Nations peacekeeping mission

“I finished my five year term in the military, mostly in the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf. I served five years in the Navy and then went to the Council on Foreign Relations but I continued to study regional issues related to this area… Caspian Sea region. So, which is kind of the stans… Khazakhstan, Turkemenistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbazhan (incoherent)… So I served my five years in the Navy and I got out and got into business.”

After his Navy duty, in 1998 the Council on Foreign Relations awarded Page one of its prized international affairs fellowships. “I remember his being an appealing candidate for one of these difficult-to-get fellowships,” said a person who sat on the selection committee, who spoke only anonymously because selection is a private matter. What attracted the committee, said the panel member, was Page’s assertion that he worked in military intelligence, stationed in the Western Sahara. This does not appear in any of Page’s personal or professional accounts, but Page has confirmed that he worked in Western Morocco as part of a U.N. peacekeeping mission.

Spending his time in residence at the CFR’s New York offices, Carter worked on his MBA which he earned from New York University Stern School of Business in 1998-1999. Page has remained a consistent participant and contributor at the CFR since his fellowship, with at least 9 panel appearances for CFR events between 2007 and 2009. He was also appointed to be a Term Member of the organization for 5 years.

It should be noted that by this point in his life, Carter was well traveled on a very narrow career pathway he had set for himself back in 1986 as a teenager, which was to affect world politics, specifically between Rus & US,  towards a path to peace via Naval Intelligence. Every position he has held since High School, from Trident Scholar, to Nuclear Non Proliferations Rep, to Naval Intelligence Officer, to CFR Term Member… all required both pre-selection and classified clearance. 

Will Horowitz examine this remarkable background as it relates to his status as a Target of FISA surveillance? Will Horowitz examine why exculpatory background ties to the Intelligence Community were not included in the applications?

In 2000 with his MBA in hand, he began work as an investment banker with Merrill Lynch in the firm’s London office, and by 2004 was vice president of the company’s Moscow office. Page later served as COO for Merrill Lynch’s energy and power department in New York.

“I got the fellowship here at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. And then I was a banker, started in London, moved in 2004 to Moscow, although my bank didn’t have an office in Moscow, it was the fastest growth market in the world, and so me and another guy went over there to open up the office.”

In 2008, after Page returned from his allegedly unmemorable time in Russia, he set up his own investment management company called Global Energy Capital with partner James Richard.  

Page has also instructed and lectured at the college level. In 2012, he received his PhD from the University of London. He ran an international affairs program at Bard College, and taught a course on energy and politics at New York University. It was at the University that Carter would be subject to recruitment efforts by Russian SVR agents working under diplomatic cover in NYC in 2013.



“Look, I don’t know what Carter Page is. But we do know that… he was involved in this 2013 case that resulted in 2015 in an indictment and jail time for a russian spy. He walked free. He then shows up in 2016 in another counterintelligence operation. I mean this is pretty remarkable, to show up in two separate operations and to do so without seemingly any indictments or jail time. Look, perhaps he’s either the luckiest or unluckiest man alive…and just happens to fall into this.. or perhaps its something nefarious, but there is a third possibility and its that this wasn’t happenstance, this wasn’t coincidence… and on the Chris Hayes show… I believe you also mentioned he talked to the FBI and CIA in the pat… it is possible that in some fashion he may have been sharing information with the US Government.” Naveed Jamali, former Russian double-agent

Even more mathematically remarkable and selective than Carter’s ties to privileged circles of Naval Intelligence, Pentagon Defense Planning, and CFR-style international policy boards, is his documented  involvement in multiple US counterintelligence operations as a purported “civilian” (who just happens to have a background in Military Intelligence circles). Carter is at the center of at least three very recent counterintelligence operations. In each instance, not only does Carter walk away from the case legally unscathed, he procures evidence for Federal authorities, even while he himself is under FISA surveillance!

