Sunday Talks – Jim Jordan Discusses Potential SCOTUS Replacements for Justice Ginsburg and Other Issues With Durham Probe of FBI/DOJ Conduct…

Representative Jim Jordan gives his perspective and analysis on the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and his thoughts on her replacement.  Additionally, Jordan discusses the ongoing material in the background of the Durham probe and the potential for investigative findings to surface prior to the election. [embedded content] . The SCOTUS pick will be important not just for long-term legal direction, but also for anticipated legal challenges likely to surround ballots, dates, votes and the 2020 election. Challenges to recent ballot decisions in Pennsylvania and Michigan will likely fast-track to the Supreme Court.  Any 4-4 tie vote in SCOTUS means the lower court ruling will stand.  As expected this is shaping up to be a very interesting election year… Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Sunday Talks – Jim Jordan Discusses Potential SCOTUS Replacements for Justice Ginsburg and Other Issues With Durham Probe of FBI/DOJ Conduct…

Recently Released FISA Court Response to DOJ Reveals Direction of Durham Probe – DOJ Requested FISC Approvals…

A very interesting release by ODNI John Ratcliffe [LINK] highlights a June 25, 2020 response from the FISA court to the DOJ.  There are five issues queried by the DOJ seeking guidance from the FISC.  Each issue points to a specific path being taken by the DOJ in general… and the John Durham probe specifically. Today, the ODNI, in consultation with the Department of Justice, releases a June 25, 2020, opinion by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) evaluating and approving limited circumstances under which the Government may temporarily retain, use, or disclose information that was unlawfully acquired pursuant to a FISC order. (more) Important note:  We are looking at this in hindsight.  The response from the FISC was dated June 25, 2020, so the request for opinion from the court was before June 25th. The court opinion tells us for the first time, the DOJ is admitting/stating that ALL FOUR of the Carter Page FISA applications were corrupt upon origination.   This is a big deal. In previous filing with the court (January 2020) DOJ only refuted the predication for the second and third renewal. Within the FISC reply we see the DOJ stating all four submissions contained material omissions and violations of “the duty of candor” (ie. lying)  by the FBI investigative unit and the DOJ team that assembled the application(s). As we look closely at the response we see some very specific language that tells a story. Apparently the DOJ asked the FISA court for guidance on five very specific issues centering around the Carter Page FISA application.  The DOJ is asking for legal guidance to assist them in disclosing information in the FISA file & evidence attached to the FISA file. The five issues all circle around the FBI/DOJ use of the Carter Page FISA application; and, more importantly, the underlying evidence that is attached to the FISA application.  The five topics are very interesting:  DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material due to FOIA demands.  FISC gives legal opinion.  DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material due to ongoing and anticipated civil litigation.  The FISC gives legal opinion and expands to criminal litigation.  DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material to internal investigative units from the FBI inspectors division (INSD).  FISC gives opinion and advice.  DOJ requests guidance for distribution of non-minimized information, and/or, minimized information as part of the ongoing Office of Inspector General oversight.  FISC gives opinion and guidance.  DOJ requests guidance for distribution of material to John Durham probe, both for criminal prosecution and possible evidence gathering attached to other ongoing investigative needs.  FISC gives opinion and guidance. The opinion from the FISC is only 20 pages long [direct pdf here], and if you skip the citations it’s a pretty straight forward answer from Judge Boasberg to review.  I would strongly urge everyone to take a few minutes and read it… carefully…. to see what John Durham was asking. Pages #6 and #7 talk specifically about the different requirements for retention and distribution and outlines a cautious approach toward distribution.  One of the disconcerting parts of this segment seems to be the FISA court subtly guiding the DOJ away from using non-minimized raw FISA material in prosecution of intentional malfeasance.   On this issue the court says allowing a target to escape prosecution is part of the penalty upon the DOJ for wrongful assembly. The court does not consider the DOJ is targeting the “assemblers” for their criminal conduct.  Rather the response is general toward criminals who were targets of a FISA application assembled with corrupt intent. A little weird. Pages #11 and #12 hit the topic of FOIA production.  The court says “some” FOIA requests might warrant document distribution, but not all.   However, on the topic of Carter Page getting his FOIA fulfilled, the court supports expansive distribution to Mr. Page. I find the arguments and issues in/around page #14 to be especially noteworthy.  In this segment the court is responding to the underlying raw evidence that would normally be used to assemble a “woods file”.  The court notes the FBI Sentinel system would contain the minimized outcomes (redacted evidence) and this points to a bigger issue.  READ: Note the woods file would be what is in the Sentinel system.  The government (Durham Probe) needs “access to the case file” beyond what is in the Sentinel system.  Durham wants to see the raw data, the underlying raw intelligence. Why? It looks like Durham investigators were already on the rail of the special counsel creating a Woods file…. and/or wants to see if the Steele Dossier is the original substantive documentation that underpins the Woods file.   Notice how INSD previously received “hard copies” of documentation that is presumed to be the Woods file. Regardless of motive or investigative suspicion, someone wants to compare the raw intel to the intel that made it into the FBI/DOJ Sentinel system. In response to this inquiry Judge Boasberg notes FBI investigators would have access to the minimized information within the Sentinel system; however, insofar as there was additional inquiry into the raw and non-minimized intelligence, a review and distribution would be permissible so long as there was a strong filter team in place to ensure statutes surrounding FISA security were not violated. Overall, Boasberg gives permission and approval for all six aspects requested.  However, he does so with several legal qualifiers and distinctions which the DOJ must observe. Here’s the full reply and opinion.  Strongly suggest the time to review: . ♦Lastly, a small and likely insignificant issue…  Here’s another one of those weird redactions that seems very out of place.  It means there is something else we have yet to identify.    Why redact the date the copy of the FISC opinion was produced by the FISA court? At face-value there is no purpose in this redaction. Isn’t it ¹Deputy FISA Clerk  “Lynn Hall”?  And why redact the date of the copy? Weird. [¹maybe the FISC has identified an internal leaker] Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Recently Released FISA Court Response to DOJ Reveals Direction of Durham Probe – DOJ Requested FISC Approvals…

