As the House impeachment of President Donald Trump becomes more of a forgone political conclusion it’s worth considering what terms and conditions Senate Leader Mitch McConnell will extract in order to preserve a Trump Presidency.
Most political pundits will not correctly outline the status of the possibilities, because most political pundits are willfully blind to the structure of the McConnell Senate.
First, McConnell doesn’t care about holding a majority position in the Senate.  Whether he is a majority leader or a minority leader doesn’t matter to McConnell. In fact McConnell’s political skill-set does better in the minority than the majority.
The preferred political position for Mitch McConnell is where he has between 45 and 49 republican Senators, and the Democrats hold the Majority with around 55.  Of course with Reid’s retirement, this would now be with Majority leader Chuck Schumer holding office.
Why does McConnell prefer the minority position?
The answer is where you have had to actually follow Mitch McConnell closely to see how he works.   When the Majority has around 52 to 55 seats, they need McConnell to give them 8 to 9 votes to overcome the three-fifths (60 vote) threshold for their legislative needs.  It is in the process of trade and payment for those 8 to 9 votes where McConnell makes more money, and holds more power, than as a sitting Majority Leader.
The 60 vote threshold, and McConnell’s incredible skillset in the minority, is where he shines.  Each of the needed votes to achieve sixty is worth buckets of indulgence to the minority leader.  This is why McConnell never changed the Senate rules for legislative passage.
(more…)

With the House calendar extended to December 20th it now appears the full House vote on articles of impeachment will take place within this year. Today, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced her instructions to House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler to assemble the formal articles of impeachment to be brought to the House floor.

~ Read Speaker Pelosi Announcement HERE ~

Speaker Pelosi did not provide many details; however, Democrats have said they are considering multiple articles of impeachment against Trump including abuse of power, obstruction of justice and obstruction of Congress. The House Judiciary Committee is expected to draw up articles of impeachment as soon as next week.
This is the first time in History that articles of impeachment will be assembled without an official full house vote to initiate the impeachment process. This is also the first impeachment effort without the House attaining recognized judicial enforcement authority.  The vote will take place before the Supreme Court weighs-in on the legal framework for the House effort. The House judicial enforcement authority, not being recognized by the Supreme Court, likely had a strong bearing on the timing.
(more…)

The CIA primarily leaks PR spin to the Washington Post.  The FBI primarily leaks PR spin to the New York Times; and the State Dept. primarily leaks PR spin to CNN.  This narrative distribution model is the one constant in an ever changing universe.
Cue the audio visual…  Obviously the prior Washington Post effort to conflate the Durham investigation with the Horowitz investigation didn’t get the desired result.  As a consequence it only took a few days before the Washington Post was back at it (Matt Zapotosky and Devlin Barrett again) to try obfuscation 2.0; this time with Joseph Mifsud.

For three years the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN have sold the FBI claim that Professor Joseph Mifsud was a Russian operative passing information about Clinton’s emails to George Papadopoulos.
That essential point underpins their defense of the predicate for the CIA and FBI to open the July 31st investigation of the Trump campaign.   Again, for three years Joseph Mifsud was sold as a Russian operative; working on behalf of Russian interests.
That “Mifsud is a Russian asset” claim is the fulcrum of Crossfire Hurricane.   Mifsud has to be a Russian asset, or else…  George Papadopoulos talking to Australian Diplomat Alexander Downer about Mifsud is simply political gossip without merit, value or bearing.
The key point is Mifsud has to be a Russian operative in order for all of the downstream FBI activity to be justified.   If Mifsud ain’t Russian, the CIA and FBI have a problem.
(more…)

Devin Nunes appeared on Tucker Carlson to discuss the impeachment events of the day.  However, thankfully they also discussed the revelation that HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff randomly started issuing subpoenas for telephone information.  That’s the part I find very troubling.  Notice how the media simply ignores it?  This is a pretty big damn deal.
Under what authority can congress arbitrarily send subpoenas for the private phone records of citizens, journalists, and fellow politicians?  Can Nunes now start sending subpoenas for the phone records of Michael Isikoff around the time of the Flynn phone call leak?… and can congress publish those call records as a part of some possibly inquiry into the leak… and we can cross reference to identify the FBI leaker?….

(more…)

Representative Matt Gaetz confronted the jaw-dropping level of political bias and Trump Derangement Syndrome exhibited by Chairman Nadler’s panel of left-wing experts.
With a visible display of righteous indignation Mr. Gaetz dressed down the pompous liberal law professor, Pamela Karlan, and cut right to the heart of the matter with the entire panel.  WATCH:

(more…)

Professor Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School became the pompous face of the academic impeachment panel today when she ridiculed the son of President Trump in an effort to highlight her resistance bona-fides.   Imagine the hate that necessarily exists in the heart of a witness who would rehearse such a line to gain tribal cheer.

.
Professor Karlan’s tone-deaf effort is a result of a life in an echo-chamber of far-left liberalism. However, the exhibited hatred did more to support the argument of the impeachment opposition than a thousand hours of granular testimony.  Karlan’s disposition during her diatribe is a case study in Trump Derangement Syndrome.

