Repost by Request – Considering the upcoming declassification window…between Trump’s state visit in Japan (5/25 – 5/28) and the state visit with the U.K (6/3 – 6/5).

Bucket Five – Intelligence documents that were presented to the Gang of Eight in 2016 that pertain to the FISA application used against U.S. person Carter Page; including all exculpatory intelligence documents that may not have been presented to the FISA Court.  Presumably this would include the recently revealed State Dept Kavalac email; and the FBI transcripts from wiretaps of George Papadopoulos (also listed in Carter Page FISA).

Now that we have significant research files on the 2015 and 2016 political surveillance program; which includes the trail evident within the Weissmann/Mueller report; in combination with the Obama-era DOJ “secret research project” (their words, not mine); we are able to overlay the entire objective and gain a full understanding of how political surveillance was conducted over a period of approximately four to six years.
This is why there’s panic.
Working with a timeline, but also referencing origination material in 2015/2016 – CTH hopes to show how the program operated. This explains an evolution from The IRS Files in 2010 to the FISA Files in 2016.
More importantly, research indicates the modern political exploitation of the NSA database, for weaponized intelligence surveillance of politicians, began mid 2012.
(more…)

Now that President Trump has officially designated the Declassification Memorandum we can review the specifics for process, content and timing.  Our previous research led to a set of expectations for the directive. Now, that we have the directive in hand, we gain increased clarity of purpose.

♦ First, President Trump has assigned ownership of the Directive to U.S. Attorney General William Barr. This part was predictable because the purpose of declassification would be to facilitate a DOJ review of how the intelligence apparatus was used in the 2016 election.
Additionally, because the DOJ review encompasses intelligence systems potentially weaponized in 2016 for political purposes and intents, President Trump carries: (a) declassification authority; but also: (b) an inherent conflict.  In this DOJ endeavor candidate Trump would have been the target of corrupt agency activity; and therefore would be considered the target/victim if weaponization were affirmed by evidence.
To avoid the conflict President Trump designates the U.S. Attorney General as arbiter and decision-maker for the purposes of declassifying evidence within the investigation:

…”The Attorney General has also been delegated full and complete authority to declassify information pertaining to this investigation, in accordance with the long-established standards for handling classified information.” (link)

Additionally, AG Bill Barr does not need to assemble the intelligence product for approval by the executive (Trump).  Instead the office of the president is granting the AG full unilateral decision-making as to each product being considered for declassification.
This is a huge amount of trust from the President to the Attorney General, and a big responsibility for William Barr:
(more…)

There was a DC rumor that “a website” was “surprisingly spot-on” when CTH posted the likely declassification structure, agency process and timing… [Here and Here and  Here]
Tonight, President Trump signs a declassification memo that identifies the intelligence units, and issues guidelines therein:

WHITE HOUSE: “Today, at the request and recommendation of the Attorney General of the United States, President Donald J. Trump directed the intelligence community to quickly and fully cooperate with the Attorney General’s investigation into surveillance activities during the 2016 Presidential election.

The Attorney General has also been delegated full and complete authority to declassify information pertaining to this investigation, in accordance with the long-established standards for handling classified information. Today’s action will help ensure that all Americans learn the truth about the events that occurred, and the actions that were taken, during the last Presidential election and will restore confidence in our public institutions.” (read more)

Memorandum for Agency Guidance below:
(more…)

Sally Moyer was FBI unit chief in the Office of General Counsel (counterintelligence legal unit within the FBI Office of General Counsel). Moyer reported to an unnamed section chief, who reported to Trisha Beth Anderson, who was deputy legal counsel to James Baker.
Ms. Moyer is responsible for the legal compliance within the FBI counterintelligence operations that generated FISA applications:
[scribd id=411004527 key=key-MV1XTw9YPfPUa7ZOaXdp mode=scroll]
(more…)

The Christopher Steele dossier was called “Crown Material” by FBI agents within the small group during their 2016 political surveillance operation. The “Crown” description reflects the unofficial British intelligence aspect to the dossier as provided by Steele.

Recently, former House Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy stated there are emails from former FBI Director James Comey that outline instructions from CIA Director John Brennan to include the “Crown Material” within the highly political Intelligence Community Assessment.
Specifically -as outlined by Gowdy- the wording of the Comey email is reported to say:

…”Brennan is insisting the Crown Material be included in the intel assessment.”

However, on May 23rd, 2017, in testimony -under oath- to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) John Brennan stated [@01:54:28]:

GOWDY: Director Brennan, do you know who commissioned the Steele dossier?
BRENNAN: I don’t.
GOWDY: Do you know if the bureau [FBI] ever relied on the Steele dossier as part of any court filing, applications?
BRENNAN: I have no awareness.
GOWDY: Did the CIA rely on it?
BRENNAN: No.
GOWDY: Why not?
BRENNAN: Because we didn’t. It wasn’t part of the corpus of intelligence information that we had. It was not in any way used as a basis for the Intelligence Community Assessment that was done. Uh … it was not.

