Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and FBI Director Kash Patel are scheduled to deliver testimony on Global Threat Assessments today at the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI). The hearing is scheduled to begin at 10:00am ET. Livestream Links Below.
The SSCI sits at the center of the U.S. Intelligence Community operations, providing support and alignment with all ongoing IC activity, with control mechanisms that work around the leadership of all IC institutions. The SSCI, acting as an oversight body, facilitates all activity.
Keep in mind, as DNI Tulsi Gabbard appears for testimony today the worst elements of the Intelligence Community, and the orcs within the SSCI that underpins the IC, despise Tulsi Gabbard.
Remember, Gabbard intercepted an impeachment construct (TdA, Venezuela deportation – Boasberg et al) and Gabbard refused to promote the fabricated IC construct that Jared Kushner was in control of Trump and manipulating the White House on behalf of Israel. Today, the SSCI will take strides to regain control. WATCH:
Tucker Carlson has announced the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has been monitoring his contacts with people within Iran and is potentially referring the issue to Dept of Justice (DOJ) officials for criminal review.
According to his previous self-admissions, Carlson was strongly against the Trump administration taking military action toward Iran and had travelled to the White House to express that opinion to President Trump. If the CIA was monitoring his contact with officials within Iran, this should NOT come as a surprise.
Given the nature of the conflict both before (during negotiations) and after the military hostilities began (operation epic fury), it would be negligent if the Intelligence Community was not monitoring that communication. Obviously, Tucker should know that; it’s a simple DUH issue.
You don’t get private time with President Trump about an issue of national security without the IC monitoring your behavior with foreign contacts. That said, the part about a potential criminal referral would depend on the nature of the communication itself.
As an example: a quid-pro-quo toward an interview with a high-level Iranian official in exchange for specific dialogue pushed through a widely followed social media platform could present legal issues (FARA etc.). Given the specific part of the video where Mr. Carlson strongly emphasizes he was never paid; it seems to me the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) is source of the issue.
Here’s the risk. According to the DOJ regulations, a person does not need to get paid by the foreign entity in order to violate FARA. However, on the other side of the issue, journalists -news or press services engaged in bona fide news or journalistic activities- are exempt from having to register under FARA guidelines. Tucker Carlson knows what his contacts were about, states his innocence and claims he is being targeted. WATCH:
CNN is bragging about the teams they have on the ground in Iran and around the war zone to provide coverage for Operation Epic Fury. [SOURCE] Which again, brings up an interesting contrast that seemingly flew under the radar from past events.
As we noted in the beginning of the Russian war in Ukraine, where was the media for that one? Where was this CNN coverage for the war in Ukraine? The Ukraine war was the only war in modern history with ZERO mainstream media reports complete with helmets, flak jackets and play-by-play reporting of every moment within the conflict. Why?
The answer is not necessarily complicated. The Ukraine war was a war of narratives. Yes, there was actual fighting, but the physical conflict itself was not in alignment with the narrative the media intended to create from it. The reality within Ukraine did not fit in the pert chart and the visuals would not ever have supported the claims.
Ukraine was/is the COVID-19 of wars. A western intelligence operation using the geography of Ukraine to push an agenda in alignment with western interests. It would not and does not serve the interests of truth and transparency for media to report from inside a battlespace that might contradict their claims. Hence, we labeled it “World War Reddit,” and it remains that way through today.
The summary of the story basically circles back to that NSA/CIA whistleblower intercept they previously were using to attack DNI Tulsi Gabbard. Now that the whistleblower’s lawyer (same lawyer as last CIA whistleblower, Ciaramella) has leaked the subject of the conversation was Jared Kushner the democrats really want to know the details.
Two foreign nationals (unknown countries) were discussing the U.S. position toward Iran. In their conversation they talked about Jared Kushner. Their conversation was intercepted by NSA/CIA using an “exceptionally sensitive surveillance method.” The intercept was written, evaluated and determined to be “gossip” but given to the ODNI, Gabbard.