US v BURYAKOV: 2013-2016

Carter’s involvement in the Buryakov case forms the foundation upon which the FBI builds its FISA case against him as a suspected agent of Russia. Aside from Christopher Steele’s lies, Carter’s association to the case is the only other evidence offered by the FBI in the FISA application. As such, Page’s activity in the case should be especially scrutinized. Strangely, mainstream media has given the case almost zero attention. 

In January 2013, Victor Podobnyy, a Russian intelligence officer working covertly in the United States under diplomatic cover, formed a relationship with Page. Podobnyy met Page at an energy symposium in New York City and began exchanging emails with him. Podobnyy and Page also met in person on multiple occasions, during which Page offered his outlook on the future of the energy industry and provided documents to Podobnyy about the energy business.

By June, FBI interviews Page after listening to Russian agents discuss his attempted recruitment (& other topics) for 5 months. Despite the Russian spies discussing giving page “millions of dollars” for “information”, FBI agents curiously decide to bring in Carter for an interview instead of putting him under FISA surveillance. Counterintelligence investigations can typically span half a decade tracking targets so as to learn everything possible about them before arrest. In this case, the agents decide to “interview” Carter after only 5mos of interaction with the Russians, and also two years before the arrest of his “associates”. 

How did FBI know they could trust Page not to talk to Russians in 2013 (revealing their CI investigation)? Will Horowitz examine why FBI declined to FISA Page in 2013 when he was being offered “millions” for “information”? Will Horowitz examine why FBI felt safe to inform Page about suspicions and/or interview in 2013 but not in 2016? 

By 2015 the Russian spy Evengy Buryakov was arrested and his associates had fled the United States under diplomatic cover. In March of 2016, DOJ/FBI summon Carter to SDNY prosecutor’s offices as part of the prosecution effort. It is in this meeting on 03/02/16 that Page alleges Preet Braha asked him to provide “false testimony” to which he refused. It is not known exactly what the nature of testimony Page was being asked to provide.

In the Government’s Response documents filed a week later Carter Page as a key witness to the case (as a recruit target) is removed from pleadings and an undercover agent matching his exact description as an “energy analyst” is introduced to the case for the first time. In this pleading it is revealed that the recordings containing discussions about Carter Page were obtained from within the SVR Headquarters SCIF in NYC by an undercover agent who provided “purported industry documents” to Russians, similar to Page. In an investigation that lasted 36 months from 2012 to 2015 and involved a plethora of surveillance techniques deployed, recordings from within SVR Headquarters only exist during Page’s precise window of involvement (Jan-May 2013)

Will Horowitz examine what discussions took place with Carter Page on 03/02/16? Will Horowitz review allegations of legal misconduct by Preet and other prosecutors? Will Horowitz determine what “false testimony” Page believes was interjected into filings and also was asked of him? Will Horowitz review the records of the UCE matching Page’s description to verify it was not in fact the same person? Will Horowitz verify if ANY cause exists to conclude Page a “hostile witness” to prosecution at any point in the Buryakov case prior to his involvement with the Trump Campaign?

US v CARTER PAGE (FISA): 2016-2017

Page’s involvement as a suspect or target of the FBI’s investigation into the Trump Campaign is fairly well known. What is less well known is how early the FBI was targeting Page. Loretta Lynch has testified that James Comey & Andrew McCabe held a National Security Cabinet meeting concerning Page as a threat as early as June 2016, before he had travelled to Russia in July. What had transpired between March of 2016 when DOJ/FBI was calling on Page as a witness to June of 2016 when FBI was labelling Page a potential National Security threat before any travel to Russia or allegations of secret meetings with Sechin? The only reported change in circumstance appears to be the March 2nd meeting, where Page alleges he was asked to falsify testimony. 

Will Horowitz determine when and why the FBI’s opinion of Page as a witness changed from friendly to hostile? Will Horowitz determine if enough predicate exists to warrant such a change? 

What is also less well known is Carter’s specific actions taken while under active FISA surveillance. Almost immediately after being put under surveillance, Page took a number of steps to begin laying a record of exculpatory evidence which are detailed in the next section.

