Yesterday we identified one FBI Confidential Human Source who was part of the Trump campaign [SEE HERE].  Today we identify another, more interesting, one.
Throughout the 478-page IG report on FBI FISA misconduct there are several mentions of Confidential Human Sources (CHSs) who were either officially “tasked” or unofficially involved in the 2016 FBI investigation of the Trump campaign.
The inspector general review of the CHS activity is fraught with examples of the FBI denying many of the numerous “non-tasked” sources were acting in an official capacity.
The inspector general’s office knowing the FBI were lacking candor is one thing; however, proving that is another matter entirely.  The ‘having to take them at their word‘ dynamic appears throughout the chapters on the use of Confidential Human Sources.
Horowitz report shows the level of denial and justification by FBI officials in Washington DC surrounding the deployment of human sources stretches credulity. It really is quite something to take the totality of the FBI denials, for repeated and specific events, place them all together and then determine all of this is just random, happenstance activity.
Despite FBI denials, perhaps because of them; and despite the IG not being able to find specific evidence that would refute their denials; the IG found far too many coincidences for all of the activity to be coincidental.  This led to Inspector General Horowitz writing a break-out report on just the use of Confidential Human Sources [Nov. 19, 2019].
CTH has identified another key “non-tasked” (their claim) CHS that appears to have been the final straw for Horowitz amid a mountain of FBI denials.  The FBI claims around this specific person is what eventually led to the November 19th, 2019, break out report.
[NOTE: I am identifying these redacted individuals and sources because there is a bigger issue at stake.  There is growing evidence of an ongoing battle within the current FBI.  One side wants to push out the truth, the other side is intent on hiding it.]
(more…)

CTH was always curious why one specific member of the Trump campaign and transition team was abruptly departed (Nov 15, 2016) immediately after the visit by NSA Director Mike Rogers was scheduled, and two-days prior to their meeting.  It’s a weedy question, likely only considered by those who were watching closely at the time…
However, perhaps Inspector General Michael Horowitz has provided some background on the move. [Page 336, 337, fn #474]

Based on the arc of the post-election timeline described in the segment of the report that touches upon “non-tasked” Confidential Human Sources (CHSs), beginning page 336; and based on other information in/around the specific CHS described; there’s a very strong likelihood we can identify this one.
(more…)

Following a Christmas eve call to U.S. service members, President Trump answers questions on a variety of topics from the press pool.  [Video Below]

(more…)

Joe diGenova radio interview discussing his perspective on revelations that former NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers has been working with U.S. Attorney John Durham:

.
BACKGROUND – With research files on the ’15, ’16 and ’17 political surveillance program; including information from the Mueller report and information from the IG Horowitz report; in combination with the Obama-era DOJ “secret research project” (their words, not mine); we are able to overlay the Obama-era domestic IC operations and gain a full understanding of how political surveillance was conducted over a period of approximately four to six years.
Working with a timeline, but also referencing origination material in 2015/2016 – CTH hopes to show how the program(s) interacted and operated. A full review explains an evolution from The IRS Files in 2010 to the FISA Files in 2016.
(more…)

Senator John Kennedy has many good quotes, his responses about constituent questions around impeachment are quite funny.
The impeachment issues are serious, but the way Kennedy encapsulates the nuttery of it all is actually representative of how/why President Trump’s polling continues to improve as more Americans are absorbing just how ridiculously political this has been.

(more…)

The New York Times has a curious article posited today surrounding U.S. Attorney John Durham who is doing the deep investigation into DOJ, FBI, CIA and intelligence community political espionage in the 2016 election and early Trump presidency.
CTH readers are very familiar with the granular details of what’s commonly referred to as “spygate”; the unofficial weaponization of the intelligence apparatus against candidate Donald Trump, president-elect Trump, and later President Trump.
The Times posts their article about Durham’s investigation against the backdrop of the completed inspector general report on DOJ/FBI misconduct in their FISA exploits.
While the majority of the narrative engineering is oddly irrelevant; and it doesn’t take a long review to notice the Times scribes have a motive to frame Durham’s eventual outcome as adverse to their own political interests; there is one particular paragraph that seems exceptionally curious:

[…] The inspector general’s report makes no substantive reference to Mr. Durham’s investigation. But before the report’s release, Mr. Durham got into a sharp dispute with Mr. Horowitz’s team over a footnote in a draft of the report that seemed to imply that Mr. Durham agreed with all of Mr. Horowitz’s conclusions, which he did not, according to people familiar with the matter. The footnote did not appear in the final version of the report. (link)

(more…)

As we suspected, albeit against much criticism, House counsel Doug Letter has responded to the DC Appeals Court arguing the forced testimony of White House counsel Don McGahn is needed for evidence in impeachment trial. [Court pdf Avail Here]
This court filing today bolsters the unspoken background motive for delayed House Impeachment Managers.  The House Judiciary Committee is using impeachment as support for their ongoing effort to gain: Don McGahn deposition, and Mueller grand jury material (6e).  The goal is opposition research; impeachment is a tool to establish legal standing to obtain it.  Everything else is chaff and countermeasures.

[Scribd pdf link – Direct pdf link (w/ embed below)]

This court filing bolsters CTH analysis that rushed House articles are a means to an end. That is – a way for House lawyers to argue in court all of the constitutionally contended material is required as evidence for pending judicial proceedings, a trial in the Senate.
This would explain why all the prior evidence debated for inclusion and legal additions to “articles of impeachment” were dropped. Instead the House focused only on quickly framing two articles that can facilitate pending court cases.
(more…)

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell appeared on Fox Morning broadcast to discuss the current status of the House impeachment and his perspective on why Speaker Nancy Pelosi is not sending the written articles of impeachment to the Senate for trial.

(more…)

House Leader Kevin McCarthy stated yesterday he would recommend John Ratcliffe, Jim Jordan and Doug Collins as House members who would represent the interests of President Trump if any Senate impeachment trial was to begin.  All three are exceptional legal orators who have displayed their skills during the House hearings.
Today Representative Doug Collins discussed the possibility:

(more…)

Marc Short, Chief of Staff to Vice President Mike Pence, appears on Meet The Press with Chuck Todd to discuss what the White House expects from a Senate impeachment trial.
Oddly, something about Short’s demeanor seems to neutralize the traditional partisan gibberish Toady is famous for.  There’s still a lot of pontification, but Short does a great job cutting through Toad’s burping noises.

(more…)