Jim Jordan Discusses Senate Homeland Security Committee Effort to Subpoena Key “Spygate” Officials…

Ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, Jim Jordan, discusses the effort by Senator Ron Johnson to subpoena a list of key names from the ‘spygate’ scandal. Additionally, Jordan discusses the effort by Adam Schiff to create another fake whistle-blower scandal this time using Brian Murphy from the Dept. of Homeland Security. Jordan clarifies some common misinformation. [embedded content] Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Jim Jordan Discusses Senate Homeland Security Committee Effort to Subpoena Key “Spygate” Officials…

WaPo Reporter Duped by Infamous Hoaxer Jacob Wohl’s Staged FBI Raid

Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl speak during a news conference in Arlington, Va., November 1, 2018. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)A Washington Post reporter could not resist the latest offering from infamous hoaxers Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman, credulously reporting that the FBI had raided Burkman’s home early Monday — only to learn hours later that the raid the pair had staged was part of another attention-grabbing ruse. Post reporter Rachel Weiner quoted Burkman — whose Arlington, Va., home has been the site for many a press conference announcing various smear campaigns against Democratic politicians — saying his home had been raided by FBI agents, who reportedly took phones, computers, and documents in connection to a coming press conference. Advertisement “We’re not going to be intimidated,” Burkman told the Post, even as law enforcement would not confirm the story to the paper, and later definitively denied conducting the raid. FBI raids home of conservative conspiracy theorist Jack Burkman https://t.co/cP28gp43HC — The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) September 14, 2020 Weiner moved forward with the story despite the lack of FBI confirmation and the dubious reputation of Burkman and Wohl, perhaps because Wohl faces a felony charge in California and that the FBI is allegedly investigating the duo already. Advertisement The Daily Beast settled the matter later in the day by revealing that Burkman and Wohl had in fact recruited white male actors on Craigslist to film a fake FBI raid. One of the men who responded to the craigslist ad with the understanding that he would be filming a television pilot told the outlet what happened and provided emails from an account linked with Wohl to support his claims. The Beast also reported that someone named “Bev Donahue” blasted out photos and clips of the staged raid to reporters — a factoid the Post did not mention — and posted the “evidence” on Twitter. But the account is linked to an email that apparently mirrors Wohl’s. Advertisement After the new reporting shed light on the duo’s latest hoax, Weiner admitted that “there’s a good chance” Burkman “staged this raid himself.” Weiner did not reply to a request for comment on whether she was alerted of the initial story by the “evidence” supplied by “Bev Donahue,” and the Post later added an editor’s note saying that “additional reporting indicates that the raid likely was staged,” after the paper was called out for making shadow edits. Editor’s Note: After initial publication of this story, additional reporting indicates that the raid was staged. The story will continue to be updated. We have deleted an earlier tweet. pic.twitter.com/cSVt97aaP1 — The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) September 14, 2020 Burkman and Wohl thrive off of media attention, which has waxed and waned over the years of high-profile allegations made against figures like Dr. Anthony Fauci, former special counsel Robert Mueller, and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.). Episodes like this indicate it might never fully subside. Send a tip to the news team at NR.