US v JAMES E. WOLFE: 2017-2018

Carter’s involvement in the James Wolfe case is that of a victim. James Wolfe leaked information about the FISA targeting Page which revealed his protected identity as a masked prosecution witness in the Buryakov affidavit. Subsequently, the fact that the FBI had obtained FISA surveillance on Page was also later revealed. Immediately after news of the FISA was published, the FBI opened up a counterintelligence operation to locate the leaker of the sensitive information. 

As a peripheral “victim” in this particular case, Page nonetheless ends up getting “involved” and secures evidence once again for Federal prosecutors. See next section.



Even more amazing than Carter’s connections to the intelligence community and counterintelligence operations are his deliberate and premeditated acts that display contemporary use and command of intelligence tradecraft (spycraft), nearly all of which occur DURING ongoing CI operations wherein he is under intense scrutiny by full spectrum FISA surveillance. 

Of particular note, Page makes use of emails to indirectly transmit key investigative leads and exculpatory information to federal authorities by way of *intercepted* communications via FISA surveillance. 

COMEY LETTER – September 26, 2016

In a letter to FBI written in the wake of the recent allegations authored by Michael Issikoff of Yahoo News, Page writes to flatly deny all allegations, calling them “completely false media reports.” Additionally in the letter, which is addressed directly to Director James Comey himself, Carter claims to have “interacted with members of the US intelligence community, including the FBI and CIA for many decades,” before making himself available for FBI questioning.

The communication is written in the style of semi-threatening meet-and-confer letter. A M&C letter is an informal communication between attorneys arguing over discovery issues in the pre-trial phase. Before going to a judge and asking for a Motion to Compel that legally forces an adversary to give me information, I am required by law to make good-faith informal efforts to attempt to resolve those issues outside of the Court. A M&C letter is one such step; it explains to your opponent in writing the nature of your disagreements (over information), and invites them to meet and confer to resolve the issue. Oftentimes these M&C letters are torn up and ignored, but the written attempts are still necessary as “foundation” to show the Judge you “tried” to resolve things before bothering the Courts. You don’t want to be documented as being the uncooperative or bad-faith party in a Discovery dispute; if the adversary is making themselves openly transparent, a Judge will frown on being asked to waste resources making a legal order for something that was already freely offered (see FISA warrant). 

In this vein, you can read Carter’s letter as an aggressive defense (to allegations) using transparency as a weapon via the Clean Hands Doctrine. Additionally, Carter is strongly hinting at connections to FBI personnel and/or the intelligence community. In an effort to avoid the dual threats of being 1) cast as uncooperative/bad-faith actor and 2) being blindsided by possible unknown exculpatory information, it would be legally prudent for the FBI to immediately interview Carter at this point. However, that they did not. 

Will Horowitz investigate why FBI declined to interview a FISA target who was preemptively denying the application’s core, unfounded, allegations and offering themselves for questioning? Will Horowitz investigate why FBI selectively quoted only a few words from Page’s letter to the Director within the FISA application and omitted Page’s reference to interacting with CIA & FBI “for many decades”?

OSCE LETTER – October 28, 2016

Instead of interviewing Page who was affirmatively denying Steele’s allegations and offering himself transparently for questioning, the FBI decided to ignore Page and instead put him under FISA surveillance on October21, 2016. About a week later, and exactly one week before the Election, while every single aspect of Page’s electronic communications whatsoever were being monitored in real-time, Page sent an extremely conspicuous email to The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. The OSCE is the world’s largest security-oriented intergovernmental organization and a United Nations Election Monitoring body. Its mandate includes issues such as arms control, promotion of human rights, freedom of the press, and fair elections.

In the letter, Carter documents several stunning facts that are directly related to the FISA application under which he is currently being surveilled. The facts are also being published for the first time, i.e. discovered by Carter Page….