The whistleblower was upset the intercept was not shared with the larger intelligence apparatus. Thus, they were angry at Gabbard. The ODNI followed the distribution for the whistleblower complaint, but not the underlying intercepted details of the conversation.
The White House has now asserted “executive privilege” over the content of the intercept, thereby bolstering the position of not sharing what was previously determined to be gossip. The DNI was asked for the details, and Gabbard has told the Democrats the White House has asserted privilege. The House and Senate Intelligence committee democrats are now big mad they don’t get to read the gossip.
(VIA WSJ) – WASHINGTON—The Trump administration told Congress it won’t share with lawmakers the classified intelligence that led to a whistleblower complaint against U.S. spy chief Tulsi Gabbard, citing presidential claims of executive privilege.
This is a little surprising to hear in someone’s outside voice. According to Jeffrey Epstein’s former lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, if his client had told him he worked for Israeli intelligence or the CIA Dershowitz could have gotten him off the charges with no jail time.
Essentially, Dershowitz is saying any sex criminals or pedophiles that work for intelligence agencies would never receive any prison sentences. WATCH (prompted):
As remarkable as it sounds, Alan Dershowitz is actually confirming what many people suspect. If a U.S. or Israeli intelligence asset commits a crime, they can leverage their position to get out of any criminal accountability.
Good grief. I’m not sure Dershowitz realizes we can hear what he is saying.
The New York Times version appears to be the most truthful, factual and cited. It also makes the most sense.
In essence, two foreign nationals were having a phone call about Iran and discussing Jared Kushner’s role and influence in the policy of Trump toward Iran. The phone call was intercepted by a foreign intelligence agency, who then relayed their interpretation of the discussion to the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).
NEW YORK TIMES – […] It was a discussion last year between two foreign nationals about Iran, not an unusual topic for American spies to study. But an intercept of that communication, collected by a foreign spy service and given to the United States.
[…] Mr. Kushner’s name was redacted in the original report from the National Security Agency, but people reading it, including the whistle-blower, were able to determine that the reference was to him.
[…] The foreign nationals, they said, were commenting on Mr. Kushner’s influence with the Trump administration. At a time last year when Mr. Kushner’s role in Middle East peace talks was less public than it is now, the foreign officials were recorded saying that he was the person to speak to in order to influence the talks.
[…] The intercept also included what officials described as “gossip” or speculation about Mr. Kushner that was not supported by other intelligence.
Allison Gill is an ally of the Lawfare network and recently sat down for an interview with NSA whistleblower attorney Andrew Bakaj; the same attorney used by former CIA whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.
This interview appears to be taking place after Bakaj revised his statements to The Guardian forcing them to rewrite the central claim of the leak he provided. The Guardian rewrote their article removing the key claim within the intelligence intercept that a foreign intelligence person was in contact with a person close to President Donald Trump.
The revision now states:
[…] “The Guardian reported earlier on Saturday that the phone conversation was between a person associated with foreign intelligence and a person close to Trump, based on Bakaj’s recollection of the complaint, which he confirmed over multiple calls. However, after publication, Bakaj said he misspoke.
He clarified his understanding of the complaint in a statement: “The NSA picked up a phone call between two members of foreign intelligence involving someone close to the Trump White House,” he said. “The NSA does not monitor individuals without a reason.” {citation}
This is not a small “revision,” it is essentially a rewrite of the central component to the whistleblower complaint. As it is now clarified two foreign people were intercepted talking about a person who knows Donald Trump. This could be any two foreign people gossiping or talking about anyone who is in the orbit of Donald Trump. That explains why intelligence analysts reviewed the NSA intercept, disregarded it and said it is hearsay likely just ‘gossip” according to New York Times reporting.
However, that said, Andrew Bakaj then appears on a podcast with Allison Gill during their effort to put traction to the claims, and Bakaj repeats the false statement. See video at 7:45:
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Vice-Chairman, Mark Warner, a man of exceptionally dubious intelligence, appears on Face the Nation for a pre-scripted interview with CBS’s Margaret Brennan. The video and transcript are below.