Continue Reading WaPo Reporter Duped by Infamous Hoaxer Jacob Wohl’s Staged FBI Raid

Blazing Sunlight – Senate Intel Committee Refuses to Give GOP Senators Documents From Russia Investigation…

Of all the *tells* that have surfaced in the past four years, this is the biggest.  This is the one that reveals just how corrupt and duplicitous the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence really is.   Do not pass over this information without pausing and evaluating just how explosive this refusal is amid the largest, most corrupt scheme in political history. The republican led Senate Intelligence Committee (SSCI) is refusing to provide documents to republican senators from their Russia investigation.  Citing archaic justification within senate parliamentary rules current Chairman Marco Rubio (R) and Vice-Chairman Mark Warner are refusing to allow Senator Johnson and Senator Grassley to review the evidence the SSCI assembled to create their report on Russian election interference. The reason and motives for the denial are simple, yet the majority of Americans have no idea…. The SSCI was the legislative entity, both republicans and democrats, who participated in the unlawful effort to remove President Trump from office.  The risk of exposure is exactly why Mitch McConnell put Senator Marco Rubio on the committee as chairman to replace Richard Burr.  The Senate was participating in the soft-coup. WASHINGTON DC –  The Republican and Democratic leaders on the Senate Intelligence Committee rejected a broad request from two Republican Senate leaders seeking access to the panel’s records to assist in their investigation into the Trump-Russia investigators. Acting Chairman Marco Rubio of Florida and Vice Chairman Mark Warner of Virginia rejected a late August letter from Senate Homeland Security Chairman Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who said that they “respect the authority” of the Senate Intelligence Committee to protect its interests, adding that “ultimately, we have the right as United States Senators” to access the records. “We note that your request of the Committee is made pursuant to Senate Rule 26, but fails to account for the unique authorities and obligations invested in this Committee through Senate Resolution 400 and respected over decades of Senate and Committee practice,” Rubio and Warner responded. “Accordingly, we must reject the absolutist interpretation of Rule 26 that you propose. If this Committee elects to share materials that it has collected and generated in the course of its investigation into Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, it will do so pursuant to these long-standing Committee rules, and specifically, the joint agreement of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman.” Rubio and Warner added: “Independent of whether that agreement is forthcoming, our position on this matter obviously does not preclude you from pursuing your own investigation, using your own authorities, as you see fit, within the confines of your committees’ jurisdictions.”  (read more) I cannot overemphasize the importance of this sunlight avoidance enough. Back on March 17, 2017, the SSCI secretly received the FISA application used on Carter Page from FBI supervisory special agent Brian Dugan.   The ‘review and return’ application was delivered to Senate Security Director James Wolfe, who then placed it in the senate scif to be reviewed by Vice-Chairman Mark Warner (and possibly Chairman Richard Burr).  It appears no other senators were informed of this production. James Wolfe then leaked the FISA application to reporter Ali Watkins.  All indications are that Wolfe leaked the application to Watkins as directed by Warner, possibly with Burr’s full knowledge. FBI Agent Brian Dugan then completed a nine-month leak investigation resulting in James Wolfe admitting to the leak.  The leak was Dugan’s FBI equity.  Due to the severity of the leak; and specifically because the leak encompassed the FISA application; in/around mid-January 2018 the special counsel in Main Justice was notified of Dugan’s findings and the investigative file was shared with the Weissmann team. The Weissman team then took apart the investigative file and began running cover for the corrupt background story that included the participation by Senator Mark Warner.  Part of that file surfaced when the text messages between Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer Adam Waldman were made public on Feb 9, 2018. In a pre-planned operation, as soon as the explosive Warner/Waldman texts were released Senator Marco Rubio rushed to the microphones to fraudulently state that Warner had informed the committee during his early spring (2017) contacts with Waldman and Chris Steele.  This claim by Rubio was a lie.  Rubio was running cover for Warner as part of his own affiliation with the origin of the Fusion-GPS opposition research and the subsequent transfer of information to the Clinton campaign and ultimately through Chris Steele to the corrupt FBI investigative unit.  [Later to the Weissmann/Mueller crew] Rubio’s motive to downplay the ramifications of the Warner effort, and the subsequent Wolfe leak, directly ties to his own involvement with the Fusion-GPS effort.   Remember, at the time of this obfuscation (late ’17 and early ’18) no-one yet knew the Fusion-GPS fraudulent story (which became the Steele dossier) was originally funded by the Super-PAC funding the Rubio campaign. Go look at when the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel deleted their iPhone records and history.  The scrubbing took place mid-January 2018 as soon as they realized the previously unknown leak investigation by Washington Field Office FBI agent Brian Dugan had bumped into the special counsel operation that was coordinating with the SSCI. The special counsel warned Warner; took action to remove specific evidence assembled by Dugan (which included the Warner/Waldman text messages); created a fictitious cover story for the SSCI to use; extracted the Dugan version of the FISA application he used to catch Wolfe (which they later released under the guise of FOIA); then sent a deconstructed (now useless) investigative file back to DC USAO Jessie Liu who had nothing left except to present a DC grand jury with James Wolfe lying to investigators. That corrupt, unlawful and coordinated cover-up effort lies at the heart of why the SSCI will not share any information with GOP senators today. Senators Johnson and Grassley were asking for the FISA application in 2018, not knowing the original and first renewal were previously provided to the SSCI on March 17, 2017. When congress (House Intel, House Judiciary, Senate Judiciary and Senate Homeland Security) were writing to FISA Court presiding judge Rosemary Collyer seeking a copy of the FISA application from the court they had no idea one early copy was already provided to the Senate Intelligence Committee.  Chairman Burr and Vice-Chair Warner kept their review and use secret; but the information about their reception came out because James Wolfe leaked it and FBI agent Brian Dugan was awaiting that leak. FISA Judge Rosemary Collyer never told any of the chairmen about the March 2017 copy of the application that was provided to Brian Dugan to deliver to the SSCI. Throughout the attempt to remove President Trump from office, which included the impeachment effort, the SSCI was participating and assisting; now they are in cover-up mode.  That’s the reason why Mitch McConnell put Marco Rubio in charge of that committee. There’s a reason why senior staff from Senator Ron Johnson’s committee and senior staff from Chuck Grassley’s committee are asking for SSCI documents.  It might not come out before the election, but it will come out… The sequence is critical: 1.  Adam Waldman text messages. (release date Feb 9, 2018) https://www.scribd.com/document/371101285/TEXTS-Mark-Warner-texted-with-Russian-oligarch-lobbyist-in-effort-to-contact-Christopher-Steele# 2. Justice Dept. Letter to journalist Ali Watkins (release date Feb 13, 2018) http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4498451-Justice-Department-Records-Seizure.html 3.  James Wolfe indictment (release date June 8, 2018) https://www.scribd.com/document/381310366/James-Wolfe-Indictment-Senate-Intelligence-Committee-Leaker# 4.  FISC / Senate Judiciary Letter (public release April, 2020 – event date July 12, 2018) The letter from DOJ-NSD (Mueller Special Proseuctors) to the FISC is important. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/2018-doj-letter-to-fisc&download=1 5.  Carter Page FISA application (release date July 21, 2018)  Only need the first application section. 83 pages of original application. https://www.scribd.com/document/384380664/2016-FISA-Application-on-Carter-Page# 6.  Government Sentencing Wolfe Case memo and recommendation for upward departure and/or variance. Filed December 11, 2018 https://www.scribd.com/document/395499292/James-Wolfe-DOJ-Sentencing-Memo-December-11 7.  Govt. Reply to Defendant (Wolfe) sentencing memo (date Dec 14, 2018)  Govt. Exhibit #13 (two page attestation is critical). https://www.scribd.com/document/395775597/Wolfe-Case-DOJ-Response-to-Defense-Sentencing-Memo Misc: July 27, 2018,  – Wall Street Journal  – Wolfe lawyers threaten SSCI subpoenas. https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-intelligence-committee-aides-lawyers-want-testimony-from-senators-1532692801?mod=e2tw Dec 11, 2018 – Politico – Senators seek Leniency: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/11/senate-intelligence-committee-leaking-james-wolfe-1059162 . Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Blazing Sunlight – Senate Intel Committee Refuses to Give GOP Senators Documents From Russia Investigation…

Grassley Demands Explanation from DOJ on Mueller Team’s Wiped Phones, Questions Whether It Was ‘Widespread Intentional Effort’

