To provide some context for this letter, even beyond what is stated by Senators Grassley and Johnson, it is worthwhile remembering the 300 pages of text messages between FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and his DOJ lawyer Lisa Page were originally revealed in March of 2019.   Catherine Herridge reported on two of those pages.

Today Grassley and Johnson send a letter [pdf here] asking FBI Director Chris Wray to stop stonewalling congressional oversight and provide the text messages.  Within the letter the senators outline a few examples highlighting how McCabe and Page were coordinating FBI leaks to their media allies during a key and critical time-frame:

(source pdf – also embed below)

Those 2016 text messages were during the time when an internal argument was taking place about the need for McCabe to recuse himself from the reopening of the Clinton email investigation because he tried to bury the Weiner laptop emails for 28-days in October.

Here’s the letter from Grassley and Johnson:

(more…)

Appearing on Fox Business with Maria Bartiromo, Michael Flynn’s defense counsel Sidney Powell cuts through the parseltongue to note the Obama administration was not tricked into allowing a smear campaign against Donald Trump and Michael Flynn; the Obama administration was participating in the creation and pushing of the smear campaign.

• July 26, 2016 – ¹Brennan informed by campaign operative that Hillary Clinton, political allies and agents were using and pushing Trump-Russia smear.
• July 28, 2016 – ²Brennan briefs President Obama about smear campaign in White House.
• July 31, 2016 – FBI Agent Peter Strzok opens Trump investigation (Crossfire Hurricane) based on Trump-Russia collusion smear.
• FBI begins using Steele-Dossier created by Fusion-GPS and Clinton Campaign as primary justification for ongoing Trump investigation.

Everyone knew exactly what they were doing. No-one was tricked into participating.

Remember, the four-year democrat narrative (pushed relentlessly by media) was how the professional intelligence community worked diligently to verify the Trump-Russia intelligence, and that every aspect briefed to President Obama went through the highest levels of “by-the-book” verification and authentication. Now those same democrats and media voices are claiming the Brennan briefing material was “Russian disinformation.”

(more…)

Dear Mr. President and White House counsel:

Understanding the ordinary process of declassifying documents is a request and authorization to the executive officers and stakeholders of classified information; and understanding the current authorization is is not ordinary because the intelligence community stakeholders are adverse to the interests of the office of the president; here is a process to cut through the chaff and countermeasures.

The background here is that any unilateral declassification request, demand or authorization by President Trump puts him opposition to a variety of corrupt interests.

As a direct result the executive office of the president will be facing legal action, likely from unified democrats and republicans in the legislative branch.  With that accepted, here is the most strategic approach.

In anticipation of litigation:

President Trump informs the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, that he wishes to have a full intelligence briefing on the following documents (more may be added), all documents are to be presented without a single redaction:

(more…)

While it might seem frustrating to see republicans and conservatives demanding that President Trump stop talking about the greatest act of sedition and usurpation, within our Constitutional Republic in the history of our nation, this espousal by Andrew McCarthy is factually a very wide-spread opinion within the DC beltway:

Take the intents in their best possible light, and the basic premise is that no-one cares about the abuses of power that took place. National Review article by Rich Lowry is here.

I have shared by own thoughts on this matter several times; and despite knowing this issue may not/will not drive the 2020 election; in my own contemplation I keep coming back to this central question: How can this be ignored?…

… How does the office of a U.S. president; and more importantly the republic itself; survive a coordinated coup effort involving all three branches of government; while simultaneously those in charge of exposing the corruption fear the scale is too damaging for them to reveal?

What are your thoughts?

A fantastic catch by Twitter user “15poundstogo” highlights a key phrase within the Senate Select Intelligence Committee (SSCI) Russia Report Volume-5, showing how the SSCI allowed those who created the Trump-Russia narrative to avoid questioning:

[SSCI Volume-5 Link, Page 23]

This is a very important detail to underpin the report we shared yesterday about former Dianne Feinstein top staffer Dan Jones attempting to avoid a subpoena from U.S. Attorney John Durham.  [SEE BACKGROUND HERE]  This key highlight from the SSCI is evidence of how the attempted coup against President Trump was coordinated by people outside government and inside government.

Dan Jones left the SSCI prior to the 2016 election and went to work pushing the Trump-Russia narrative through his media contacts.  Jones took over funding Fusion-GPS and Chris Steele in 2017 at the same time Senator Mark Warner took over as SSCI vice-chairman. Dan Jones and Mark Warner coordinated the efforts outside and inside government on the same objective.  The Senate Intel Committee was part of the effort.

As a result of their alignment and common purpose the SSCI didn’t investigate the origin of the Trump-Russia narrative; and instead positioned themselves as a shield to block any investigative inquiry into what took place.  THIS IS A BIG DEAL !

(more…)

First, let me set the stage for new readers. No-one is more cynical of DC operations and manipulations than me. I do not sell nor promote ‘hope porn’, and I am not confident that anything is close to being revealed. Indeed, given the scale and scope of what took place in the last eight years, yes eight years; I have expressed doubts that anyone in government would ever actually expose it.