First (1) he states that the Yahoo article is “almost entirely attributable” to HRC’s campaign. The Isikoff piece had broke on Page only a month prior. In the letter to OSCE Page is alleging the Hillary for America campaign is the SOURCE to whom Isakoff should be at “almost entirely attributed”. This is a BOLD claim! Carter is already talking about DOSSIER SOURCES, IN THE FISA! This argument regarding the Isikoff article, originally advanced in print by Page, will also become the “circular sourcing” argument found later in the Nunes Memo.

Second (2), Carter Page identifies Christopher Steele *and* the intermediary (Perkins Coie) by which he’s being paid on *behalf* of the Clinton Campaign. Per the letter: “I have learned from reliable sources that a law firm close to Clinton campaign hired a London based private investigator to investigate my trip to Russia.” Again, this knowledge about money flows to the CHS being used by FBI to secure his FISA warrant was being transmitted indirectly to FBI who was monitoring the emails. Page was again “breaking” this information an entire year before it would be verified by the courts and reported in the press. Again also, this information would form a key piece of the Nunes memo and resultant investigations.

Third (3), Carter also notes the FBI has been compromised. His plea to the international body is predicated upon hints at political corruption within, to wit: “evidence of certain connections between HFA campaign and federal authorities make me cautious of of seeking help”. The “connection” between HFA and the Feds could be an illusion to the fact that FBI’s CHS Christopher Steele was being paid by HFA and FBI simultaneously, or it could also be a reference to Fusion’s connection to DOJ via the married Ohr’s. 

Lastly (4), Page documents that his prior efforts to reach out to the once-friendly FBI have only been rebuffed. He notes Comey is non-responsive to cooperation, referencing his September letter that went unanswered. Page has effectively documented the FBI as a bad-faith actor

Again, this all predates election and its being watched in real-time by Comey. 

Now, consider the points above that Carter Page just outlined in his email (one week before the election) juxtaposed against @DevinNunes memo. There is considerable overlap in facts and arguments used. It’s almost as if Carter’s 10/28/16 email was a nascent genesis for the Nunes Memo. Isn’t that something…

As noted elsewhere, we find it strange that Carter Page was able to AFFIRMATIVELY IDENTIFY STEELE AS A SOURCE for the Yahoo article IN WRITING *for* the FBI (via FISA intercepts) before the FBI was able to *ask* Steele themselves.

Will Horowitz examine how Page was able to determine Steele as a source before the FBI was? Will Horowitz determine who Page’s “source” was? Will Horowitz ask and examine whether the exculaptoring facts unearthed by Page were timely incorporated into his subsequent FISA application renewals? 


Weeks after FBI opened its investigation into the leaked FISA & narrowed to James Wolfe as a suspect, Carter was emailing Washington Post & New York Times reporters with James Wolfe *blind copied* as a recipient. (Exhibit 5b) This email from Carter Page would as a tracer for the FISA leak recipient, directly identifying @nakashimae for prosecutors when she was the only reporter of 5 to “respond” to the “invisible” copied target, James Wolfe. 

Take a moment to reflect on the irony: Carter Page, all times under 100% FISA surveillance for being an alleged “agent of a hostile foreign power”, is sending emails that identify leak-networks for federal prosecutors AND are used as multiple pieces of “State’s evidence”. (Exhibit 10 Reporter #3)

Will Horowitz determine how Page know James Wolfe was involved an entire year before anything was reported in the news? Will Horowitz determine how government prosecutors received Page’s emails and whether they were turned over voluntarily or obtained via surveillance? 

This amazing display of trade-craft, specifically using emails to *indirectly transmit* key investigative leads to federal authorities by way of *intercepted* communications via FISA, is notable. It establishes a *pattern* of such behavior for Carter Page. See his email to the international body OSCE to *indirectly* inform FBI/Comey that he knew about Christopher Steele. 

Carter Page also sent another email, the day before his letter to reporters, to the House Intel Committee. In this email Carter names reporters at @ABCnews & @Buzzfeednews (@brianross & @aliwatkins) as responsible for Felony #1, which is the intentional publishing of his protected identity. Carter names reporters at @Wapo as responsible for Felony #2 which is the publishing of the FISA. 

