Tick-tock-bombshell club member John Solomon drops an explosive statement on Sean Hannity.  Oddly, there’s a factual part of his statement CTH agrees with; and a structural part of the background that is almost certain never to reach sunlight.  First, the substance:

(Transcript) […] “In May of 2017 there was a document identified to a small number of people in the United States government. It’s in the possession of the Defense Intelligence Agency.  For eighteen months there’s been an effort to resist declassifying that document; I know that that document contains extraordinary exculpatory information about General Flynn. I don’t believe the president has ever been told about the existence of this document.  One lawmaker discovered it, but was thwarted by the Defense Intelligence Agency in his efforts to disclose it. I think we should all ask for that declassification; get that out; it may enlighten the judge; it will certainly enlighten the American public.”

From the time-frame disclosed we can reasonably infer what this document is; at least what background surrounds it.
♦“In May of 2017”… The document is likely part of an intelligence product that was produced for President Obama’s Daily Briefing (PDB), and contains unmasking information (likely done by Susan Rice) on Michael Flynn as a surveillance target.
♦“One Lawmaker discovered it”… You might remember way back in March 2017 when HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes was taken to the White House SCIF by then white house official Ezra Cohen-Watnick; and that began a series of cascading events.
(more…)

Today there was a much hyped congressional hearing, spearheaded by sub-committee chairman Mark Meadows, into issues surrounding the Clinton Foundation and the possibility of IRS tax avoidance schemes. The backstory is of particular importance because the hearing is being framed by the ‘tick-tock-boom club‘ as something it was not.

There is a policy within the IRS that any person can report fraudulent tax filings, or the lack thereof, by any American taxpayer – toward any individual or group that is avoiding the payment of taxes. The IRS has a process to receive “tips” and claims from anyone to their investigative unit.  If the tip ends up in the IRS being able to secure missing tax payments, the tipster can get a percentage reward based on the amount of the taxes the IRS can recover.  The reward percentage is from 10% to 30% of the recovered amount.
Mr. Lawrence W. Doyle and Mr. John Moynihan, are the proprietors of a firm called MDA Analytics.  They are two ‘tipsters’, financial bounty hunters, calling themselves ‘whistle-blowers’, who have researched the Clinton Foundation and informed the IRS that based on their research the foundation owes back taxes.  They duo are hopeful to receive an IRS award based on their estimation of missing tax payments of between $400 million and $2.5 billion. In addition to their patriotic duty, this is the financial motivation behind Mr. Doyle and Mr. Moynihan.
(more…)

Backstory: According to an email chain between Google executives obtained by Fox News’ Tucker Carlson and Breitbart News, Google’s Multicultural Marketing development head Eliana Murillo sent out an email November 9th, 2016, detailing how Google had “supported partners like Voto Latino to pay for rides to the polls in key states,” which she characterized as a “silent donation.”
“We even helped them create ad campaigns to promote the rides (with support from HOLA folks who rallied and volunteered their time to help),” Murillo said. “We supported Voto Latino to help them land an interview with Sen. Meza of Arizona (key state for us) to talk about the election and how to use Google search to find information about how to vote. They were a strong partner, among many in this effort.”
Jim Jordan questions Google CEO Sundar Pichai about their specific political bias.

.
These answers ring especially hollow when you remember the video of Google CEO Sundar Pichai and all top executives discussing their sadness at the result of the 2016 election. See below:
(more…)

The transcript from the first James Comey interview with the joint house committee is rather revealing for several measures.  One of the more interesting aspects surrounds Comey claiming the FBI never investigated the Trump campaign; and yet also claiming four Trump campaign officials had FBI investigative files opened on them simultaneously.
Apparently, Comey wants everyone to believe it was a coincidence or something.
Additionally, within his ‘interview’ Comey confirmed our previous hunch on a very specific redaction within the Nunes memo:

Chuck Ross expands: The FBI opened counterintelligence investigations into four Trump campaign associates in late July 2016, earlier than previously known, former FBI Director James Comey told Congress Friday.

(more…)

Representative Jim Jordan discusses his perspectives on the closed-door testimony of former FBI Director James Comey.

