Congressman Adam Schiff was the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence from 2015 through 2019, then Chairman of that same committee from 2019 through 2023. In his leadership position on the HPSCI, Schiff was also a member of the congressional Gang of Eight who received classified intelligence briefings on all U.S. intel matters.
Adam Schiff used his position on the HPSCI to fabricate information from the HPSCI, leak information to media, and falsify statements during public appearances. Following the 2020 midterm election result, Schiff was forcibly removed from the committee by Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Today the House of Representatives censured Schiff for his lies and manipulative conduct and submitted him to an ethics investigation by the House.
(Via Politico) – The House GOP voted Wednesday to publicly reprimand Rep. Adam Schiff for his leading role in Democratic investigations of former President Donald Trump.
The measure, which passed 213-209, formally censures Schiff and directs the House Ethics Committee to investigate his actions. All five Republican members of the House ethics panel and Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) voted “present” on Wednesday’s measure.
Representative Andy Biggs and Representative Matt Gaetz both confronted John Durham about his role in covering for a politically corrupt and weaponized Dept of Justice and FBI.
Matt Gaetz specifically confronts Durham over his lack of holding people accountable. The confrontation between Matt Gaetz and John Durham should have been the tone of the entire hearing. WATCH:
You can like or dislike the approach by Matt Gaetz, personally I appreciate it, but what Gaetz says in this confrontation is factually accurate and true.
Today he testified in classified setting before the House intelligence committee. Tomorrow is the public version.
Special Counsel John Durham is scheduled to be questioned tomorrow by members of the House Judiciary Committee in a public setting. The hearing is scheduled for 9:00am ET, Rayburn Office Building [ DETAILS HERE ] – “The hearing will focus on the report of Special Counsel John Durham that examined the origins and justifications of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Crossfire Hurricane investigation against then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.”
Questions have been passed along, and hopefully this summary is timed to avoid giving Mary McCord and her Lawfare team prep-time to construct their defensive talking points.
(1) Mr. Durham, having spent four years investigating, researching, reviewing, interviewing and pouring through files related to the overall Trump-Russia collusion story, your report -like the report of Robert Mueller that preceded it- found no substantive predicate existed to ever open an investigation of candidate Donald Trump for any efforts with Russians or foreign actors to interfere in the 2016 election. As a result of your time and diligence, you are likely the #1 subject matter expert in the entire series of events.
♦ Question: In your opinion, was President Obama aware there was no reason in 2016 to investigate Donald Trump, who then became President-elect Trump?
(2) You note in your report that you never re-reviewed any of the material evidence that formed the baseline for the Robert Mueller special counsel investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.
♦ Question: Why not?
♦ Question: Who made the decision not to review the 2-year Mueller probe activity as part of your investigative review? Why was that decision made?
After reading the entire 75-page transcript of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) testimony to congress [READ HERE], a testimonial that almost no one in the mainstream news has written about, issues surrounding the document search against President Trump take on some new context.
The NARA officials are essentially professional DC bureaucrats with a mission to look out for the best interests of the DC system they support. It is very clear from their opinion; Donald Trump was considered an outsider to the DC system of government – and that baseline established the framework for why and how NARA took such extreme processes with President Trump.
From the transcript, one NARA official says, “I am storing 555,000 cubic feet of classified national security information. To put that in perspective, the white boxes that many of you have seen in your offices, that is a cubic foot. It holds about 2,500 pages. Another way for me to describe it, a typical stack area that we store records in a Federal records center can hold about 100,000 cubic feet. And that is a room that is about roughly the size of a football field. So you are looking at five and a half football fields floor to ceiling shelving.” {Transcript, page 24}
President Trump did not turn over the letter left to him by President Obama, nor did President Trump turn over the 27 letters exchanged between himself and North Korea Chairman Kim Jong-un. NARA was looking for these along with other documents pertaining to President Trump engaging in discussions with other foreign leaders, and NARA was angry about the perceived lack of respect shown by Trump toward their endeavor.
However, when you take the current DC establishment system, look at the history of the Trump administration engagement in foreign policy, then overlay that dynamic with the gatekeeping responsibilities outlined by NARA, what you may discover is an entirely different prism through which to view the DC motives.
