The Supreme Court has issued a ruling maintaining the block against House Democrats receiving President Trump’s tax returns.  The one paragraph order [pdf here] essentially maintains the stay and requests the Trump administration to file a formal request for review by the court, a “writ of certiorari”, by December 5th (noon).

It seems likely, almost certain, the House Democrat leadership was expecting this outcome; hence their earlier request for the Supreme Court to delay this predictable ruling for ten days.
The administration will almost certainly file the formal request for review by the court; and if the request is granted (very likely considering the wording of the order), the Supreme Court will hear the arguments in the spring of 2020 with a ruling sometime around June 2020 to settle the issue once and for all.
The underlying House case has several defects.
(more…)

If you have liberal family members around for this weeks Thanksgiving feast and celebration it would be wise to understand the scale of their disappointment, even if they have yet to recognize it.  Perhaps the best course will be just smiling.

…”I want to discuss this with my constituents and colleagues before I make a final judgment on this,” Schiff said.

Amid diminishing public support for the impeachment fiasco; and with more Americans starting to realize the past two months were an abject lesson in political narrative building and legislative manipulation; HPSCI impeachment committee chairman Adam Schiff transmits a letter today to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler.
If Schiff were in the MMA venue this letter, describing the HPSCI report to the House Judiciary Committee (HJC), would be a double tap to the mat:

Well, there’s a slightly less than strong impeachment position: Impeachment by “inference”.. he says.  Previously Mueller and Weissmann attempted to prosecute President Trump, the fictitious horse-thief, for attempting to obstruct his hanging; now Schiff is inferring guilt because President Trump didn’t present alibis for his whereabouts when the fictitious horse wasn’t stolen…. Yup, it’s looking like a fail.
(more…)

This decision (full pdf below) was easily predicted for the past several weeks.  The HJC -vs- White House case for McGahn testimony will be appealed and join the HJC -vs- White House case surrounding grand jury information in the DC appellate court.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge ruled late Monday that former White House counsel Don McGahn must obey a subpoena for his testimony issued by the House Judiciary Committee.

Federal District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson [pictured right] said McGahn must appear before Congress but retains the ability to “invoke executive privilege where appropriate” during his appearance. The judge did not put her own ruling on hold, but the Trump administration will likely seek one to put the effect of her ruling on hold while it pursues an appeal. (link)

Nancy Pelosi and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler need a full House impeachment authorization vote to try and overcome the current obstacles they are facing.  The authority for the House Judiciary Committee (HJC) to penetrate the constitutional firewall that protects the separation of power in the main issue; but there are other structural/legal issues that also exist.
(more…)

There is a very strong likelihood the documentary material that FBI Lawyer Kevin Clinesmith falsified was actual communication from Carter Page to the FBI where Page was seeking their help in 2017.   This revelation would explain and reconcile two seemingly contrasting points:

• Point one – The media have asserted, based on leaks from the principal reviews, the woods file manipulation by Clinesmith did not impact the validity of the original FISA application on October 21st, 2017.
• Point two – The material Kevin Clinesmith did manipulate was so egregious and unethical, it stands as one of the most clear examples of corrupt FBI abuse of power in recent history.

This outline will highlight a VERY disturbing picture:

Start by remembering the timeline of the Carter Page targeting through the use of a FISA application to the FISA Court (FISC).  The original application was submitted on October 21st, 2016.  The first FISA renewal was January 12, 2017 (84 days from origination).  The second renewal was April 7, 2017 (85 days from prior renewal).  The third renewal was on June 29th, 2017 (83 days from prior renewal).

Avoid the spin, and let’s focus on the facts.  According to all reporting on the falsified evidence created by FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, the manipulation of the woods file, happened during one of the renewals.

Michael E. Horowitz, uncovered errors and omissions in documents related to the wiretapping of a former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page — including that a low-level lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, altered an email that officials used to prepare to seek court approval to renew the wiretap, the people said. (NYT Link)

The renewals were: Jan 12th, April 7th, June 29th, 2017.  However, we know from the redacted release of the FISA application there was no material added in the first renewal in January 2017.   So that leaves either the April ’17 renewal or the June ’17 renewal.
(more…)

Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) discusses the upcoming drafting of a partisan report derived from witness testimony and the likelihood of an independent minority report.   Unfortunately Rep. Zeldin, just like Adam Schiff and House leadership, is not sure what comes next (other than Thanksgiving).