Note that everyone that Carter has “named”, has suffered consequence: James Wolfe, named in the blind cc email, was of course prosecuted, convicted, and defamed. The reporters Carter named responsible for Felony #1 were both demoted from their careers on the NatSec beat *within 24 hours of each other* in July 2018. They claimed “bad reporting” for Ross and “ethics review” for Watkins. Both were poor cover stories. The reporter responsible for Felony #2 was masked as Reporter #1 in the Wolfe indictment but slyly revealed by Carter Page as @nakashimae when he leveraged a female identifier dropped by prosecutor Jessie K. Liu to eliminate 4 other male contenders!

It cannot be emphasized enough that in all three counterintelligence operations to which Carter has been a party, he has produced evidence for federal authorities each time, even while under purported “suspicions of being a foreign agent”. In Buryakov he was a key witness (and suspected undercover agent). While under FISA surveillance he provided investigative leads that made up the foundation of the Nunes memo and resultant OIG investigation. Additionally while under FISA surveillance he provided emails that would ultimately be used as multiple pieces of evidence against James A. Wolfe. At all times under FISA surveillance and FBI purported “suspicion”, Page was able to generate evidence for Feds, remain innocent of any criminal charges, and also interviewed with FBI, Mueller, Senate and House investigations all without the aid of an attorney. 




In addition to transmitting investigative details to authorities by way of electronic communications that Page knows will be intercepted by FISA, Page also has waged a one man guerilla warfare campaign of media appearances designed to defend against defamatory allegations which the FBI refused to investigate and attack the legal basis upon which FBI has used to justify its surveillance of him. Page has done an inordinate amount of televised interviews, with the outlets that carry him shifting depending on the political winds of the times.

In 2016, the Russian Television outlet “RT” was the only news outlet to film Carter Page as an interview subject. There were two interviews and both took place after he was under FISA surveillance and not a member of the Trump Campaign (in October and December). Page was immediately laying an exculpatory foundation and promoting his innocence by way of these first interviews. 

In 2017 while Carter was a known investigative target with an active FISA, he appeared in 20 televised interviews. CNN/ABC/NBC (aka Blue Media) featured Carter prominently for 65% of all interviews and Fox (aka Red Media) only did 2 interviews with Carter for 10% share.

In 2018 during which Nunes Memo & Carter FISA are declassified, Carter appeared in 28 televised interviews. CNN/ABC/NBC (Blue) shrunk to 3 interviews for a 10% share and and Fox (Red) did 17 interviews for 60%.

In 2019 during which Mueller Probe was concluded and FISA Abuse Probe is still pending, Carter appeared in 27 televised interviews. CNN/ABC/NBC (Blue) further contracted to 2 interviews for an 8% share and and Fox did 16 interviews for 59%. Also notable in 2019, Page mentioned multiple times for the first time in public that he “assisted the FBI and CIA for decades” and also came out strongly in a Fall interview with Fox to directly accuse Preet Bhraha of requesting him to provide “false testimony” in the Buryakov case. This serious allegation was virtually completely ignored by mainstream media. 


In addition to letters to authorities, televised interviews and copious interviews with print media, Page also maintains an active voice on Twitter. Page did not publicly tweet until after the Nunes Memo was released in February of 2018. Almost immediately after coming online Page directly began calling out @PreetBharara, @Comey, and their actions concerning him in the 2015 Buryakov Case…

Will Horowitz investigate Page’s numerous claims and references to Preet Brhraha and the Buryakov Case? 


  1. This is on page “xvi” at the beginning of the IG’s report (I think it’s page 17). Right hand side:

    “The Use of Confidential Sources (Other Than Steele) and Undercover Employees As discussed in Chapter Ten, we determined that, during the 2016 presidential campaign, the Crossfire Hurricane team tasked several CHSs, which resulted in multiple interactions with Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, both before and after they were affiliated with the Trump campaign, and one with a high-level Trump campaign official who was not a subject of the investigation. All of these CHS interactions were consensuall y monitored and recorded by the FBI. As noted above, under Department and FBI policy, the use of a CHS to conduct consensual monitoring is a matter of investigative judgment that….”