From his position on the SSCI, Senator Warner was one of the key players in the deployment of the Intelligence Community against President Trump’s first term in office, including his background conversations with Chris Steele and his leaking of the Carter Page FISA warrant to promote the Trump-Russia conspiracy claim and stimulate the appointment of a DOJ special counsel.
Within President Trump’s second term in office, Warner’s primary concern is having a Director of National Intelligence (DNI) who doesn’t conform to the goals and objectives of the Fourth Branch of government, the intelligence apparatus. In reality, DNI Tulsi Gabbard appears to be methodically taking apart the intelligence community weaponization system. This, when combined with Gabbard’s review of election integrity issues, has triggered the deep concern of Warner, one of the IC’s primary enablers. WATCH:
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning and welcome to ‘Face the Nation.’ We begin this morning with the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Virginia’s Mark Warner. Good to have you here.
SEN. MARK WARNER: Thank you, Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to talk about elections and security. Back on January 28, the FBI went to Fulton County, Georgia and seized ballots and 2020 voting records linked to the presidential election. The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, then was spotted outside the elections office, and she argued that her presence there had been personally requested by the president of the United States, and she had broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate and analyze intelligence related to election security. What would justify her involvement? Is there any foreign nexus that you have been informed of?
I said a few days ago, “with DNI Tulsi Gabbard putting strategic pressure from the inside, and We The People putting accountability pressure from the outside, this Deep State intelligence nut just might begin to crack. In fact, I might even argue that cracking is exactly what we are starting to see.”
Today, we see evidence of just that; perhaps even the first signs that John Ratcliffe is on board. Perhaps.
The context here is important. Within the larger administrative state network: CNN is the preferred PR firm of the State Dept.; the CIA use The Washington Post; the FBI use Politico and the New York Times; the DOJ use the New York Times and Wall Street Journal; while the control lawfare embeds within the domestic IC spread their narrative distribution to the NYT, WSJ and Politico depending on the context.
When we see the Washington Post contracting, shrinking or otherwise limited in their activity, we can be confident the feeder system from the CIA is subsequently diminishing. If the CIA was operating at full narrative weapon capacity, the Washington Post newsroom would be bustling. The opposite is also true, although we have not seen much of that until recently. So, that’s the context:
WASHINGTON – Washington Post CEO Will Lewis stepped down from his position on Saturday — throwing the prestigious Jeff Bezos-owned newspaper into further turmoil just days after the publication laid off some 300 staffers. The Washington Post announced that Lewis would be resigning effective immediately.
You know the IC narrative is falling apart quickly when even the New York Times paints the background as gossip.
Within the New York Times reporting we discover more of the underlying context for the NSA intercept.
According to the Times, the NSA intercept was of “two foreign nationals” discussing an American person with some relationship to President Trump. The underlying concern was about the conversation they intercepted.
Just pulling out the pertinent:
“a whistle-blower report about an intelligence intercept of a call between two foreign nationals discussing a person close to President Trump” … “It is not clear what country the two foreign nationals were from, but the discussion involved Iran.” … “The identity of the person close to Mr. Trump could not be immediately determined.”
[…] “One official said there was no other intelligence that led officials to think the two officials had been speaking truthfully. Some intelligence analysts concluded the two foreign nationals were either gossiping or deliberately spreading misinformation. As a result of those doubts, Ms. Gabbard moved to restrict the report’s visibility. She also provided the information to Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, according to people briefed on the events.
The acting intelligence community’s inspector general [a Biden appointee] cleared Ms. Gabbard of wrongdoing after she responded to questions about her actions.” {source}
Summary: The NSA intercepted two foreign nationals talking about Iran and gossiping about someone close to Trump. The NSA snooper documented the conversation. Intel analysts concluded the two foreign nationals were just gossiping. DNI Gabbard did not put credibility on the issue, but to be safe informed Susie Wiles of the intercept. That’s it.