That said, in addition to my own cynicism I have been deep in this “spygate” or “Russiagate” rabbit hole; factually and physically inside the DC network; long enough to see the map of an investigative trail bringing up the rear.

During one great conversation a lawyer said to me: “All of this you know; all of this you have evidence for; but we don’t have the badges”. Thus began my 2020 effort, ultimately a successful effort, to drag the badges into the hole.  That’s the background for an update with new information:

A very important article was written yesterday in the New Yorker [SEE HERE]. While the topic of the article spotlights the ridiculous conspiracy theory surrounding Alfa bank, and the insufferable nonsense about Trump Tower servers having contact -electronic touch signals- with servers from the Russian banking organization, there are aspects to the story that show where the Durham probe has been forced to travel.

Within the article –which everyone should read– some names are very important. The article is framed around defending the New Yorker’s previous reporting on the Alfa Bank conspiracy theory, so the intent of the article is defensive. However, the events being described in the article, and more importantly the people being outlined in the article, are accurate. Especially Daniel Jones and his lawyer William Taylor; and the connection of both to Fusion GPS and Glenn Simpson.

According to the article there are two parallel efforts underway to untangle the background of how the false Alfa Bank story was originated. One effort is a set of civil lawsuits by the owners of Alfa bank against those who created the fraudulent story that flowed through Fusion GPS, into Chris Steele’s dossier, into the FBI, and ultimately into the Buzzfeed reporting therein. The owners of the bank are taking all of these entities into court and demanding discovery of sources who framed/created the false impression.

(more…)

By now the American electorate’s confidence in the FBI is hovering near zero.  FBI Director Chris Wray has done nothing to counter a reality of institutional corruption.

To the contrary, and factually, over the past several years the FBI have shown they are politically motivated in all their efforts. If the FBI was not political, they simply wouldn’t be seen taking a knee to express their political alignment with far-left causes:

From the FBI involvement in attempted election interference in 2015 and 2016; to their 2017/2018 efforts to overthrow the U.S. presidency of Donald Trump; to the 2018 Caesar Sayoc case, a transparently self-interested attempt to sway the 2018 mid-term election and protect themselves from further investigation; to the FBI involvement in the 2019 SWAT arrest of Roger Stone; to the 50 FBI agents who worked with Andrew Weissmann and Robert Mueller on the special counsel operation… all the way to this announcement today, everything the FBI does is wrapped in their political ideology.

There is a profound irony when considering how the political left decries Russia’s use of state police for political purposes; and yet we see the United States FBI carrying out identically motivated federal police operations. Think carefully about it.

Michigan – […] The [FBI] news conference comes after the filing of a federal affidavit Thursday morning that describes an alleged plot to overthrow the government and kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

(more…)

Fred Fleitz is the President and CEO, Center for Security Policy; a former NSC Chief of Staff, CIA analyst and House Intel Com staff member. Tonight he appeared with Lou Dobbs to discuss the ongoing issues with the intelligence apparatus and the requests by President Trump to release all documents without redaction.

.

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe released the following statement today:

(more…)

Missouri U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen has provided additional information to the Flynn defense team highlighting a January 25th meeting between officials in the DOJ-NSD and FBI the day after Michael Flynn (code-named Razor) was interviewed in the White House.

The DOJ officials attending the meeting included: Mary McCord (NSD head), George Toscas (NSD principal deputy), Stu Evans, Tashina Guahar, and “Matt A” (possibly Matthew Axelrod (lawyer for the Deputy Attorney General).  Additionally, from the FBI there was: James Baker (chief legal counsel), Bill Priestap (CoIntel head) and a redacted name.  It is clear from the meeting notes the group was trying to find something to target Michael Flynn and brainstorming on what approach to take.

As noted they discussed the “Logan Act” yet found there was no reasonable way to use it and Flynn’s contact with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, during the transition, was normal.

FBI Legal Counsel James Baker asked how could you prosecute Flynn for a 1001 violation (lying to FBI officials) when you couldn’t prosecute any underlying crime because the contact with Kislyak was normal.

The “truth of something being falsely stated to the public” surrounds the January 15, 2017, CBS interview with Vice-President Mike Pence who conflated a question about contact with Russians during the election; with Flynn’s contact with Kislyak in the transition period.

John Dickerson: Just to button up one question, did any advisor or anybody in the Trump campaign have any contact with the Russians who were trying to meddle in the election?

MIKE PENCE: Of course not. And I think to suggest that is to give credence to some of these bizarre rumors that have swirled around the candidacy. (link)

The DOJ/FBI team was going to hang their hat on this conflation as a conflict between Pence and Flynn.   That’s the beginning of the Russian “blackmail” narrative.

(more…)

Counsel to General Michael Flynn, Sidney Powell, comments on new unredacted information regarding the presidential transition scandal known commonly as ‘Russiagate,’ and the roles that President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton may have played in the events in question. The interview is with Newsmax TV’s John Bachman

(more…)