Sen. Chuck Grassley speaks in Washington, D.C., September 4, 2018. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)Senator Chuck Grassley on Friday demanded more details from the Justice Department on the cell phones used by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team that were wiped before the DOJ inspector general could review them for records. “It appears that Special Counsel Mueller’s team may have deleted federal records that could be key to better understanding their decision-making process as they pursued their investigation and wrote their report. Indeed, many officials apparently deleted the records after the DOJ Inspector General began his inquiry into how the Department mishandled Crossfire Hurricane,” Grassley wrote in a letter dated Friday to Attorney General William Barr and FBI Director Christopher Wray. Advertisement “Moreover, based on this new information, the number of times and the stated reasons for the deletions calls into question whether or not it was a widespread intentional effort,” the Iowa Republican wrote. At least 27 cell phones belonging to members of Mueller’s team were wiped clean of data before the DOJ inspector general could comb them for records, the DOJ said in records released Thursday. Including mobile phones that were “reassigned,” members of the Special Counsel’s office wiped a total of 31 phones. Several of the phones were wiped “accidentally,” some after the wrong password was entered too many times. Andrew Weismann, a top prosecutor on Mueller’s team, “accidentally wiped” his mobile phone more than once, causing the data to be lost, the DOJ said. A phone belong to assistant special counsel James Quarles “wiped itself without intervention from him,” the DOJ’s records state. Advertisement Advertisement The cell phone of FBI lawyer Lisa Page was misplaced by the special counsel’s office. While it was eventually obtained by the DOJ inspector general, by that point the phone had been restored to its factory settings, wiping it of all data. The phone of FBI agent Peter Strzok was also obtained by the inspector general’s office, which found “no substantive texts, notes or reminders” on it. Phones issued to at least three other Mueller prosecutors, Kyle Freeny, Rush Atkinson, and senior prosecutor Greg Andres were also wiped of data. Grassley, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, demanded that the DOJ provide the committee with records relating to the cell phones, including any recovered text messages and the explanations that members of Mueller’s team gave for why their phone data was deleted. Grassley also asked whether the DOJ is investigating potential violations of federal record keeping laws by members of the Special Counsel’s Office as well as whether the department attempted to forensically recover any deleted records. Mueller submitted his final report to Attorney General William Barr on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election in March of last year. The report concluded that the Trump campaign did not conspire with Russians to influence the election, but said investigators could not reach a conclusion on whether President Trump committed obstruction of justice. Send a tip to the news team at NR.

Continue Reading Grassley Demands Explanation from DOJ on Mueller Team’s Wiped Phones, Questions Whether It Was ‘Widespread Intentional Effort’

Sunday Talks: Devin Nunes “We Don’t Have Handcuffs or Guns” On Our Investigative Side…

House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes discusses the conduct of the Weissmann/Mueller investigation and their blatant destruction of iPhone content to cover their tracks.  Within the interview Nunes hits on a very key aspect that doesn’t get enough attention when he says of congress “we don’t have handcuffs or guns.” This was/is a frequent point made repeatedly in my own contact with House and Senate investigators.  All of the information and evidence gathered doesn’t amount to anything if the DOJ and FBI leadership just simply refuse to do anything about it; which leads to the issue with AG Barr saying he will not accept any information from within a political silo. If, due to his concerns over political optics, the United States Attorney General will not accept, or act upon, any information or evidence from congress;… well, then what exactly is the purpose of a congressional investigation?   Information without action is antithetical to its purpose.  Democrats use information/evidence from anyone (see Vindman and Adam Schiff), but Republicans do not (see Senator Graham). It is infuriating. [embedded content] Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Sunday Talks: Devin Nunes “We Don’t Have Handcuffs or Guns” On Our Investigative Side…

Tucker Carlson Questions DOJ Aggression Toward Julian Assange….