(more…)

Former FBI Director James Comey gives a brief press conference following his testimony before a joint congressional committee.  Notably, Comey references the importance of saving the ‘institutions’ (and all the corrupt interests within it) above all other aspects.
When the institutions are corrupt; and the officials within the institutions are corrupt; and there is inquiry into the corrupt activity of the officials within the institutions; then retaining the institutions is the priority.  It’s that simple.  If you take down the institution you run the risk of exposing the corruption…. So anyone associated simply demands another coat of paint.

Additionally, Comey seems to infer that the removal of Jeff Sessions is now part of the Mueller/Rosenstein/Democrat approach to frame obstruction against President Trump.  Quite simply, any action by Trump to expose the previously described corruption is viewed as unlawful obstruction.  That’s their plan, and the approach has worked so far.
Comey is scheduled to return for more testimony on December 17th. Transcripts of today’s hearing should be available soon.
(more…)

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has always worked earnestly to protect whistleblowers; it is a subject near and dear to his heart.  Against the backdrop of an unexpected raid on the home of an approved and protected whistleblower named Dennis Nathan Cain, Senator Grassley writes to Inspector General Horowitz:

(Document Link)

(more…)

The Daily Caller has an exclusive report tonight that is very troubling, and, unfortunately in alignment with a previous suspicion CTH shared when it was first announced that John Huber was scheduled to testify to congress on December 5th.

According to the Daily Caller: FBI agents raided the home of a recognized Department of Justice whistleblower who privately delivered documents pertaining to the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One to a government watchdog, according to the whistleblower’s attorney.

The Justice Department’s inspector general was informed that the documents show that federal officials failed to investigate potential criminal activity regarding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Rosatom, the Russian company that purchased Uranium One, a document reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation alleges.

The delivered documents also show that then-FBI Director Robert Mueller failed to investigate allegations of criminal misconduct pertaining to Rosatom and to other Russian government entities attached to Uranium One, the document reviewed by TheDCNF alleges. Mueller is now the special counsel investigating whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election.

(more…)

Dan Bongino delivers speech about “Spygate” during David Horowitz Freedom Center Restoration Weekend 2018.  His presentation outlines how the big threads all connect to weave a very specific conspiracy.  Great presentation:

.
One of the key points Bongino highlights is how none of the paper-trail; nothing about the substance of the conspiracy; can possibly surface until *after* Robert Mueller is no longer in the picture.  Until Robert Mueller is removed, none of this information can/will surface.
That’s why every political and media entity are desperate to protect Mueller; and also why Mueller’s investigation will never end.
(more…)

A key point to finding truth in any theory is to apply the scientific method to the research; ie. question the assumption, reverse the hypothesis.

Throughout the research into the Machiavellian constructs of “Spygate” and the subsequent Mueller investigation, there have always been larger questions behind the stories.  It is a fact that most of the evidence surfaced after General Michael Flynn entered a plea agreement with special counsel Mueller on November 30th, 2017.
Why were the original Page/Strzok text messages released to the public in December 2017, and January 2018?  Perhaps more importantly: Who did the redactions within the text messages prior to their release? And why were those redactions ever made?

There’s a bunch of ‘unofficial’ evidence, or data-points, that no-one can explain how or why they came to be visible.  The data did not surface sequentially; but it surely surfaced purposefully from within the apparatus of government.
Just like the questions about who redacted information inside the 600 pages text messages between DOJ/FBI Lawyer Lisa Page and FBI investigator Peter Strzok; putting the downstream data-points together leads to a series of questions that remain the subject of much speculation through today:

• How do we find out about the Mark Warner text messages?
• Who publicly released the Carter Page FISA application?
• Where did the four day flood of information (Dec 1st – 4th, 2017) about Lisa Page and Peter Strzok come from?
• Who released that Page/Strzok information to the media?  Why?
• Who made the decision not to indict James Wolfe for leaking classified information?
• Why be so specific about details within the Wolfe indictment; then dismiss them?
• Who made the decision (FISA ap) NOT TO redact the key FISC clerk stamp?
• Where is all of this “unofficial” evidence/information coming from?
• Why?

For a long time CTH has looked at these questions from the position that the information was adverse to the interests of the DOJ; therefore we operated on the assumption that someone within the apparatus of government was leaving a trail of information with good intention.  However, over time – and with the absence of any accountability being delivered, there is also another motive that deserves attention and review.
(more…)