Well, here we are again; another leaked transcript, this time from DOJ Official Bruce Ohr. And as with the prior two transcript leaks, we don’t get the raw information.  So let me first, necessarily, reassert our CTH position on these “leaks”.
Leaking is bad, period; in all directions. Because *leaking* is simply a method, a mechanism, to direct and control the focus of sunlight upon illicit action. Regardless of whether you support or oppose the message within any individual leak; the leak itself does not expose corruption…. only full and unfiltered information can expose corruption.  That means we need the actual raw transcripts to make determinations for ourselves.
As a factual standard for honesty and sunlight, CTH would never describe a transcript where we could not provide the reader with the raw and underlying material.  We have held this standard for many years; most of you know that. The truth has no agenda.

That said, someone is leaking congressional transcripts and a current tug-of-war exists between two opposing narrative engineers.  The heavily promoted New York Times article last Friday, was based on leaks of James Baker Transcripts, from sources who were responding to the leaks from other sources that were given to the Epoch Times.   Each side in the DOJ/FBI corruption story is currently leaking to advance their interests.
Three congressional committees have requested the release of witness transcripts.  HPSCI via Devin Nunes (September 2018); and the joint House Judiciary/Oversight committee (December 2018).  Congressional allies of President Trump (Nunes, Jordan, Meadows and Collins) are being blocked by corrupt cabinet members within the current administration.
(more…)

If you wait long enough, the Lawfare actors brazenly expose their intents.  Cue the example today as former SDNY U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara showcases the ideology behind the DOJ and FBI weaponizing their offices based on political policy differences.
It has been outlined that President Trump would prefer to withdraw the U.S. from NATO. Trump’s view stems from NATO allies (Germany) engaging with NATO adversaries (Russia) with strategic energy policy (gas pipeline) to benefit Russia; while simultaneously demanding the U.S. taxpayer fund the defense of Germany (and EU) from Russia.
In response to reports that President Trump may withdraw from NATO, a strategic U.S. policy shift, Preet Bharara demands “impeachment and conviction”:

This clear example evidences the mentality within the DOJ and FBI that is becoming more openly obvious.  The institutions of the DOJ were/are weaponized, against candidate and president Trump, based on political differences and viewpoints.

Against the backdrop of a New York Times article attempting to justify the FBI opening a counterintelligence operation against Donald Trump the current narrative du-jour is to claim the investigation was considered as an outcome of the firing of James Comey in 2017.  This is factually false.
FBI Director James Comey outlined the specifics of when the counterintelligence operation began during his March 20, 2017 testimony. Pay close attention. FBI Director James Comey -together with NSA head Admiral Mike Rogers- testified to congress specifically about the timing and notification (first three minutes of the video):

Rep. Stefanik: [01:12] …”when did you notify the White House, the DNI or congressional leadership”?
James Comey: …”good question. Congressional leadership, sometime recently they were briefed on the nature of the investigation, as I said. Obviously the department of justice has been aware of it all along”…

Watch the first 3 minutes of that video. Notice the discomfort etc. We have previously outlined why THAT is such a big deal –SEE HERE– Comey is discussing the notification to congress that took place approximately a week earlier. Prior to that congressional notification FBI Director Comey admits to keeping congress in the dark “because of the sensitivity of the matter” from July 2016 through March 2017.
The issue of the counterintelligence timing becomes an even bigger deal when contrast with the recently exposed testimony from FBI attorney Lisa Page.  Pay attention to Lisa Page and then contrast it against CIA Director Brennan’s testimony:
(more…)

Suspicious cat sparks are flying as Maria Bartiromo questions Connecticut Democrat Rep. Jim Himes about the intents and purposes of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) in the upcoming investigative sessions.
HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff is closely coordinating with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, White House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings and Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler on the pre-established impeachment road map.
Preliminary oversight subpoenas and witness testimony kicks-off immediately after the Superbowl with a February 7th hearing for Michael Cohen and Lanny Davis.

Andrew McCarthy has a great common sense Op-Ed written today [SEE HERE].  One of the key points McCarthy makes is akin to a bull licking a NYT journalist on the face.
The NYT wrote their article about the FBI opening an investigation on President Trump ‘as if‘ that was some big revelation; however, McCarthy points out the FBI believed the Steele Dossier and used it as evidence in their FISA applications.  The Steele Dossier was only about Donald Trump, no-one else.  The fact that the FBI would believe and use the Steele Dossier is proof alone their investigation was always and only about Donald Trump.

