Perhaps, just perhaps, being cautiously optimistic, we appear to be gaining momentum toward a massive dose of sunlight on the 2016 FBI/DOJ “Trump Project”.
In the interview below, Senator Rand Paul outlines his concerns with the intelligence use of FISA warrants and then drops a verbal MOAB right in the middle of the interview.
After he outlines the general FISA concern, Senator Rand Paul cuts straight to the heart of matter and righteously points to the increasing evidence that the DOJ and FBI were in collusion against a presidential candidate.  Must Watch:

(more…)

Justice-time for Christmas?  Well, it would appear AG Jeff Sessions has instructed the DOJ to follow something similar to the basic investigative outline CTH recommended on November 3rd regarding Uranium One. When Katica discovered the FOIA documents an investigative trail seemed to almost create itself.   We shared:

“Put the FBI special agent together with the unnamed FBI informant, question them, and discover what they know about the entire Uranium One deal – and there’s the road-map to tear this thing wide open.”

Well, today:

(WASHINGTON DC) – On the orders of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Justice Department prosecutors have begun asking FBI agents to explain the evidence they found in a now dormant criminal investigation into a controversial uranium deal that critics have linked to Bill and Hillary Clinton, multiple law enforcement officials told NBC News.
The interviews with FBI agents are part of the Justice Department’s effort to fulfill a promise an assistant attorney general made to Congress last month to examine whether a special counsel was warranted to look into what has become known as the Uranium One deal, a senior Justice Department official said.

(more…)

FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe faced about eight hours of questioning behind closed doors during the House Intelligence Committee yesterday. Unlike prior HPSCI closed hearings remarkably there were no leaks; which would generally indicate the content was adverse to the interests of Democrat party investigators within the hearing.

From scant reporting it appears the questioning surrounded potential conflicts of interest and anti-Trump bias amid the entire cabal of FBI officials. Fox News James Rosen provides some overall information from congressional investigators.
According to Rosen’s reporting Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, bringing a full contingent of FBI/DOJ lawyers, has apparently lost much of his memory surrounding how the Steele Dossier was financed, constructed and later utilized by the FBI Counterintelligence unit (Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok) in their quest for 2016 surveillance and wiretaps against candidate Donald Trump within their FISA applications.

James Rosen – Congressional investigators tell Fox News that Tuesday’s seven-hour interrogation of Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe contained numerous conflicts with the testimony of previous witnesses, prompting the Republican majority staff of the House Intelligence Committee to decide to issue fresh subpoenas next week on Justice Department and FBI personnel.
While HPSCI staff would not confirm who will be summoned for testimony, all indications point to demoted DOJ official Bruce G. Ohr and FBI General Counsel James A. Baker, who accompanied McCabe, along with other lawyers, to Tuesday’s HPSCI session.

(more…)

Former Asst. FBI Director James Kallstrom appeared on Fox Business News to discuss the details behind the increasingly transparent 2016 and 2017 Joint FBI and DOJ Counterintelligence Operation to target the candidacy -and block the presidency- of Donald J Trump.
Toward the end of the interview Mr. Kallstrom shares his view, based on current FBI contacts, that FBI insiders (white hats) are on the cusp of removing the cloud of mystery behind all of the obvious politicized shenanigans. When asked about his knowledge of the current morale within the FBI:

…”but I think recent events, that I’m aware of, are going to improve that, because there’s going to be something actually something that’s going to happen; in my view.” … “Well, I think there’s a lot of patriots that have just had it up to here, with what’s going on. And they’re to step forward and tell people what the shenanigans have been; how they shut down the Clinton Foundation investigation; how other things, you know, were done that are so anti what the FBI and United States is all about”…

Watch:

.
This would easily align with the years-long Office of Inspector General report by Michael Horowitz that is soon to be released.  The FBI ‘insiders’ would be the primary target audience for the questions from the Inspector General.  Similarly the IG would be the primary and statutory office where FBI white hats would go to become whistle-blowers.
As they say….  Stay frosty, but prepare the ‘tar and feathers’ just in case.
#ColdAnger
(more…)

Almost two weeks ago it was announced that U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras was mysteriously recused from the Special Counsel case against General Mike Flynn, five days after Judge Contreras accepting the initial pleading. No explanation as to ‘why’?

