The House of Representatives GOP leadership team held a press briefing earlier today.  During the Q&A Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, was asked about the House Intelligence Committee memo that has been released to the Executive Branch.The full presser is below.
The memo remarks by Speaker Ryan occur at 15:00 of the video.  Notice the appropriate, constitutional, and purposeful explanation of the process.  The executive branch (President Trump) and legislative branch (Ryan, Nunes, etc.) are continuing to emphasize the structural framework of U.S. government, and the seperation of powers therein, to return the rule of law during the Trump administration.  This is NOT accidental. [Video prompted to start @15:00]

.
The prior administration weaponized the executive branch against its political enemies.  Repeat: The prior administration weaponized the executive branch against its political enemies.  U.S. citizens, Americans, were targeted by corrupt officials within the Justice Department for political purposes.  Never lose this critical reference point and context.
(more…)

The media narrative engineers are busy at work attempting to cloud the constitutional framework behind the accurate, lawful, sequence of steps surrounding the Nunes House Intel Memo.  Don’t fall for the tricks.
The legislative branch has now voted in committee to declassify the House Intelligence Memo on FISA-702 abuse, and systemic fraudulent DOJ/FBI use therein.  The memo has been sent to the executive branch for review and public release approval.

The White House has five days to review. Any DOJ or FBI officials who have a position against public release are now responsible to make their case known to the Office of the President who is in charge of them, and the executive branch.
Specifically because the Chief Executive (President Trump) granted permission for FBI Director Christopher Wray to see the intelligence memo prior to the House Intel vote; Director Wray and Asst. AG Rosenstein had an obligation to debrief the executive on their findings. That’s why Wray and Rosenstein were at the West Wing yesterday.  However, the vote last evening transferred the declassification decision to the executive.
(more…)

After representative Adam Schiff ran to the microphones to decry the lack of GOP support for releasing his ‘minority memo’, congressman Lee Zeldin shares the back-story.  Adam Schiff wouldn’t even allow the intelligence committee to see Schiff’s ‘minority memo’, yet he was demanding they vote to declassify it. WATCH:

.
Representative Zeldin asks President Trump to quickly review and release the memo; and for the entire congress to declassify the underlying supportive documents.  The latter request, declassification of underlying documentation, will create massive heartburn within Democrat leadership because it reveals the severity of politicization within the DOJ and FBI.
(more…)

Former Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino appeared on Tucker Carlson TV show tonight to discuss the release of Chairman Devin Nunes intelligence memo.
During the segment Mr. Bongino highlighted his theory that Chairman Nunes memo not only holds references to the DOJ and FBI use of fraudulent FISA702 application evidence, but that the memo also contains compartmented intelligence exclusive to former President Obama’s Presidential Daily Briefings (PDB’s).  WATCH:

.
If true, this exclusive Bongino revelation could be explosive.  Let’s explore.
(more…)

Paul Sperry is breaking some news that will generally be lost on most who are not deep in the weeds; however, this news is exceptionally important and explains the back-story to why Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley called the FBI’s bluff.

(LINK)

It is important to understand what Chairman Chuck Grassley has done with the criminal referral and how he is calling out the FBI.  Taken at it’s face value, which is what the tweet does, it seems that Christopher Steele lied to the FBI by saying the “dossier” information was not shared with media, therefore the dossier was not opposition campaign research.
The intent of this FBI claim (to the FISA court) is to give the “dossier” enhanced value as source material for a FISA warrant (request for surveillance authority). However, the underlying facts behind the FBI assertion are false; and it’s not Steele making the claim.
The FBI is the entity attempting to inflate the credibility of the application by claiming  Steele never shopped the dossier, ergo it is not political opposition research.  There is ZERO evidence Steele made any such claim to the FBI. There is ample evidence from the senate testimony of Glenn Simpson (Fusion GPS) to the contrary.
(more…)

Imagine that despite your always knowing the DC swamp was deep (dangerous and full of terrors), corrupt, and generally horrible, you decided to do it anyway. You “just had to”.
Imagine you have spent years thinking about it; thinking about every angle within it; thinking and talking to people who know almost everything about it, well, from their perspective anyway; and ultimately you decided to do it.
Imagine that even though you knew it was bad, it wasn’t until you actually began running that you discovered the depth of the corrupt nature with it. –SEE HERE– You see things in the campaign you never expected; things no-one ever talked about.
(more…)

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte appears on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss his ongoing investigation into the DOJ and FBI.  Chairman Goodlatte holds primary oversight authority over the entire Justice Department.
Part of the conversation turns very interesting, and provides an indicator into the next phase, when Bartiromo mentions messages between FBI Agent Peter Strzok and DOJ Attorney Lisa Page surrounding an intent to “destroy evidence”, during their participation in the Clinton investigation.  WATCH:

.
Additionally, it must be noted how the narrative engineers are specifically misleading everyone with their ‘memo reporting’.  They intentionally overlook the distinction between U.S. branches of government and the separation of power as it relates to Chairman Devin Nunes and the House Intelligence Memo.
(more…)

On the night of Thursday December 7th, 2017 it was announced that U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras was recused from the case against General Mike Flynn.  This recusal came five days after Judge Contreras accepted the initial pleading from Flynn.  Almost two months have passed, and there’s no explanation 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)

If sufficient judicial conflict existed on December 7th, why wasn’t that conflict present on December 1st, when Judge Contreras presided over Flynn’s initial pleading?

 
The story behind why U.S. District Court Judge would be recused, is transparently missing from any follow-up by media.  With all the current sunlight over possible manipulation of a FISA court application by the FBI, no-one seems curious if Judge Rudolph Contreras was the FBI’s FISA approval judge, and the U.S. DC Judge in the Flynn pleading.
The story has disappeared into the swamp; but the story is important.
There is a very strong possibility that U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras was forcibly recused by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, because Contreras is also the FISA Court Judge who signed-off on the 2016 FISA application (warrant) that led to the wiretapping and surveillance of General Flynn.  That FISA application is now being questioned.
(more…)

Since Thursday night we’ve been combing the FBI files to figure out exactly what FBI Agent Peter Strzok was referencing in one of the most recently released text messages.  We have discovered the context and the text is now damning.
House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte read this specific text message on Thursday night during an interview with Sean Hannity:

At first, the context behind the September 10th, 2016, message was elusive, however it is now clear.
On September 2nd, 2016, during the (pre-election) apex of the FBI providing the documents behind their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of her personal email, and the subsequent decision by FBI Director James Comey not to pursue criminal charges therein, the FBI released their investigative files:
September 2nd, 2016 FBI Press Release:

“Today the FBI is releasing a summary of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s July 2, 2016 interview with the FBI concerning allegations that classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal e-mail server she used during her tenure. We also are releasing a factual summary of the FBI’s investigation into this matter.
We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Appropriate redactions have been made for classified information or other material exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Additional information related to this investigation that the FBI releases in the future will be placed on The Vault, the FBI’s electronic FOIA library.” (link)

The FBI was under pressure to release their investigative documents.  On Sept 2nd, 2016 the release included the FBI investigative notes (FD-302’s) from the questions and answers during Hillary Clinton’s interview.  This investigative release was big news at the time.
(more…)

Well, well, well…. that’s a shift in language.  Congressional Rep Matt Gaetz: “I believe there’s been a criminal conspiracy”…  This specific language elevates the current political dynamic toward an exponential level of risk for those within the “conspiracy”.

.
18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights: If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured — They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (link)
(more…)