    Read that carefully. Maybe I’m just confused, but it says “both before and after they were affiliated with the Trump campaign”. Are they saying they were spying BEFORE working on Trump’s campaign? It’s worded weird. (I’m suspended from Twit, which is a good thing – I don’t need to be tweeting all day 🙂


      1. Hi Monsieur. Yes, I saw that correction. So happy to see you and Cody communicating – you two really work great together! Not sure if you’ve found this yet – was reading a bit of what you guys are doing. Here’s the ABC interview with Millian – actual audio 🙂

        It is linked in a tweet dated January 24, 2017 by Patrick Reevell.

        Hope that helps. Much love & respect! – Kathryn


  2. Page is a strange duck. I am a boat school grad from just a few years before Page. Page is very annoying in not answering questions and his overall demeanor. Also, he seems like a kid that was in over his head. Trident Scholar is a big deal, yes. But Poly Sci is one of the easier majors at USNA. Also, he didn’t have much of a Naval career. In addition, his I-banking foray didn’t work out. And the Russians thought he was a dope. Sadly, I agree. None of this changes that he was unfairly spied on (and the Trump campaign by extension). But he’s not a good model for USNA.


    1. A kid that was in over his head? I think you’re the one confused.

      He faced every single investigative authority without representation by an attorney WHILE he was being FISA’d by an FBI hellbent on trying to frame anyone breathing in the Trump Campaign. The same Russians who thought Page an “idiot” ended up successfully prosecuted and jailed based on Carter’s cooperation and direct evidence. Everybody in DC thought Page was an “idiot”; meanwhile behind the scenes he’s providing evidence to secure prosecution of James Wolfe and publicizing facts about the fraudulent FISA process (i.e. Steele being paid by Perkins Coie and DNC) an entire year before anybody else knew.

      You’re completely free to side with the Russians and everybody else who underestimated him.


      1. One of the things you learn plebe year is called the “five basic responses”. Page is incapable of short, direct answers. He meanders to the extent of not answering questions.
        He’s just embarrassing. It’s like he never even had a plebe year. It would also not be tolerated onboard ship. Could you imagine answering your CO about the broken feed pump with his meandering answers that he gives on news programs?
        Note this has nothing to do with the biased, illegal, etc. FISA surveillance. But Page is not a good example of a Naval officer.


      2. Are you suggesting that he should have a Symmetric response-pattern to both his CO and adversarial interrogators alike? Of course not. His Meandering responses, are well-crafted chaff. And all through the interim, as documented above, he’s force-feeding the FBI nuclear bombs of exculpatory and inculpatory material. Just because you do not agree with his style, does not detract from his accomplishments. In a game of poker, the purpose is to keep you fooled. They laughed at and called this guy an idiot two and a half years. Keep it up.


  3. I’m talking about his interviews on TV. The guy is a train wreck. Even with sympathetic audiences. I would have issues with sort of communication in any setting: business, military, TV, dinner.

    Like I said, I know the drill. Trident Scholar is a big deal. But the rest of the guy’s resume shows issues. Bull major. (Not even a perjorative, what they call non-technical majors at Canoe U.) Poly Sci (QPR high!) goes the saying. SWO daddy who switches to Restricted Line. The I-banking failure (and exaggerating his importance). The Russians calling him a dope. And then lately spending time on the lame talk circuit. Like a better version of Papadop. Better grifter than George. Not up to Stefan.

    Sure, the dude was mistreated. But, no…he’s not some amazing intellect. Or even a good example of military demeanor.


  4. I don’t think the surveillance was proper. But don’t set Page on some pedestal. He’s a goober. He wasn’t even important to the Trump campaign. All he was, was a FISA that allowed for “hopping” onto the whole campaign. If you set him up as some great scholar/warrior, you show no perspective on what real scholars or warriors are.