(more…)

Representative Elise Stefanik appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss her perspective on the impeachment inquiry.  As with all other republican members, including ranking member Devin Nunes and interim member Jim Jordan, Mrs. Stefanik has no idea where the Pelosi, Schiff and Lawfare goes from here.   Everything seems up-in-the-air.

.
Having listened to three interviews with Adam Schiff today as well as Shiff’s little toady, Eric Swalwell; and watching them also say they don’t actually have an outlined plan of what will come next from their “impeachment inquiry”, it all seems rather odd.
It appears Democrat leadership are taking a climate assessment of the electorate before returning to the next, and final, House session on December 2nd.  Pelosi, Schiff et al  previously committed themselves to a semi-formal process in the House resolution that began the impeachment inquiry.  However, they no longer discuss that process.
(more…)

Within the only impeachment resolution put forth by Speaker Nancy Pelosi to open an “impeachment inquiry” the resolution outlined a process.  With only eight legislative days left in 2019; and considering the resolution as adopted; the calendar doesn’t match the democrat talking points.  Here is a walk through of the timeline:
Congress returns from the Thanksgiving break on December 2nd and recesses again on December 12th.  That leaves eight days in December to accomplish all the House tasks.
Democrats have said they anticipate an impeachment vote in mid-December, but a review of the House impeachment resolution calls for a transfer from HPSCI “inquiry” (Schiff) to HJC “investigation” (Nadler) as an outcome of a report from Adam Schiff’s intelligence committee.
Even if we assume the HPSCI report is being written during the Thanksgiving break by HPSCI/Lawfare staff there would still need to be a period where the report is reviewed by the congress members on the committee.  Normally there would be a minority section to the report; and under all committee processes there would be a vote to advance the report.
Again, there’s only eight days in December and presumably HPSCI committee members would need to review the report prior to advancing it to the House Judiciary Committee (HJC).  Once the report lands in the HJC, again – according to the prior resolution, that’s when President Trump would be able to call rebuttal witnesses and have White House counsel challenge and cross-examine HJC witnesses.
(more…)

The Secretary of Navy, former Wall Street global banking executive Richard V Spencer, holds a press availability to deny threatening the President of The United States.
Secretary Spencer denies a report he threatened to resign if President Donald Trump intervened in the case of Navy SEAL Edward Gallagher, and said he works at the pleasure of the president. He also refuted a report that Rear Adm. Collin Green also threatened to resign.

(more…)

It was evident several weeks ago that U.S. chargé d’affaires to Ukraine, Bill Taylor, is one of the current participants in the coup effort.  It was Taylor who engaged in carefully planned text messages with EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland to set-up a narrative helpful to Adam Schiff’s political coup effort.

George Kent (left) – Bill Taylor (right), bagmen for the Foreign Service Office.

Bill Taylor was formerly U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine (’06-’09) and later helped the Obama administration to design the laundry operation providing taxpayer financing to Ukraine in exchange for back-channel payments to U.S. politicians and their families.
Today Rudy Giuliani has released a letter to Senator Lindsey Graham outlining how Bill Taylor has blocked VISA’s for Ukrainian ‘whistle-blowers’ who are willing to testify to the corrupt financial scheme.   Unfortunately, Senator Graham, along with dozens of U.S. Senators currently serving, may very well have been a recipient for money through the aforementioned laundry process.  So, good luck with the visas.
U.S. senators write foreign aid policy, rules and regulations thereby creating the financing mechanisms to transmit U.S. funds.  Those same senators then received a portion of the laundered funds back through their various “institutes” and business connections to the foreign government offices; in this example Ukraine. [ex. Burisma to Biden]
(more…)

The initial jaw-dropping compromise within the Pentagon was first noted when Lt. Col Alexander Vindman, on assignment to the National Security Council, admitted during his deposition to defying White House policy and delivering countermanding instructions to his colleagues in the Ukraine government.

Alex Vindman compromised his position, compromised his leadership, and made himself an issue for National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien.  However, it wasn’t what Vindman did per se’, but rather what the Dept. of Defense didn’t do that was more alarming.  Immediately upon notification of the compromise Defense Secretary Mark Esper (above left) was under the obligation to remove the compromise, yet he did nothing.
The Vindman example was/is a concerning lack of action by Defense Dept. leadership, and that situation is made all the more alarming today as the New York Times is reporting Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer is now openly blackmailing CiC President Donald J Trump and rebuking civilian authority and oversight.

New York Times […] The secretary of the Navy and the admiral who leads the SEALs have threatened to resign or be fired if plans to expel a commando from the elite unit in a war crimes case are halted by President Trump, administration officials said Saturday.

(more…)