Against new information that U.S. Attorney John Durham has lengthened the time-frame for this investigative inquiry into the DOJ and FBI activity around the 2016 election, earlier today Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo revealed (and President Trump tweeted) the FISA report by Michael Horowitz will be released on Friday October 18th.
If that time-frame for the IG report is accurate, that means the classification review has been completed; any remaining classified information not specifically authorized in the inspector general report, a decision granted to AG Bill Barr, would be placed in a classified appendix that is not available to the public.

A publication date in/around October 18th would also mean the time allotted for principal review has expired.  Generally the people whose conduct is under review are granted a preview of the report that covers their activity.  The IG may or may not include any response from the principals outlined.  If the IG permits inclusion of a principal response, the IG usually outlines additional information to rebut or support the principal position.
A final draft is assembled only after the OIG administrative referencer makes a final review of all statements of fact and provides citations therein.  Then things get a little troublesome…
If Bartiromo is accurate as to the size of the IG report; this is where the ‘summary of IG findings‘ becomes critical.  Generally speaking the IG writes the full body of the report, but may not author the ‘executive summary’.  The executive summary can be written by administrative state career officials and their priority is institutional preservation.  If they are motivated to shape public opinion of the report content, the executive summary may be written to dilute institutional damage outlined within the main body of the report.
(more…)

Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan appears on Fox News this morning to discuss the current democrat plan to impeach President Trump via an anonymous complaint.   It seems ridiculous the democrats would advance such a proposition, yet here we are.

(more…)

President Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani and former U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova appeared together on Fox News to discuss the ongoing impeachment effort by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House democrats.

(more…)

Journalist John Solomon appeared on Fox News with Sean Hannity last night to drop a considerably important revelation. According to Solomon’s reporting the White House has open-sourced evidence that Ukraine re-opened their investigation into Burisma Holdings and Hunter Biden in February 2019; several months before President Trump spoke to President Zelenskyy.

(more…)

One aspect heavily monitored by CTH surrounds frequent redactions to ongoing DOJ releases that touch upon former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. An additionally annoying thorn would be the continued holding-back of Rosenstein’s expanded scope memos authorizing the expansion of Mueller’s special investigation. [They remain hidden]
The reason Rosenstein’s behavior remains a high-priority is simply because without his ongoing participation and authorization in 2017 and 2018 the Weissmann/Mueller probe would not have been able to continue.
Rosenstein is a central character to all events, and at the end of the Mueller investigation -through today- the DOJ continued to black out any information that evidenced Rosenstein’s duplicitous activity.
As a result, CTH has viewed the transparent DOJ redactions as a purposeful effort to protect Rosenstein.  However, recent activity and media reports outline the possibility of another motive.  Perhaps, just perhaps, the evidence of Rosenstein’s activities has been withheld because Rosenstein is a subject of the Durham investigation.  First watch this:

.
Setting aside the common mistake in part of that report by John Roberts, the fact that Durham is looking into the Mueller phase of the coup (early 2017); in combination with White House officials now sharing documents surrounding the Mueller-Rosenstein White House visit; and accepting the ongoing redactions by the DOJ on material that touches Rosenstein; there is a moderate possibility Rosenstein is now a Durham target.
(more…)

(White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham)  The President has done nothing wrong, and the Democrats know it.  For purely political reasons, the Democrats have decided their desire to overturn the outcome of the 2016 election allows them to conduct a so-called impeachment inquiry that ignores the fundamental rights guaranteed to every American.
These partisan proceedings are an affront to the Constitution—as they are being held behind closed doors and deny the President the right to call witnesses, to cross-examine witnesses, to have access to evidence, and many other basic rights.

(more…)

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her Lawfare allies can change House rules (they did). Pelosi and Lawfare can also change House impeachment rules (they did). Pelosi/Lawfare can change committee rules (they did); and in doing so they can remove House republicans from the entire process… Which They Did.  However, what Lawfare and Pelosi cannot change is The U.S. Constitution, which they are desperate to confront.
Speaker Pelosi’s ‘Lawfare House rules‘ and/or ‘Lawfare impeachment rules‘ cannot supersede the constitutional separation of powers.
Nancy Pelosi cannot decree an “official impeachment inquiry”, and as a consequence nullify a constitutional firewall between the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch.

~ Speaker Pelosi and House Attorney Douglas Letter ~

All of that said, there is a distinct difference between a congressional subpoena intended to compel generic testimony, and a congressional subpoena intended to compel impeachment testimony.
Attempting to compel testimony that crosses through the separation of powers; and goes even further in an attempt to penetrate the firewall around executive privilege; requires the House -or a committee therein- to carry “Judicial Authority“.
“Judicial Authority” is not absolute authority, but rather a legal reference and framework that forms the basis for an impeachment ‘compulsion demand‘ (or subpoena) by the House.  Judicial Authority is the House saying they have a legal basis to make a demand.
The reason judicial authority is necessary, is because creating Judicial authority, via the Legislative Branch full chamber vote, gives the Executive Branch access to appeal any legislative demand via the Judicial Branch (federal courts).
(more…)

U.S. Ambassador Gordon Sondland was directed by the State Department not to appear Tuesday for an interview with House committees leading the fraudulent impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. The non-appearance follows Chairman Adam Schiff’s manipulative media releases based on Ambassador Kurt Volker testimony.
Knowing that testimony from “impeachment inquiry” participation is being selectively used to create a false narrative; and knowing the committees’ will not release full transcripts and or documents gained therein; the administration is not going to assist Pelosi and Schiff’s scheme to create the illusion of something that doesn’t exist.
These “requests for interviews” are not legal subpoenas because the House has not created judicial authority within the committees’ by holding a full House vote to authorize. Therefore non-appearance puts more pressure on Pelosi to hold a House vote. Republican members Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, Mark Meadows and Lee Zeldin explain:

.

(more…)

Sometimes dates are just data-points.  However, sometimes data-points help structure information timelines showing a connection between two seemingly disparate events.  When this happens, dates start to tell a story.
The CIA operative “whistle-blower” letter to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, and Senate Intel Chair Richard Burr, was on August 12th (link).  Now here’s Speaker Pelosi’s modified House rules for impeachment [116th Congress]:
[scribd id=429229553 key=key-qOLCD0TRon8wgt3IPfoQ mode=scroll]
.
Quite a coincidence?
(more…)

President Trump Campaign Manager Brad Parscale is reporting that Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey is attempting to block President Trump from speaking at an event in the city on Thursday October 10th.   This is beyond outrageous.

[Trump Campaign] The radical leftist mayor of Minneapolis, Jacob Frey, is abusing the power of his office and attempting to extort President Trump’s re-election campaign by conjuring a phony and outlandish bill for security in an effort to block a scheduled Keep America Great rally. Democrat Mayor Frey is using the bogus security charges to pressure the Target Center, site of the contracted October 10, 2019 rally, into preventing Minnesota residents from exercising their First Amendment rights in support of President Trump.
Frey’s city government preemptively informed the Target Center that it would be responsible for $530,000 in security and other costs related to the event. The Target Center attempted to pass the costs on to the Trump campaign under threat of withholding the use of the arena.
(more…)