    See here (ignore the parts justifying the surveillance, my point is the guy is a talk-talk failure):

    ‘When he is nervous, he grins. One person who met him around this period described the encounter as “excruciating.” Page was “awkward” and “uncomfortable” and “broke into a sweat.”’

    [If he tried that nervous smirk as a plebe, I would have made his life hell as one of his upperclassmen. All calls chowcalls, braced up, the whole drill. Just grind it out of him or make him quit. One or the other. But I’m not surprised, he bailed on a shipboard career and ran off to Restricted Line.]

    “And a PhD from the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London.

    ‘This, it transpired, was hard won. Page’s British academic supervisors failed his doctoral thesis twice, an unusual move. In a report they described his work as “verbose” and “vague”.’

    [If you have ever listened to the guy give an interview, do you see the commonality? I bet he got away with a lot of pablum while in his DOD postings, and was a relatively weak Trident scholar. Then when in a real scholarly setting, they expected better. And he couldn’t produce it.]

    ‘According to Politico, few people in Moscow’s foreign business community knew of him. Those who did were underwhelmed. “He wasn’t great and he wasn’t terrible,” his former boss, Sergei Aleksashenko, said, adding that Page was “without any special talents or accomplishments,” “in no way exceptional,” and “a gray spot.”’

    [Not tearing it up at Merrill Lynch…and kind of a fringe area of ML at that. (Note from other articles: he also did not bother learning Russian fluently while posted there. Sure, that is hard work. But a real scholar, spy, market entrant, etc. would have got it done.)]

    ‘One former Eurasia Group colleague said he was stunned when he discovered Page had mysteriously become one of Trump’s foreign policy advisers. “I nearly dropped my coffee,” he told me. The colleague added: “We had wanted people who could engage in critical analysis of what’s going on. This is a guy who has no critical insight into the situation. He wasn’t a smart person.”’

    [DING, DING, DING. Leave aside policy…the guy is just not a smart analyst…a moderately better George P. “B player”. Don’t set him up as sooper-smart…it shows a lack of insight yourself. Look at Climate Audit…the guy there is a brainiac, on our side, and can recognize goobers like Papadop or Page.]

    ‘ Russia’s media hailed Page as a “celebrated American economist.” This, despite the fact that Page’s lecture was distinctly strange—a content-free ramble verging on the bizarre. Page, it seemed, was criticizing U.-.S-led attempts at “regime change” in the former Soviet world. Nobody could be sure. His audience included students and local Trump fans, some of whom were visibly nodding off by the end.

    Shaun Walker, the Guardian’s Russia correspondent, had attended an event given by Page the previous evening. He described Page’s PowerPoint presentation as “really weird.” “It looked as if it had been done for a Kazakhstan gas conference,” Walker said.’

    [Content free ramble. Does that fit the pattern?]

    P.s. He also failed to get promoted to O-4 while in the reserves. Which is kind of a gimme promotion (in USN Reserves). Maybe he just had a hard time getting to drills (no foul, it can be a hassle to balance private sector life…but still one more datapoint showing the guy was not some super stud, but a weak player.)


  5. Hi Monsieur. Just wanted to say THANK YOU for the great article. I read a lot on Twitter and am so pissed off …. especially with regards to Carter’s letter of September 25, 2016 to Comey. I see “experts” on Twit on OUR SIDE debating whether Carter worked for the CIA or maybe it was “the DNI”. I have continually screamed about his letter – it’s always been known – Carter made it PUBLIC! I just don’t get why it’s been ignored for nearly 2 years. Comey now playing stupid and assholes like Sgt. Friday (in cahoots with asshole Joestradamus) claiming Comey was a white hat (btw, I have a very secret and explosive history with Joe – he “lured” me into some “scry” psyops crap with Tim Null. Joe has NEVER been a Trump supporter – he finally got pissed at me, because I refused to agree that Comey & Rosenstein were “white hats” – psyops failure. Idiots).