(Reuters) The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia judge presiding over the criminal case for President Donald Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has been recused from handling the case, a court spokeswoman said on Thursday. (read more)

One might think the media apparatus, or pundit proletariat writ large, might be curious about why a U.S. District Court Judge would be recused. Alas One would be wrong. The recusal angle is transparently missing from any follow-up by media; and apparently the judicial cat also has stolen the tongue of congressional curiosity. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.
The story has been memory holed into the concentric whirlpool of nothingness.
We have speculated that U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras was recused, either by himself or by challenge, because he is also a FISA Court Judge and could have signed off on the October FISA warrant that led to the wiretapping and surveillance of General Flynn. However, we have received information that it wasn’t ‘by challenge’, leaving the preponderance of the motive for recusal directly upon Judge Contreras personal decision.
(more…)

This would be embarrassingly laughable if the underlying issue was not so serious. Notice the transparency of the timing here; along with the justification angle.

Today NBC comes out with an “exclusive report” provided by “FBI counterintelligence sources” curiously pushing a story (*NOW*?) about a “high-level counterintelligence briefing by senior FBI officials” for candidate Donald Trump in July 2016 “soon after the nomination”.  Why this narrative now?  Methinks they doth protest too much.
Gee, I wonder why government officials would be pushing NBC’s Ken Dilanian (the narrative engineer for pro Fusion-GPS stories) to report on Senior FBI counterintelligence briefings with Donald Trump in July 2016?

Perhaps because those same Senior FBI counterintelligence people (Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe) are quickly realizing their 2016 spy operation against Trump, their “insurance policy“, is out in the sunlight…. and NOW their collaborative illegal operation is about to put them in a position of being questioned by congressional oversight?  When does McCabe testify? Oh, yeah, tomorrow; funny that.

WASHINGTON — In the weeks after he became the Republican nominee on July 19, 2016, Donald Trump was warned that foreign adversaries, including Russia, would probably try to spy on and infiltrate his campaign, according to multiple government officials familiar with the matter.
The warning came in the form of a high-level counterintelligence briefing by senior FBI officials, the officials said. A similar briefing was given to Hillary Clinton, they added. They said the briefings, which are commonly provided to presidential nominees, were designed to educate the candidates and their top aides about potential threats from foreign spies.

(more…)

There is widespread opinion that many of the officials enlisted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller are ethically challenged.  Critics point to Mueller team members like DOJ Attorney Andrew Weissman, Jeannie Rhee and Aaron Zebley as specific examples of players within Mueller’s investigative team who have a history of gross ethics violations and also carry jaw-dropping conflicts-of-interest.
Against that backdrop, a report today about conduct by the Mueller team of investigators gains additional levels of concerns.   According to reports, in August 2017 the Mueller team went around the Trump administration in their quest for documents, by directly demanding documents from the General Services Agency (GSA); the entity that hosted the communication network for the Trump transition team.  According to reports, the content of 12 email accounts was handed over to the Special Counsels’ office; consisting of thousands of pages of transition team communication.  Innocuous, ordinary transition stuff, but the method of procurement is jaw-droppingly unethical, possibly illegal.