(more…)

Excellent presentation by Kimberley Strassel discussing the scale and scope of the government weaponization during the 2016 election; and the willful assistance by an ideological U.S. media.

(more…)

On her television show Laura Ingraham reported her ‘sources’ inform her President Trump will execute the declassification directive next week. [Video Tweet Link] If accurate, the timing –in advance of the OIG draft report– makes sense.
The declassification of documents central to previous congressional inquiry, that also encompasses the Inspector General review of the Carter Page FISA application, is the subject of great interest and speculation.  However, it would make sense for President Trump to authorize the declassification of documents in advance of the IG report release.

Likely Inspector General Michael Horowitz has reviewed all of the documents in question.  If Horowitz wants to include the classified content in his draft report for principle review; and later within the final report; those documents would need to be declassified or else they would be held back, footnoted and outlined in a classified appendix.
If the DOJ and President Trump want the information more broadly available to the public and media, it would make sense to declassify the documents – pending the review and approval of the participating intelligence agencies (DOJ, DOJ-NSD, CIA, NSA, State Dept., FBI, ODNI, DoD, etc.)
♦ The process without controversy – First, each of the executive branch intelligence agencies will have to sign-off on the declassification request, and/or explain to the Chief Executive (that’s Trump), through the ODNI, why their specific intelligence product should not be made public.
Generally speaking, now that the Mueller investigation is complete; and if there is no substantive risk to national security; the intelligence agencies will adhere/defer to the request of the executive.  This is where the alignment and support from U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr is critically important.
(more…)

Devin Nunes appears on Fox News to discuss why the origin of the Russia narrative is important.  The scale and scope of the fraudulent construct is now a strongly enmeshed narrative, toxic to the systems of cohesive government:

.
If you read the Weissmann/Mueller report carefully one aspect stands out strongly; the Mueller investigation was fully committed to The Steele Dossier. An inordinate amount of the report is focused on justifying their investigative validity and purpose in looking at the claims within the Steele Dossier.
(more…)

If this were anyone except Judiciary Committee member John Ratcliffe, it would be easier to ignore…. but it’s not.  John Ratcliffe is a very tempered and deliberate voice; he has a strong reputation in DC and doesn’t speak in riddles, hype, or disingenuous terms.
During an interview with Maria Bartiromo discussing the recent comments by former FBI Director James Comey, Ratcliffe replied [Must Watch at 04:10 ]:

[@04:10] “Gosh, y’ know, as I listen to that, Jim Comey is proud and wouldn’t change a thing? Really?  He’s proud that he put Peter Strzok in charge of investigating Donald Trump? The same Peter Strzok who, while he was investigating Donald Trump, promised to “f*ck” him and to “stop” him?  He’s proud of his hand-picked deputy director, Andrew McCabe who lied under oath; lied to the inspector general, and has been criminally referred for that?
And we know Jim’s proud of himself, but the inspector general found him insubordinate, and many of us believe that he either is or should be under investigation for violating the espionage act; for recording his conversations with President Trump in the oval office, and then intentionally leaking classified information to start this investigation”…

Note: “is, or should be”.  So there’s a possibility of “is”.
Remember, Ratcliffe is one of only a handful of people who saw, and continues to see, all of the highly classified intelligence documents (fully unredacted) currently under consideration for declassification by President Trump.  Ratcliffe was also strongly considered for the U.S. Attorney General position.  This is a deliberate man.
(more…)

In two separate court filings Roger Stone is challenging the DOJ to produce evidence of their predicate claim the Russians “hacked” the DNC servers.
The first filing is a motion to compel [SEE HERE] and requests the DOJ provide unredacted documents to support their framework of evidence that Russian’s “hacked” the DNC.  The second filing is a motion to suppress [SEE HERE] any downstream evidence, extracted by the use of search warrants, built upon upon the predicate claim of Russians “hacking” the DNC.

In essence Roger Stone is challenging the U.S. government to prove the DNC was hacked by Russians; and further he is refuting the validity of the FBI using a private organization, Crowdstrike, as a valid investigative and determinative body.
The suppress motion argues it was the responsibility of the FBI to secure and investigate the hacking evidence and not rely upon the word of a private party hired by the DNC (an opposing political entity). If the government cannot prove the Russian’s hacked the DNC, and subsequently attempted to work with Wikileaks for the distribution therein, then the basis for government claims about Stone seeking to engage with Wikileaks diminishes.
(more…)