    Look, I’m just venting, as I’m pissed. Comey is lying. Carter’s letter WAS referenced in the FISA. I did not and will not read the entire IG report, as I’ve always relied on the Twit “experts” (which I’m not). I just one someone, anyone, to focus on his Sept 25, 2016 letter and what that actually MEANS with regards to what Comey is claiming (ignorance), whatever is in the IG’s report, and the text messages. I remember seeing texts between Lisa and Peter – they were excited about Carter’s letter to Comey and using it to get the FISA!! It’s important. I’m not able to put it all together in an effective way, but the TRUTH is and has always been in plain sight. You brilliant people sometimes overlook the simplest of things, that people like me see and are limited with comprehending the “fuller” picture.

    I can’t explain me, as I’m not normal and can be rather toxic, but I mean well and am only trying to help, but have no voice. I see and know too much, but on things that others have no interest in …. one of which seems to be Carter’s letter, which HE made public for a reason! I believe 100% that Carter Page is THE KEY to all of this, more than Trump. Carter was and remains the biggest threat. THINK! He was an FBI and CIA asset – THEY KNEW. Holder/Preet wanted him to LIE – he refused. Don’t care what anyone says …. THAT is the reason they “burned” Carter – they had to know what CARTER PAGE was saying, not what George Papa or Manafort (neither of which Carter had any dealings with). They could have easily concocted bullshit to get a FISA against George Papa or Manafort, but they didn’t. THINK!


  6. Monsieur, I’m begging you to figure this out with Cody. You two are the experts on Carter Page. Do not ever forget, they NEVER expected Trump to win – that is so key. They were spying on Carter. They KNEW Carter (according to what Carter has revealed) that he never spoke to Trump, never met Trump, never did ANYTHING in Trump’s campaign. So why get a FISA on Carter to “spy” on the Trump campaign, when he was NEVER really involved?

    WHO was pushing the FISA on Carter? Why? Yes, I do believe people may have been duped, but why Carter? They KNEW he was an FBI and CIA asset – he sent Comey that letter. They burned him. This is so much more deep. SOMEONE MADE the FBI focus on Carter Page (I believe it was Obama/Brennan and whoever else KNEW about the Bury case …. did Holder/Preet push it? – Carter seems to think so).

    There are clips of Horowitz’s testimony where he indicates that nothing of value was obtained by Carter’s FISA. That’s because Carter did NOT communicate with Trump or his campaign. This is so messed up and everyone’s missing what Obama/Brennan were really up to. The FIRST FISA on Carter Page WAS about Carter Page and not Trump, and I absolutely believe that many, many people were used and abused (and yes, fuck them for what they did), all because Carter Page refused to LIE on that Bury case. AFTER Trump won, THEN it was all about TRUMP!

    Why the hell didn’t they just get a FISA on Manafort or Flynn? Manafort certainly would have been much, much more productive with regards to communications with Trump and his campaign (wasn’t Manafort at the infamous Trump Tower meeting? A ton of info there). THINK! Carter’s FISA was BEFORE Trump won and AFTER Carter left the Trump campaign (that he NEVER did a damn thing on, which they KNEW) – that is so very, very KEY.

    Love & respect …. Kathryn


  7. They put the FISA in on Page because they had reason to think they could get it, given they had documented contacts of Page and various Russians, Page had worked in Russia, etc. Once they had Page FISA, they had two hops to the entire campaign. This is why they didn’t go after Papadop with a FISA.

    But remember, the two hopping makes it basically possible to look at everyone in the campaign. Don’t lose the point. Like lame-o Brian Cates (StealthSessions) with the comments about FISAs on more people.

    P.s. As soon as Page was named to the campaign, it was an opportunity for them. Note they restarted a separate, earlier, pre-CH investigation on Page himself, AFTER he was announced as part of the Trump campaign.

    P.s.s. Go Navy. Beat Army. Run, Perry, run!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s