Nancy Pelosi previously labeled all Trump supporters as “enemies of the state.”  Similarly we note the apparatus of the administrative state labels Julian Assange the same.  There’s a good argument that the reason why Assange is considered such a threat to the U.S. is specifically because he could expose the lies of the administrative state. As a consequence the U.S. intelligence apparatus has targeted the WikiLeaks founder and the Bill Barr DOJ is being extremely aggressive in their effort to get control of him.  Tucker Carlson discussed this dynamic last night; albeit stopping short of the brutally honest part. [embedded content] . To understand the risk Julian Assange represents to the administrative state, it is important to understand the extent of CIA, FBI and DOJ operations in 2016. It is within this network of foreign and domestic operations where FBI Agent Peter Strzok was clearly working as a bridge between the CIA origination and FBI investigation. By now people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor now generally admitted/identified as a western intelligence operative who was tasked against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep} In a similar fashion the CIA tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent under the false name Azra Turk, Halper also targeted Papadopoulos. The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the targets much easier. One of the more interesting aspects to the Durham probe is a possibility of a paper-trail created as a result of the tasking operations. We should watch closely for more evidence of a paper trail as some congressional reps have hinted toward documented evidence (transcripts, recordings, reports) that are exculpatory to the targets (Page & Papadop). HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes has strongly hinted that very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and yet withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page that also mentions George Papadopoulos. I digress… However, there is an aspect to the domestic U.S. operation that also bears the fingerprints of the CIA; only this time due to the restrictive laws on targets inside the U.S. the CIA aspect is less prominent. This is where FBI Agent Peter Strzok working for both agencies starts to become important. Remember, it’s clear in the text messages Strzok has a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA. Additionally, Brennan has admitted Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative; and it is almost guaranteed the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” from the CIA to the FBI that originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane” was co-authored from the CIA by Strzok…. and Strzok immediately used that EC to travel to London to debrief intelligence officials around Australian Ambassador to the U.K. Alexander Downer. In short, Peter Strzok appears to be the very eager, profoundly overzealous James Bond wannabe, who acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for CIA Director John Brennan to utilize. Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015; at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons. It was also Fusion-GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working double-agents for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S. Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion-GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting… back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan fell out of a helicopter to his death (just before it crashed). Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s handler, it was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Byrne the instructions on where to send her. {Go Deep} All of this context outlines the extent to which the CIA was openly involved in constructing a political operation that settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit. International operations directed by the CIA, and domestic operations seemingly directed by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin] Recap: ♦Mifsud tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Halper tasked against Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA), and Papadopoulos (CIA). ♦Azra Turk, pretending to be Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI). ♦Veselnitskaya tasked against Donald Trump Jr (CIA, Fusion-GPS). ♦Butina tasked against Trump, and Donald Trump Jr (FBI). Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer, hired by Fusion-GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. Deripaska refused to participate. All of this engagement directly controlled by U.S. intelligence; and all of this intended to give a specific Russia impression. This predicate is presumably what John Durham is currently reviewing. The key point of all that background is to see how committed the CIA and FBI were to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ, put a hell of a lot of work into it. Intelligence community work that Durham is now unraveling. We also know specifically that John Durham is looking at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talking to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This is important because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks. On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA. From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018: (Link to pdf) On Tuesday April 15th more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to…. The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019. Why the delay? What was the DOJ waiting for? Here’s where it gets interesting…. The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.” (August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years. Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill. “Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.” Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more) Knowing how much effort the CIA and FBI put into the Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative, it would make sense for the FBI to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange; and why the FBI would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury by December 2017. Within three months of the grand jury the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018. The EDVA sat on the indictment while the Mueller probe was ongoing. As soon as the Mueller probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link). As a person who has researched this three year fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16; and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17; this timing against Assange is just too coincidental. It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to control Julian Assange because the Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes, and that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes. This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange on-the-record statements. The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election. The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community assessment; and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from Crowdstrike, a DNC contractor. The CIA holds a massive conflict of self-interest in upholding the Russian hacking claim. The FBI holds a massive interest in maintaining that claim. All of those foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also have a vested self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative. Julian Assange is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange has claimed he has evidence it was not from a hack. This Russian “hacking” claim is ultimately so important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K intelligence apparatus…. Well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Assange down as soon intelligence officials knew the Mueller report was going to be public. Now, if we know this, and you know this; and everything is cited and factual… well, then certainly AG Bill Barr knows this. Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Tucker Carlson Questions DOJ Aggression Toward Julian Assange….

Arson Arrests Being Made Across the West Coast – Multiple Fires Identified as Arson – 27 People Killed, Dozens Missing….

