Earlier today Bill Barr gave an interview to Fox News on the sidelines of a law enforcement event in Chicago.  The U.S. Attorney General discussed the ongoing investigation by U.S. Attorney John Durham, and gave high praise to FBI Director Christopher Wray for his “outstanding support” therein.   [Link to Fox Interview]  Excerpt Video:

(Via Fox) […] The attorney general said that while he’s assisting in connecting Durham with countries that could have valuable information, Durham is running the show.

(more…)

Earlier today representatives John Ratcliffe and Doug Collins react to the successful operation to capture/kill Baghdadi along with recent events surrounding the John Durham investigation shifting into a criminal probe.
First, John Ratcliffe discusses the killing of Baghdadi and the possibility of criminal indictments as the Durham investigation focuses on the origin of the Russia investigation.
[wpvideo HHJ5dC26]
.
Additionally, Doug Collins discusses current events:
(more…)

CTH has some new readers, so against the backdrop of the UniParty in Washington DC jumping into action to criticize President Trump’s decision to withdraw from Syria; and against the backdrop of President Trump authorizing an operation last night that killed ISIS leader Baghdadi, perhaps a little factual and historic refresher is in order….

On September 30th 2016 the New York Times quietly released a leaked audio recording of Secretary John Kerry meeting with multiple factions associated within Syria.
The 40-minute discussion took place on the sidelines of a United Nations General Assembly in New York. The meeting took place at the Dutch Mission to the United Nations on Sept. 22nd 2016:

[…] Kerry’s off-record conversation was apparently with two dozen ‘Syrian civilians’, all from US backed opposition-linked NGO’s in education and medical groups supposedly working in ‘rebel-held’ (aka terrorist-held) areas in Syria.
This opposition conclave also included ‘rescue workers’ which can only be ambassadors from the White Helmets, a pseudo NGO which serves as Washington and London’s primary PR front in pursuit of a “No Fly Zone’ in Syria, and it’s being bankrolled by the US, UK, EU and other coalition states to the tune of well over $100 million (so far). (link)

When you listen to the audio recording (embedded below) it becomes immediately obvious what was going on in 2014, 2015 and 2016 as an outcome of policy from the White House. In addition, you discover why this jaw-dropping 2016 leak/story was buried by the U.S. media and how it connects to the prior 4 years of perplexing U.S. mid-east policy.
This evidence within this single story would/should forever remove any credibility toward the U.S. foreign policy under President Obama. It also destroys the credibility of a large number of well known republicans, and explains how the prior action placed President Trump into a precarious position requiring a careful approach.
(more…)

An article today about Carter Page suing the DOJ in an effort to review the inspector general report on the FISA manipulation prior to publication provides an opportunity to review the insignificance of Carter Page.   First the Carter Page perspective:

(Via Epoch Times) The former Trump-campaign associate who was wiretapped by the FBI, sued the Department of Justice on Oct. 21, demanding that the government provide him with an opportunity to review, before it is made public, the forthcoming inspector general’s report on potential surveillance abuses in his case. (read more)

What Carter Page apparently doesn’t recognize is his insignificance in the overall DOJ and FBI purpose behind the FISA that carries his name. Page was never exploited by the FISA Title-1 warrant -as granted by the FISA court- for the same reason Page was never investigated by the FBI or Mueller team, he was irrelevant.
Carter Page was a means to an end; the end goal was to get the Steele Dossier into the FBI as an official investigative work product. Perhaps a little review of the three-year research detail will help us better prepare for the IG report.
The “Steele Dossier” was important to the FBI because the content within it is the material they needed to present as justification for an ongoing investigation… that ultimately was handed to Andrew Weissmann and Robert Mueller; and the investigation of the material therein was later authorized by Rod Rosenstein in his August 2017 expanded scope memo.
The dossier is what’s important. Carter Page never was.
(more…)

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy weighs in on the latest developments within the Michael Flynn case.   As McCarthy points out, if Judge Sullivan doesn’t accept the defense position of gross misconduct by the prosecution; and if Sullivan does not dismiss the case; Flynn could end up on a worse position than the prior plea agreement.
Additionally McCarthy discusses the potential risks present for John Brennan, James Clapper and James Comey; and then goes in to his perspective on the impeachment inquiry.

U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley sent a forboding tweet a few days ago outlining the possibility of the FISA investigation would result in a “deep six” cover-up.

Grassley has a unique perspective on a very specific element to the construct of the FISA application, and the political use therein, that most have forgotten.  Back in 2018 when Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Grassley was hot on the trail of a very specific individual that has had almost no attention since. The election clock ran out on Grassley; the mid-terms took place; and Grassley was never able to get to his target.
The background to this tweet needs a little context {GO DEEP} and surrounds two individuals who have NOT been identified as being questioned by either IG Michael Horowitz or U.S. Attorney John Durham.
Those two individuals are: Daniel Jones, former lead staffer for former SSCI Vice-Chair Dianne Feinstein; and a lawyer for Christopher Steele named Adam Waldman.
(more…)

The Christopher Steele dossier was called “Crown Material” by FBI agents within the small group during their 2016 political surveillance operation. The “Crown” description reflects the unofficial British intelligence aspect to the dossier as provided by Steele.

