Within an interesting interview conducted by Jan Jekielek of Epoch Times, former AAG Matt Whitaker confirms what CTH long suspected. The Mueller investigation was used by corrupt interests within the special counsel’s office to threaten any/all executive branch and congressional officials with “obstruction of justice” charges if they revealed any exculpatory or counter-narrative information during the Mueller probe.

Whitaker describes this as the “obstruction of justice trap.”

Essentially, this approach confirms the second-prong purpose of the Mueller investigation itself. First, use the special counsel in 2017, 2018 and into the beginning of 2019, as a shield (hide information); and secondly a weapon (threats) against any entity who would reveal the background intelligence that undercut the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

We know President Trump was threatened by Rod Rosenstein not to declassify any information in September of 2018 or the Mueller investigation would use that act as evidence of obstruction. Whitaker confirms that same approach was applied toward any executive branch officer who would reveal or release information to congress during the tenure of the special counsel; even within the DOJ and including the attorney general.

This is how the Mueller probe was weaponized to mislead the American people.

(more…)

Moments ago President Trump tweeted he will veto the House FISA re-authorization if it is passed without first investigating and exposing prior FISA abuses committed against his prior election campaign and administration:

The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote by proxy on the FISA re-authorization previously passed by the Senate.  No-one has any idea if the FISA vote will actually pass the House and it appears most republicans are positioned to vote against it.

Lou Dobbs discusses the issues with Representative Jim Jordan shortly before President Trump tweeted his intent.  WATCH:

.

These developments come on the heels of increased sunlight into the corrupt purposes and intents of Obama-era intelligence officials and how they weaponized their authorities to target the Trump administration starting with National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

[…] It was the FBI, not the NSA, that wiretapped Kislyak’s calls and created the summary and transcript, the former officials said. (link)

(more…)

CTH wants details.  Details on the process of this testimony from Rod Rosenstein; how it will be structured, how much time the committee will allow; who is questioning, Skype or in-person? Why are details important? Because CTH has enough questions to take more than a full day just from our independent research.

Additionally, Rosenstein is at the epicenter of the ‘insurance policy’ phase of the coup against President Trump.  If the intent of Graham is to provide both transparency or a cover-up, former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein is who you’d start with on both fronts.

According to numerous media reports Rod Rosenstein is scheduled to be the first witness to testify before Senator Lindsey Graham’s Judiciary Committee.

We have over two dozen documented contacts between Rosenstein and Robert Mueller before the special counsel was launched.  The first contact was a phone call the morning after former FBI Director James Comey was fired.  Literally hours after Comey was fired, based -in part- on a letter written by the former DAG recommending the firing, Rosenstein was coordinating the appointment of the special counsel to investigate President Trump.

You could spend several hours of inquiry into just that part of the decision-making process alone; without even touching the ramifications of his role in the Carter Page FISA applications and what came next.   Rosenstein was also the principle influence agent in 2018 who told President Trump not to declassify any documents requested by congress or POTUS would be facilitating an ‘obstruction’ charge against the office of the President.

Yeah, Rosenstein has a lot to answer for.

(more…)

For well over a year we’ve been saying AG Bill Barr’s biggest challenge is not investigating the soft-coup but rather managing through what We The People are already aware of.

With that in mind; and with congress moving to put former DAG Rod Rosenstein and former Special Counsel Robert Mueller under a microscope; it is interesting to note AG Bill Barr recently conceding his two friends were corrupt.  WATCH:

[Transcript] …”Now what happened to the president – and I’ve said this many times – what happened to the president in the 2016 election; and throughout the first two years of his administration was abhorrent. It was a grave injustice and it was unprecedented in American history.”

“The law enforcement and intelligence apparatus of this country were involved in advancing a false and utterly baseless Russian-collusion narrative against the president.”

The proper investigative and prosecutive standards of the Dept of Justice were abused, in my view, in order to reach a particular result.”  ~ (AG Barr, May 18, 2020)

How can AG Barr say the DOJ/FBI conduct during the first two years of the administration “was abhorrent” without specifically implying his two friends, Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein were complicit in the “grave injustice” he outlines?

It is interesting that no media (of any disposition) has ever questioned AG Barr about Rosenstein and Mueller considering his words that outline their behavior as abhorrent.