In a rather disconcerting sequence of events many of the west coast forest fires are now being attributed to intentional arson.  One of the key aspects to the unnatural outbreak of fires is the proximity to homes and well established neighborhoods in California, Washington State and Oregon. A twitter account by Katie Daviscourt has been tracking some of the fires and a recent series of events from the area(s) [SEE HERE].  The ongoing thread is updated with several points of evidence where people have been caught, captured or filmed in the act of lighting fires.  There is some speculation, and some evidence, that some of these fires may have been ignited by Antifa activists as a method of further creating crisis in the region. The FBI is saying there is no evidence Antifa or Joe Biden’s far-left base of support are behind the fires. However, given the internal dynamic within the FBI; and accepting the FBI carries a political agenda; and considering the facts on the ground do not support the denials; the downplaying of motive by the FBI is not very reassuring. A statement by federal law enforcement to Law Enforcement Today is troubling and points to several ongoing investigations into these fires: LawEnforcementToday – […] A federal law enforcement source shared with Law Enforcement Today that the feds are looking into whether some of the cases are linked together… and warn there could be more “attacks”. “We are reacting to a coordinated series of attempts to start fires anywhere and everywhere in Oregon. Public and Private lands, incorporated and unincorporated areas. By all indications so far in the preliminary stages of these investigations there is a coordinated effort on the part of these individuals to start fires in areas that are the least protected and most vulnerable then slowing working their way into more populated areas and neighborhoods. Please take this information as an advisory for you own account and welfare and please act in good faith with due diligence to plan accordingly for your own safety and the well being of your community.”  (read more) [embedded content] We just got level 2 alert (3 is evacuate)We are listening to ham radio & people are getting caught left and right for Arson (I mean in the dozens). We are also hearing that they can't contain any of the fires.Ham radio channel 155.430 155.190Arsonists are getting caught listen☝️ pic.twitter.com/JcCXPOlCdz — Short and Sweet (@nehdah) September 10, 2020 MSM – […] In Oregon’s Clackamas and Marion counties south of Portland, smoke was so thick that it was difficult to see more than 10 feet ahead Saturday morning. Carolee Brown told CNN she has relocated twice this week because of evacuation orders. She’s been losing sleep, constantly monitoring her home’s security camera online to see if it’s still standing. As of Saturday morning, it was. “It’s unreal. You can’t really fathom what is going on,” she told CNN in Marion County. “You take what you think (you should), and you just get out.” While Oregon’s death toll was at least six on Saturday, the state is preparing for a “mass fatality incident” based on how many structures have been charred, Oregon Emergency Management Director Andrew Phelps said Friday. Already, dozens are missing, the state’s governor said, mostly across Jackson, Lane and Marion counties in western Oregon. (read more) Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Arson Arrests Being Made Across the West Coast – Multiple Fires Identified as Arson – 27 People Killed, Dozens Missing….

Tom Fitton: “There Needs to be A Criminal Investigation of the Special Counsel”…

There are a lot of tenuous characters who report on the machinations of the swamp, Lou Dobbs and Tom Fitton are not part of that media system.  In this interview both Dobbs and Fitton deliver brutal honesty, call the baby ugly, and discuss the best approach that President Trump should take to deliver sunlight upon the schemes. WATCH: [embedded content] . Tom Fitton is exactly correct. There needs to be a criminal investigation of Andrew Weissmann and the entire special counsel crew for their conduct in 2017, 2018 and 2019. The corrupt FBI and DOJ activity in 2015/2016 pales in comparison to the corrupt activity within the special counsel when they held the reigns in Main Justice. Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Tom Fitton: “There Needs to be A Criminal Investigation of the Special Counsel”…

Flynn Update – Judge Sullivan Appointed Amicus, John Gleeson, Files His Reply to Motion for Dismissal…

As anticipated Judge Sullivan’s court appointed amicus, John Gleeson, a special directive prosecutor appointed by the court, files his brief today [pdf here] arguing the DOJ is attempting to corrupt the court by filing an unopposed motion to dismiss. The amicus filing itself is based on the severe anti-Flynn sentiment carried by the Lawfare community and their allies in the DC network.  Accordingly, Gleeson having presented himself as a member of this resistance effort, pontificates shallow conspiracy theories about the DOJ bending to political pressure in their decision to drop the case. As defense attorney Sidney Powell previously shared: …”The defense and the government have agreed we will file no further briefs at all after amicus files whatever diatribe he plans to file. The only document that matters is the government’s motion to dismiss, which stands on its own and must be granted under ALL precedent. Everything amicus files is improper and should even be stricken–were the law being followed.” It is unknown what Judge Sullivan plans to do with this amicus brief; however, the scheduled hearing for oral argument before the court is September 29th. Here’s the full briefing: . Worth noting this little aspect as noted by Techno Fog: Gleeson was assisted in this Brief by David O'Neil (same firm) O'Neil is the lawyer for Sally Yates. Yates is a material witness to FBI/DOJ misconduct as to Flynn (and the Carter Page FISAs). These briefs thus serve the interests of the firm's client. Good job Sullivan 🤡 pic.twitter.com/FLEqmXsaRm — Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) September 11, 2020 Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Flynn Update – Judge Sullivan Appointed Amicus, John Gleeson, Files His Reply to Motion for Dismissal…