In May 2019 former House Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy stated there are emails from former FBI Director James Comey that outline instructions from CIA Director John Brennan to include the “Crown Material” within the highly political Intelligence Community Assessment.
Specifically outlined by Gowdy, the wording of the Comey email is reported to say:

…”Brennan is insisting the Crown Material be included in the intel assessment.”

However, on May 23rd, 2017, in testimony -under oath- to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) John Brennan stated [@01:54:28]:

GOWDY: Director Brennan, do you know who commissioned the Steele dossier?
BRENNAN: I don’t.
GOWDY: Do you know if the bureau [FBI] ever relied on the Steele dossier as part of any court filing, applications?
BRENNAN: I have no awareness.
GOWDY: Did the CIA rely on it?
BRENNAN: No.
GOWDY: Why not?
BRENNAN: Because we didn’t. It wasn’t part of the corpus of intelligence information that we had. It was not in any way used as a basis for the Intelligence Community Assessment that was done. Uh … it was not.

(more…)

After the DOJ/FBI advanced their defensive efforts last weekend via the New York Times and NBC, now the CIA/ODNI faction step forth with the same intents and purposes.
CIA defending journalist Natasha Bertrand has been participating in the multi-year PR effort which helped frame the CIA/ODNI talking points against President Trump, and she is deployed again in the latest effort within Politico.   The timing here is predictable.

(Via Politico) President Donald Trump’s obsession with former CIA director John Brennan could be on a collision course with an ongoing Justice Department probe as Attorney General Bill Barr takes a more hands-on approach to examining the intelligence community’s actions in 2016.
[…] Durham’s report is likely to land well after the results of an inquiry by the Justice Department’s Inspector General, who is examining the FBI’s applications to a secret court in 2016 and 2017 to obtain surveillance warrants on a Trump campaign aide.

(more…)

With media reporting that U.S. Attorney John Durham has expanded the timeline and scope of his investigation into U.S. government and intelligence community activity during the 2016 election, there’s an interesting quote from NBC:

…”Justice Department officials have said that Durham has found something significant, and that critics should be careful.”…

The expanded investigative timeline is now into May 2017 when Mueller was appointed special counsel, and would mean all of the preceding (and surrounding) activity leading up to Mueller would be reviewed.   With that carefully in mind….
During the 2016 effort to weaponize the institutions of government against the outside candidacy of Donald Trump, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) was headed by Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein.  After the 2016 election Senator Feinstein abdicated her vice-chair position to Senator Mark Warner in January 2017.
While the SSCI was engaged in their part of the 2016 effort Vice-Chair Feinstein’s lead staffer was a man named Daniel Jones. Dan Jones was the contact point between the SSCI and Fusion-GPS.
After the election, and after Feinstein abdicated, Dan Jones left the committee to continue paying Fusion-GPS (Glenn Simpson) for ongoing efforts toward the impeachment insurance policy angle.
Feinstein appears to have left because she didn’t want to deal with the consequences of a President Trump, IF he discovered the SSCI involvement. Dan Jones left because with a Trump presidency the SSCI, now co-chaired by Senator Mark Warner, needed arms-length plausible deniability amid their 2017 operations to continue the removal effort (soft coup).
The trail for this plausible deniability process and ongoing soft-coup effort first surfaces with Dan Jones appearing in the early 2017 text messages between Senator Warner and the liaison for Christopher Steele, lawyer and lobbyist Adam Waldman:
(more…)

The background context has already been outlined –SEE HERE– so we won’t repeat.  Instead, we look at today’s defensive narrative engineering from the New York Times with a similar perspective, but a different set of reminders.
Content and distribution tells us this information is from the DOJ and FBI faction of the “Small Group“.  Not accidentally, and VERY importantly, this is the same faction under the microscope of Inspector General Michael Horowitz and his pending IG report.  Additionally, and again very importantly, the principles within the IG report have already had an opportunity to review the part of the upcoming report that highlights their conduct.

So this New York Times reporting, from conversations with the DOJ and FBI small group participants, is coming out in advance of the IG report and with their review in mind.
Here’s the article, emphasis mine:

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors reviewing the origins of the Russia investigation have asked witnesses pointed questions about any anti-Trump bias among former F.B.I. officials who are frequent targets of President Trump and about the earliest steps they took in the Russia inquiry, according to former officials and other people familiar with the review.

[Note “prosecutors” is plural; more than one.  “prosecutors” also implies a shift from investigative review, to a likelihood of criminal conduct.  The media presentation of John Durham has gone from a single U.S. Attorney with a mandate from his boss, to a group of people, ‘prosecutors’, working with the U.S. Attorney.]
(more…)