In October 2015 the DOJ announced it was dropping the investigation into the IRS, Lois Lerner, and the unlawful sharing of taxpayer data in the IRS targeting investigation surrounding True The Vote et al.

As a direct consequence of the DOJ decision, congressional inquiry into the IRS targeting matter seemingly dropped from the radar.
However, if you draw a line from the original intent of the entire enterprise, the post-2010 mid-term “shellacking”/”secret research project“, forward to the 2016 election cycle an interested observer might still be left asking:

“why did the IRS, through Lois Lerner, deliver the 1+ million pages of tax filings, to include the entire donor list of Tea Party and patriot groups, through 21 CD-ROMs and not by electronic data transfer. Information that was specifically sent to Eric Holder and the U.S. Department of Justice”?

This is an obvious question which, despite the numerous congressional hearings on the matter, was never asked – nor answered.
The entire scheme is riddled with complexity; almost too complex for the average person to understand, and seriously difficult to summarize. However, when you boil it down here’s the essential components that are no longer suspicion or supposition, but factually provable: (more…)

President Donald Trump tweets a response to a recent New York Times article citing the internal FBI debate about opening an investigation on him personally:

The New York Times article was based on leaks from sources who were responding to the leaks from other sources that were given to the Epoch Times.   Each side in the DOJ/FBI corruption story is currently leaking to advance their interests.
(more…)

The leak wars have officially begun.  “Caveat emptor” (buyer beware) is the general warning to all interested followers of the story-lines.

In response to leaks of congressional testimony to The Epoch Times (Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe) damaging to the prior narratives of the DOJ and FBI; the opposing side of the political continuum begins leaking transcripts to the New York Times (James Baker) favorable to the DOJ and specifically FBI.  Damn these insufferable leakers, their agendas, and their weaponized political motives; all of them.
CTH suspected this bull sh*t was going to start as soon as we saw the first Lisa Page transcript leak.
As a result we are now reduced to reviewing information through the pre-filter of the media outlet delivering the analysis of the transcript; a process CTH hates with the passion of a thousand supernovas.
The New York Times leak-angle is to justify *why* the FBI contemplated opening an investigation on candidate, president-elect and president Trump . – SEE HERE –  That said, sticking with the Epoch Times leak-angle on Lisa Page testimony for a moment, there is an aspect to the CIA activity of John Brennan which confirms prior suspicions.
Here’s the part that pertains to earlier CTH research on the issue of Brennan, the CIA, and more importantly Fusion-GPS contract employee Nellie Ohr who we confirmed also worked for the CIA:
(more…)

In the last 24 hours The Epoch Times has become a conduit for leaked information from inside the joint House congressional committee (Oversight/Judiciary) that was investigating DOJ and FBI corruption. [Two Stories: See Here and See Here]
The joint House committee previously requested approval from the DOJ and FBI for transcripts of all witness testimony to be released.  In response, Deputy FBI Director David Bowditch, citing possible interference with the Mueller investigation, refused to release the transcripts.  However, it appears someone from within the committee, likely Mark Meadows, following a pattern previously exclusive to John Solomon (The Hill), is now leaking those witness transcripts to The Epoch Times.
The leaked transcripts are not being made available; however, articles are being written from those who are reviewing them.  The first is an article by Jeff Carlson about the testimony by former FBI lawyer Lisa Page.  It is a lengthy article and I would urge all who are interested in her testimony to read it: SEE HERE.  There is a wealth of new information that fills in many of the gaps from prior research.

One of the immediately interesting aspects of the Page testimony goes directly to the issue of why the witness transcripts are not being released, and the inherent risk to the small group inside the DOJ and FBI who were coordinating the Clinton and Trump probes.
Lisa Page outlines the people who were at the center of the “small group team” within the FBI (emphasis mine):
(more…)

In December CTH outlined the likely sequence of events that professional democrats will follow.  Michael Cohen and Robert Mueller provide the first parts of the foundation.  A week ago House Speaker Nancy Pelosi published rules confirming the general outline and sequencing.  Yesterday the DOJ confirmed the timing for Robert Mueller.
Today House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings confirms the timing of Michael Cohen.  Public testimony for Michael Cohen is scheduled for February 7th:

Washington, D.C. (Jan. 10, 2019)—Today, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, announced the schedule for Committee hearings in January and February and issued the following statement:

“I thank Michael Cohen for agreeing to testify before the Oversight Committee voluntarily.  I want to make clear that we have no interest in inappropriately interfering with any ongoing criminal investigations, and to that end, we are in the process of consulting with Special Counsel Mueller’s office.  The Committee will announce additional information in the coming weeks.”  (link)

(more…)