One can easily argue the Deep State per se’ was looking for notes, information, contacts, tips and hints of discussions that took place between Trump and foreign leaders, that may have actually exposed the mechanisms of DC money and policy laundering.
Bill Barr continued his Sunday Talk appearances this week, specifically organized by the apparatus in control of DC, to attack Donald Trump and position the executive branch of government as subservient to the interests of the United States Intelligence Community.
Don’t miss the forest when you are looking at the trees.
Barr is advocating for a system of government that has institutional interests above the constitution. According to Bill Barr, the DOJ, FBI and US Intelligence Community control the Office of the President. Look at what he is saying. The bureaucracy of the administrative state is above the chief executive office holder. The intelligence community supersedes the President.
I’m not putting words in his mouth. Barr believes the President is a functionary of, and in a lesser position than, the unelected people who control institutions that make up the executive branch of government. THIS is what he believes. Get past the parseltongue and obtuse linguistics; this is Barr’s advocacy position. WATCH:
.
Why? Why is he doing this? Does he really believe this? The answer is yes, and essentially what Bill Barr is doing is protecting the system that George W Bush, Dick Cheney and Barack Obama constructed and then used respectively. Barr is defending the surveillance state, the post-Patriot Act state of intelligence agency control over government.
Bill Barr is protecting the weaponized institutions of the Director of National Intelligence (Bush/Cheney), the Dept of Justice – National Security Division [DOJ-NSD (Obama/Holder)], the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA Court), and the Dept of Homeland Security (Bush/Cheney). These institutions, according to AG Bill Barr, are now in full control of the executive branch, full control of government, and now more powerful than the Office of the President of the United States.
This is the position of the DC system and everyone within it. This is why Bill Barr is positioning himself as the tip of the spear. This position is the entire reason why President Trump was told to hire Bill Barr, because Bill Barr had a job to do…. preserve the institutions, he helped build, at all costs. This is also why Bill Barr protected Robert Mueller, and never impeded the Andrew Weissmann effort.
Bill Barr knows what Jack Smith, Lisa Monaco, Andrew Weissmann, Barry Berke, Norm Eisen, Mary McCord, David Laufman and Lawfare are doing. Bill Barr supports that effort, because ultimately it preserves the institutions from the corrective action of Donald Trump.
One of the ways you can immediately detect federal Lawfare deployment is to look at how media articles are written when they outline court filings without direct citation for review. The Hill began SEE HERE. The New York Times is similar, SEE HERE.
Notice both national publications talk about a DOJ court filing, presumably made under seal, that limits President Trump’s defense access to materials and documents used in the case against him. Notice the media do not say how they gained insight into the details of the sealed filing itself; nor do they provide any source context for how their reporting is structured. Nothing like, “according to sources with familiar with the matter” or anything similar. Just nothing; no attribution at all.
That media context is a BIG red flag indicating the need to ‘create a narrative’ is more important than the actual substance of the evidence material underpinning it.
Both stories hit on the issue of the DOJ filing a (presumably sealed) motion with the Florida court, to place limits, rules and restrictions on evidence against President Trump, that limits his ability to review it, talk about it and/or provide context for it. THIS IS A LAWFARE MOVE. This is what happens in the prosecutorial star-chambers where they hide information in order to create the appearance of something nefarious, where nothing nefarious exists.
When we see this legal approach, we can be assured the case that uses the evidence is built upon fraud and pretense. Do not be afraid to tell your family, friends and others about this dynamic. President Trump is being accused of the crime of violating 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a violation of the espionage act, and the DOJ is requesting that President Trump must not permitted to defend himself by discussing the evidence against him.
The DOJ wants to limit public knowledge of the material evidence, not because it would harm national security – but rather because the nature of the evidence itself would highlight to the nation how fraudulent the targeting is. This is the guaranteed DOJ motive, that’s why everything is under seal and even the media will not talk about how they are gaining their leak knowledge. This is LAWFARE narrative engineering at its apex deployment.
We live with a new type of tyranny, where we find ourselves dissidents. It is not like any previous tyranny. It is not revolutionary in nature. Instead, it operates very scientifically and technocratically by convincing those it tyrannizes to demand their own enslavement, under the guise of comfort.