(more…)

A Washington Post spin article attempts to defend the DOJ/FBI “small group” 2016 campaign effort by claiming vindication from IG Horowitz and U.S. AG Barr not accepting the finding.   But not so fast…
Before getting to the WaPo narrative construction a little background review is worthwhile; starting with the original investigative purpose of the IG review.  The Horowitz review was initiated to look into how the DOJ and FBI secured a Title-1 FISA surveillance warrant against U.S. person Carter Page:
IG Horowitz was never investigating the predicate claims that initiated the CIA/FBI operation known as “Crossfire Hurricane”.  So how exactly would AG Barr and IG Horowitz be diverging on an aspect to a predicate that Horowitz was never reviewing?
Additionally, IG Horowitz was never tasked or empowered to interview CIA officers who are known to have been at the heart of the pre-July 2016 operation.  Horowitz was/is focused on the DOJ and FBI compliance with legal requirements for the FISA application that was assembled for use in October 2016, and renewed throughout 2017.
(more…)

In advance of the Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler and Lawfare Committee releasing a highly partisan HPSCI report to facilitate a political impeachment effort, the House republicans have provided a proactive 123 page rebuttal report [pdf link here] the media will ignore.
A good encapsulation paragraph within the executive summary: “The Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is not the organic outgrowth of serious misconduct; it is an orchestrated campaign to upend our political system. The Democrats are trying to impeach a duly elected President based on the accusations and assumptions of unelected bureaucrats who disagreed with President Trump’s policy initiatives and processes. They are trying to impeach President Trump because some unelected bureaucrats were discomforted by an elected President’s telephone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. They are trying to impeach President Trump because some unelected bureaucrats chafed at an elected President’s “outside the beltway” approach to diplomacy.”

[link to House pdf version of report]

1. President Trump has a deep-seated, genuine, and reasonable skepticism of Ukraine due to its history of pervasive corruption.
(more…)

There has been a great deal of discussion about the pending release of the DOJ Inspector General report on potential FISA abuses on December 9th, but no word on the declassification material since AG Bill Barr was granted authority on May 23rd, 2019.

Amid the twists and turns many people have forgotten about the material congress asked President Trump to declassify a year-and-a-half ago.  Additionally there has been some material cited that just seemingly slipped away without follow-up.  Consider:

• Whatever happened to the forty pages of Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe text messages that Catherine Herridge noted nine months ago?  Herridge only published four of the pages in March 2019.
• Why are the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages still redacted two years after their original release (December 1st, 2017)?
• Where’s the release of the Susan Rice inauguration day memo to the file?
• Why didn’t the DOJ/FBI release all of the Bruce Ohr 302’s without redaction?  Will those fully unredacted 302’s be part of the IG report release?
• Where’s the unredacted David Archey FBI declarations that were previously ordered to be released by a DC judge?
• The Mueller investigation ended 9 months ago.  Why are we still not able to see the  unredacted three authorization memos that Rosenstein gave to the special counsel on May 17th, August 2nd and October 20th, 2017?

Those simple questions (and releases) are in addition to the original list that congress provided to President Trump back in the summer of 2018.  A declassification list that DAG Rod Rosenstein asked President Trump not to release until after the Mueller investigation. Again, the Mueller investigation ended nine months ago; President Trump authorized AG Bill Barr to declassify the material six months ago on May 23rd.
(more…)

In the past several days; and in anticipation of an inspector general report/release tasked to look into the FISA processes of the prior administration; I have been assembling a file, a series of reminder questions, that peer into the heart of the 2015/2016 FISA surveillance.  Today, is another reminder…  [*ahem* Sidney Powell, please note]

Left to right: Kathryn H. Ruemmler, President Obama, Lisa Monaco and Susan Rice.

Knowing what we know now, consider this long forgotten letter from Susan Rice’s lawyer Kathryn Ruemmler.  Ms. Ruemmler is currently the global co-chairman of the Latham & Watkins white collar criminal defense practice; she formerly served as White House Counsel to President Obama.  Ask yourself: how do these paragraphs reconcile?

[Feb 23, 2018] The memorandum to file drafted by Ambassador Rice memorialized an important national security discussion between President Obama and the FBI Director and the Deputy Attorney General. President Obama and his national security team were justifiably concerned about potential risks to the Nation’s security from sharing highly classified information about Russia with certain members of the Trump transition team, particularly Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
[…] While serving as National Security Advisor, Ambassador Rice was not briefed on the existence of any FBI investigation into allegations of collusion between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia, and she later learned of the fact of this investigation from Director Comey’s subsequent public testimony.
Ambassador Rice was not informed of any FISA applications sought by the FBI in its investigation, and she only learned of them from press reports after leaving office. (link)

How could Ms. Rice be aware of a “national security compromise”, “particularly surrounding Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn” after a “briefing by the FBI”, if she was not briefed on the existence of an FBI investigation”?
See the problem?
(more…)