Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham Announces Dates and Timeline for SCOTUS Confirmation…

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham appears on Sunday Morning Futures to discuss the latest DC events surrounding senate investigations and the confirmation process for Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett.  Senate Judiciary hearings begin October 12th, committee nomination likely October 22nd to Mitch McConnell. As an outcome of his own can-kicking and ‘over-promise/under-deliver’ disappointments Senator Graham has diminished support from the republican base in South Carolina.  As a direct result, Graham uses this appearance to request money for his own reelection effort. [embedded content] Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham Announces Dates and Timeline for SCOTUS Confirmation…

Robert Mueller Investigative Agent Recently Testified Special Counsel Operation was “Intended to Get Trump”…

Well, this MUST READ INTERVIEW should bring all efforts against Flynn to a halt. U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, Jeff Jensen, has been conducting an ongoing review of the FBI investigation that led to charges in the case against Michael Flynn. As part of that review an interview was recently conducted (September 17, 2020) with the former Flynn supervisory case agent, William Barnett – who also was assigned to the Special Counsel’s Office investigating Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential Election. What Special Agent Barnett says under oath about the DOJ and FBI investigations is devastating to the institutions.  Here is his 302 report: Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Robert Mueller Investigative Agent Recently Testified Special Counsel Operation was “Intended to Get Trump”…

Sidney Powell Discusses Explosive New Texts and Documents With Lou Dobbs – Corrupt FBI Officials Even Purchased Professional Liability Insurance…

Michael Flynn defense attorney, Sidney Powell, calls-in to Lou Dobbs to discuss the explosive new evidence released to her by the DOJ. In an update to briefings before the court Sidney Powell released today a set of previously hidden text messages within the FBI investigative unit highlighting the fraudulent and corrupt premise behind the targeting of her client [pdf link]. The documents are also embedded below. Ms. Powell discusses the stunning nature of the release and how the texts and documents show a targeted effort against candidate Trump, President-elect Trump, President Trump and her client Michael Flynn who was the incoming National Security Advisor. This release is perhaps the most damning so far.  WATCH: [embedded content] . The corrupt units within the FBI and CIA even went so far as to purchase professional liability insurance after the election because they knew their prior activity could lead to criminal, civil and financial lawsuits. A stunning internal admission. I would be remiss if I did not remind everyone the DOJ (Barr and Durham) asked the FISA court for guidance in sharing classified and corrupt FISA associated information with litigants in civil (and criminal proceedings).   Ergo, given the nature of their activity this insurance issue by the corrupt officials has some substantive context for legal exposure. Here’s the FULL RELEASE: I will have more on this issue later.  There is a lot to unpack. Share your review in the comments, thanks. Share this: Like this: Like Loading...

Continue Reading Sidney Powell Discusses Explosive New Texts and Documents With Lou Dobbs – Corrupt FBI Officials Even Purchased Professional Liability Insurance…

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…

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…

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…

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…