(more…)

Yesterday we noted a rather important, yet less discussed, motive for the strength of the DC Circuit Court position against Judge Emmet Sullivan.  I’ll expand after the video.

In this interview Gregg Jarrett talks with Flynn’s defense lawyer Sidney Powell about the rather unusual behavior of Judge Emmet Sullivan.  WATCH:

.

A DC judge hiring a well connected DC lawyer to write his response to a DC circuit court appeals panel is the part that’s interesting.  There’s no guarantee the appeals court will accept such a response; but that’s also another issue.   Bottom line: Judge Sullivan is importing a lawyer to represent his interests.  Very unusual.

(more…)

It’s a question that has been asked several times: why is FBI Director Christopher Wray now starting an internal review of those within the FBI who were engaged with the events around Lt. General Michael Flynn.  Why did he wait so long?

In this interview Representative Andy Biggs discusses that question.  WATCH:

.

The most likely answer is simply sunlight.  The corrupt FBI activity was clearly evident within the organization in 2018 and 2019.  However, the recent change is the public awareness of it with documented evidence.

(more…)

The Washington Post headline reads (emphasis mine): “Federal judge hires high-powered D.C. attorney to defend his actions in Flynn case.” Which gives some insight into the framework and purpose of this event, and how it reached the WaPo narrative engineers.

The Washington Post is, as an institution, adverse to the interests of Michael Flynn.  So this story, specifically the events behind the story, are written in a posture to aid Judge Sullivan and oppose Flynn.  Keep that in mind (I’ll explain after).

Judge Sullivan has hired a high profile DC lawyer to assist him in responding to the inquires of the DC circuit:

WASHINGTON DC – […] In a rare step that adds to this criminal case’s already unusual path, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has retained Beth Wilkinson to represent him in defending his decision to a federal appeals court in Washington, according to a person familiar with the hire who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

[…] Wilkinson, known for her top-notch legal skills and get-results style, is expected to file a notice with the court in the coming week about representing the judge. She declined to comment when reached Friday evening. Sullivan also declined to comment through his office.

(more…)

Former Acting AG Matt Whitaker appears with Liz MacDonald to discuss the latest revelations in the Flynn case; the ongoing declassification of documents by DNI Ric Grenell; and the announcement of a new internal FBI investigation.  WATCH:

(more…)

Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard “Ric” Grenell announced today he is in the process of declassifying the transcripts of the calls between Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

Within a twitter response by Grenell, part of the riddle behind the transcripts gets a little more clarity: “The IC doesn’t have all the transcripts/summaries…. it wasn’t our product.”

The implication here is the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) did not generate one of the transcripts; that evolved into an FBI equity, and was later used in their case against Lt. General Michael Flynn. The December 29, 2016, intercept was not exclusive to the U.S. intelligence apparatus, and the call summary became proprietary to the FBI; the agency exploiting the underlying content.

This makes sense and explains how the FBI was able to manipulate the framework of the call and keep the remaining U.S. intelligence system away from their internal plan.

There was more than one phone call and conversation between Flynn and Kislyak.  Some immediately after the election and in/around mid-December 2016.  Reports of those contacts and communications WERE in the U.S. IC network and those reports led to unmasking requests.  However, the specific December 29th communication was not an exclusive intercept of the U.S. intelligence community and therefore easier for the FBI to shape.

(more…)

You may have recently noticed that Susan Rice has called for the release of the transcript of the conversation between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak:

(Source and Full Statement)

However, what many people do not realize is the motive for Susan Rice to call for the release of this transcript.  This aspect of the intercepted communication is very interesting.

First, there is nothing damaging in the content of the Flynn-Kislyak call.  We know there is nothing damaging in the transcript because the call was made on December 29, 2016; and the FBI investigators who intercepted the call reviewed the call content; and five days later on January 4, 2017, the same Washington DC field office of the FBI wanted to close the investigation of Michael Flynn having “found no derogatory information.”

If there had been something damaging within the call to either the incoming Trump administration, or Michael Flynn himself, the FBI would not be saying they have found nothing derogatory and they were closing the Flynn investigation five days after the call.

Additionally, we also know there was nothing damaging or inappropriate within the call because Robert Mueller’s investigators outlined the content:

(more…)