However, as with all things disclosed and discovered recently, CTH would caution anyone toward weighting favor or disfavor on the underlying issue.  Additionally, I would again remind everyone to look at the timelines on any new information, overlay it against prior information, and consider how the timing of the event(s) -in relation to the whole- might change the first impression.
In this case, the reported action by the SC team took place in August 2017, four or five months ago.  Inside that exact same timeline, on August 16th 2017, FBI Agent Peter Strzok and FBI Attorney Lisa Page were kicked off the Mueller team.  Coincidence? Dunno. Maybe.
Again, don’t get so stuck looking at the granules moving at your feet that you fail to notice the entire landscape around you is shifting.
(more…)

Many people are understandably tentative about the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz.  How can this IG, or any IG, really be trusted to root out the rot that lies at the heart of the DC corruption?
Can we trust the IG to target the politicization of the FBI and DOJ, and do so with the righteous indignation necessary to tear out the corruptocrats? After all, what would motivate Inspector General Horowitz to participate in such a righteous endeavor?
How quickly some have forgotten:  DATELINE July, 2015:

WASHINGTON DC – The Obama administration formally announced that inspectors general will have to get permission from their agency heads to gain access to grand jury, wiretap and fair credit information — an action that severely limits the watchdogs’ oversight capabilities, independence and power to uncover fraud.
An opinion, issued by the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, says the Inspector General Act of 1978 — which was written by Congress to create the government watchdogs in order to help maintain integrity within their agencies — does not have the authority to override nondisclosure provisions in other laws, most notably in regard to grand jury, wiretap or fair credit information.

(more…)

…Giddy up!  Democrats just realized the years-long DOJ Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigation is about to bite them, hard.  We are now entering the political combat zone where congressional democrats will attack the IG, in advance of the pending report.
Ironically, the Inspector General investigation led by Michael Horowitz was originally a lame-duck request (January 12, 2017) by Democrats prior to President Obama leaving office. [OIG Origination pdf HERE] That’s one of the more brilliant aspects towards its value.  The resulting investigation into the politicization of the FBI and DOJ is revealing details of how both departments were corrupted by political operatives friendly to Democrats.  Consequently, their own demanded investigation now becomes a risk.

(OIG Horowitz, AG Jeff Sessions, FBI Director Chris Wray)

As described by Politico: “Judiciary Committee ranking member Jerrold Nadler of New York and two other panel Democrats asked for a full review of DOJ’s decision making that led to Tuesday night’s release of about 375 texts that the FBI officials — Peter Strzok and Lisa Page — sent over a 15-month period during the 2016 presidential campaign.”
Democrats are furious the Strzok/Page text messages were released by DOJ Inspector General Horowitz to the House Committee.  They’re mad because the releases provide evidence of the corruption Jerold Nadler and Democrat leadership want to keep hidden.  However, as we have shared, the Inspector General is releasing some of the evidence collected so that the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees can question FBI and DOJ leadership about the content – and this approach rolls out the much bigger story.
In essence, Inspector General Horowitz is providing the American people with information the Democrats want to keep hidden.  Institutionally, the black hat usurpers, mostly mid-level management and staff within the DOJ and FBI, have been stalling and blocking congressional inquiry into their nefarious, and politically motivated schemes.
(more…)

Attorney Lisa Bloom is the daughter of Gloria Allred.  The apple certainly doesn’t fall far from the poisonous tree.  Both Gloria Allred and Lisa Bloom have a history of planned and strategic attacks against candidate Donald Trump and President Donald Trump.

According to research and documents provided to John Solomon, Lisa Bloom organized payments for the accusations against presidential candidate Donald Trump and coordinated financial benefits, through the larger Democrat apparatus, for the accusers:

(Via The Hill) A well-known women’s rights lawyer sought to arrange compensation from donors and tabloid media outlets for women who made or considered making sexual misconduct allegations against Donald Trump during the final months of the 2016 presidential race, according to documents and interviews.
California lawyer Lisa Bloom’s efforts included offering to sell alleged victims’ stories to TV outlets in return for a commission for herself, arranging a donor to pay off one Trump accuser’s mortgage and attempting to secure a six-figure payment for another woman who ultimately declined to come forward after being offered as much as $750,000, the clients told The Hill.

(more…)