Durham DC Investigative “Functionary” Returns to Private Sector Work…

Stories of a top aide to USAO John Durham, Nora Dannehy (good Irish family), leaving the investigative unit have hit the media narrative cycle.   However, here’s a slightly different perspective about her departure you won’t see anywhere else. CONNECTICUT – Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, a top aide to U.S. Attorney John H. Durham in his Russia investigation, has quietly resigned from the U.S. Justice Department probe – at least partly out of concern that the investigative team is being pressed for political reasons to produce a report before its work is done, colleagues said. (read more) That highlighted narrative segment is horse-pucky. Unbeknownst to Ms. Dannehy, we met, we crossed paths in DC.  It was an serendipitous outcome of putting my physical presence in a position to interact.  From our encounter Ms. Dannehy seemed to be a functionary of the investigative process; located in DC as an outcome of her task assignment. Dannehy, very familiar with the DC national security networks; and carrying a top-secret clearance level; had a role to play where she reached into compartmented silos, retrieved information, conducted interviews and then sent the raw data along with summaries back up the investigative pipeline. Ergo, she seemed to be an investigative “functionary.” Although she was/is obviously a badge carrying member of the Orange-Man-Bad committee (most of them cannot hide that inherent disposition), she seemed competent and detached emotionally from the work.  That said, obviously this ‘Durham’ investigation touches on several ‘third-rails’ that could negatively impact the financial prospects of any DC insider if their assigned role undermined the position of the administrative state that functions to pay the network.   Did that play a role?  If I were a betting man…. ♦ Here’s the way it looks to me.  The Durham probe, actually more like the Aldenberg probe, has slightly shifted direction.  Additional inquires are now being made into the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel conduct.  That explains why the ‘Woods File’ story surfaced; and that explains why the iPhone scrubbing FOIA info was produced; it’s an insiders control-game and it continues. With any slight shift toward questioning the unquestionable, stuff happens.  Mueller, and his DC enabled career of “public service”, is a protected entity (a third rail of sorts).  Any shift into the disposition of that enterprise is a disconcerting and troubling shift for all of those who operate within the DC administrative state. It’s a weird inside the bubble dynamic.  Any review of the individual elements within the bubble brings out a certain level of defensive angst from every element inside the bubble.  The system protects itself.  Any slight defect or investigative penetration of the membrane is considered a risk. [Think: ‘first rule of fight club‘ etc.] If, as I suspect, a series of investigative paths starts to merge upon the operation of the special counsel, any networked official who is dependent on the system is going to want to avoid participating….  Especially if their private sector financial attachment is connected to their ability to reenter the bubble to engage the trough; just like Ms. Dannehy. In this scenario a bail-out from assignment only reflects an individual choosing to stop traveling in the rabbit hole out of a sense of self-preservation.  That outlook doesn’t define any time-frame within the investigation; nor does it attribute a coming interim report as a consequence of the investigative travels so far.  It’s simply a functionary making a decision to exit and retain private sector access to the same system.  Nothing more. Warmest best. PS. Hello fellas. Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Durham DC Investigative “Functionary” Returns to Private Sector Work…

Lou Dobbs and Devin Nunes Discuss Ongoing William Aldenberg Investigation…

John Durham is a name attached to an internal DOJ investigation; however, it is William Aldenberg who is the real investigative lead.  Aldenberg is the technical center; and Aldenberg provides Durham the results of the investigation he is directing. Lou Dobbs and Devin Nunes discuss the frustration and slow-pace of the current DOJ probe under the office of USAO John Durham.  Recently AG Bill Barr has inferred that more indictments are possible as an outcome of the background investigation. We’ll see. [embedded content] Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Lou Dobbs and Devin Nunes Discuss Ongoing William Aldenberg Investigation…

U.S. Attorney John Durham Interviews Ex-CIA Chief John Brennan as Part of Russiagate Probe

Continue Reading U.S. Attorney John Durham Interviews Ex-CIA Chief John Brennan as Part of Russiagate Probe