Prior dissidents were at least dissidents of a tangible, kinetic revolution. We are dissidents of what the willfully tyrannized perceive as their secure position within the rightful order of things. This needs to be factored into how we think about “converting” and “awakening” others amid the ongoing insurgency.
(Via Daily Mail) – A Fox News producer who resigned over a chyron that described Joe Biden as a ‘wannabe dictator’, has broken his silence.
Alexander McCaskill posted a photo of himself on Instagram holding a cardboard box outside the corporation’s New York offices.
He told his followers ‘Today was my last day at Fox’ and described his time there as a ‘wild 10 years’.
McCaskill is thought to have been responsible for the chyron which claimed President Biden was intent on locking up his 2024 rival, Donald Trump on Tuesday.
Fox had it on screen for less than 30 seconds, and then apologized. Dailymail.com has approached Fox News and McCaskill for comment.
Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson claimed the producer had resigned during his new show, now being broadcast on Twitter, on Thursday.
Comrades, dissident voice Tucker Carlson continues broadcasting his rebellious monologues on Twitter. For his latest episode 4, Carlson notes the new American dictatorship. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:
Dear Leader does not appreciate the unauthorized broadcasts from dissident citizens.
Devin Nunes was previously the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. In that very specific role, Nunes was a member of the Gang of Eight who are briefed on all intelligence issues at the same level as the President, the chief executive. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman, is the #2 ranking intelligence oversight member within the national security oversight apparatus, exceeded in rank amid the Gang of Eight group only by the House Speaker.
As the HPSCI chairman, Nunes has a very granular understanding of intelligence language and the way the intelligence apparatus uses words within national security documents. When Nunes talks about national security documents, he is a subject matter expert on the administration side of the process. Why is that important right now? Because Nunes knows how to contrast the wording in the Jack Smith indictment against wording used to describe national security documents.
Pay very close attention to this interview, prompted to 05:06, for the Nunes part. You have to get past the paid to obfuscate Mrs. Hannity interruptus, as she tries to shut down Nunes from bringing sunlight on the indictment. However, what Nunes introduces in his comments is the origin of what I am going to explain after the interview.
This is a game-changing context for the Jack Smith indictment. Again, pay close attention. WATCH:
.
What almost everyone in professional narrative engineering/punditry is missing, many of them because they are paid to pretend not to know, is that the national archivists gave sworn testimony to Congress about the Trump documents on May 17, 2023{citation}. What I am going to outline below will explain the fraud that Jack Smith and his Lawfare crew are purposefully generating.
Some baselines are needed for you to understand what is happening.
First, the National Archives and the DOJ did not demand a return of Classified Documents. They requested a return of documents containing classification markings. These are two entirely different things.
Most documents containing classification markings are not classified documents; yet, most classified documents contain classification markings. Additionally, one of the documents used by Jack Smith in his indictment [COUNT #11] contained no markings at all.
Second, it is critically important to remember that throughout the legal issues in the aftermath of the Mar-a-Lago raid, the DOJ has viciously denied any responsibility to describe the classified documents they claim to have retrieved. In fact, the DOJ has fought against any entity, including the court appointed “special master”, from being able to look at the documents the DOJ *previously* claimed were either classified, or, vital to national security. {GO DEEP}
Because there is a very specific type of Lawfare taking place with words, it is critical to see the value in what Devin Nunes understands about the way the language is being deployed. Now we return to the testimony of the national archivist office, and here is where it gets really interesting.
Here we go again with the ever-familiar silo defense. The FBI is refusing to hand over the unclassified FD-1023 stating there is an ongoing investigation using the confidential human source who made allegations outlined in the document. Remember, the allegations and the statement record was created in July of 2020, almost three years ago.
Prior to last week, the FBI refused to say the 6-page unclassified document existed. After House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer told FBI Director Chris Wray he had already seen the unclassified document via a whistleblower, then Comey admitted the FBI indeed had it. Today, the FBI is refusing to release the document, stating it is now captive as part of an “ongoing investigation.” The claimed investigation began July 2020 – the investigation is “ongoing”. Go figure.
James Comer said he will begin the process, this Thursday, to hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt of Congress. WATCH:
