A formal announcement is likely tomorrow; however, leading information now affirms Acting AG Todd Blanche is moving Joe DiGenova and Christopher-James DeLorenz into positions in South Florida to assist U.S. Attorney Jason Quiñones in ongoing investigation of the Donald Trump targeting.  The venue puts any grand jury information in the court orbit of Judge Aileen Cannon.

Before getting into the substance, the alignment here is critical to understand.  Judge Cannon saw firsthand exactly what the Lawfare constructs consist of when she had the Jack Smith operation in her court during the Mar-a-Lago documents case.  Judge Cannon knows the context of weaponized justice and saw the techniques through first-hand experience.  This cannot be emphasized enough.

There are a lot of people who want to see some form of accountability finally delivered for the decade-long corrupt Lawfare operation that took place against Donald Trump before he took office (Spygate), during his administration (Russiagate, Mueller, Impeachment), after he left office took office (Jack Smith and Mar-a-Lago) and even through today (Judicial Intervention).  Many of those voices have concerns about 81-year-old Joe diGenova, so let me address that first by pointing out how the issues that frame the criticism are also a valuable asset.

Joe diGenova has a very rare current perspective; he completely sees the timeline of Trump targeting for what it is.  This is immensely valuable because not enough people understand the complex continuum enough to stand back and see the bigger picture.  diGenova sees the bigger picture.

diGenova can see the 2015/2016 FBI contractor political spying operation (Spygate) and how it connects to the later Fusion GPS/Clinton construct of Russiagate. More importantly, diGenova sees the connective tissue -the actual characters- flowing from Spygate, through Russiagate, into the Mueller investigation, then into the impeachment effort and then into the Jack Smith operation.  Seeing the big picture is the first step.

Now, critics point out that diGenova is a creature of DC. Yes, that is true. However, that’s also an asset given that he understands just how difficult it is to navigate through all of these ridiculous DC interests.  diGenova is also a character, boisterous perhaps intemperate and easy to Alinsky (isolate, ridicule, marginalize). So what? It doesn’t matter who is involved in this effort, they are going to be Alinsky’d by the Lawfare operatives on the other side.

Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing see the big picture and have a skillset to tell the story.  They can assist brilliantly and direct the telling of the story by connecting the lead prosecutors to the background script of how everything unfolded over the past decade.  If Quiñones is researching a “conspiracy” case, it is the primary job of the investigative researchers to connect each of the evidence dots to the larger conspiracy.  Sounds perfect for diGenova.

(more…)

Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, appears for an interview with Katie Pavlich to outline the importance of bringing all of the information about the Intelligence Community targeting of President Trump to the public.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and We the People want to see accountability for the Machiavellian conduct.  The intelligence community targeted President Trump and people within the CIA ran an operation to remove him.  These people have names and titles that have remained hidden, DNI Tulsi Gabbard is putting those names, specific names into the public psyche so we can have a full understanding of what took place.

Now, for many here this may seem like information we have all known about; however, Gabbard is providing the receipts, the actual evidence, of how these IC operations took place.  WATCH:

.

DNI Gabbard is showing how specific people within government weaponized their positions to conduct some of the most insidious schemes in modern U.S. history.  The criminality of those schemes is for others in Main Justice to determine, but the evidence of those schemes is clear.

I am thankful that people are now starting to use the new information to review past timelines. [SEE HERE] What they will discover is that Michael Atkinson’s work with Mary McCord and the Lawfare network are not isolated events. This is a continuum of targeting against Donald Trump using all of the intelligence levers at their disposal.

Michael Atkinson and Eric Ciaramella are the current names, but beside them sits Mary McCord, Norm Eisen, Andrew Weissmann, Barry Berke, Dan Goldman, Benjamin Wittes and many others from the Lawfare community.  They intersect with various high level government officials in Main Justice, the FBI, the CIA, NSA and various intelligence agencies.

This is the nest of Deep State and Tulsi Gabbard is exposing it.

(more…)

My personal opinion on the FISA-702 reauthorization is well known {GO DEEP}.  However, I am not naïve enough to believe there is enough DC support to stop it. {GO DEEP} That said, I am disappointed the reauthorization will not be attached to the Save America Act as leverage.

[Via Truth Social] – “I am working very hard with our Great Speaker, Mike Johnson, along with Chairman Jim Jordan and Chairman Rick Crawford, to get a clean extension of FISA 702 through the House of Representatives this week. I am asking Republicans to UNIFY, and vote together on the test vote to bring a clean Bill to the floor. We need to stick together when this Bill comes before the House Rules Committee today to keep it CLEAN!

I was a victim of the worst and most illegal abuse of FISA in our Nation’s History, by Radical Left Lunatics, who lied to the FISA Court to spy on my 2016 Presidential Campaign in their attempt to RIG the Election in favor of Crooked Hillary Clinton. Their use of this instrument in the 2020 Presidential Election was even worse! When the Dirty Cop, James Comey, the failed Head of the FBI, went after me, he was using FISA Title I, the Domestic Collection, not FISA 702, the Foreign Collection, which needs to be extended today.

While parts of FISA were illegally and unfortunately used against me in the Democrats’ disgraceful Witch Hunt and Attack in the RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA Hoax, and perhaps would be used against me in the future, I am willing to risk that as a Citizen in order to do what is right for our Country.”

(more…)

It’s worth remembering how the IC silo process was used to manipulate proprietary claims by government agencies. These setups are intentionally designed this way, and none of the reasons behind them are good.

The CIA Whistleblower Complaint and subsequent Intelligence Community Inspector General investigation and report, falls under the work product of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.  The IC IG is quasi-independent but works for the ODNI.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard is releasing direct stakeholder information from within the ODNI with the release as noted – SEE HERE.  This is the background information that led to the impeachment effort.  The DNI is the Executive Branch.

The transcript of ICIG Michael Atkinson was held within another branch of government, within the Legislative Branch, and as a consequence DNI Gabbard needed to gain permission from the House Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), another silo, in order to review the testimony that came as an outcome of the ICIG complaint and investigation. SEE HERE and SEE HERE.

DNI Gabbard then needed to request the release of the HPSCI transcripts [legislative branch] to her DNI office [executive branch] where all three aspects of the ICIG activity can then be examined and reviewed in full context.

The DNI then requests the HPSCI to permit declassification and public release.  HPSCI reluctantly agrees.  DNI declassifies then returns the transcripts to the HPSCI for public release – while simultaneously the DNI office declassifies and releases the baseline ICIG investigative material so the public can have context.

The resulting outcome is a combined work product from five silos (HPSCI, DNI, CIA, ICIG, NSC) along with a statement from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and a summary of what all the combined materials show:

(more…)

Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has retrieved, reviewed, declassified and forced the release of internal background documents related to the Intelligence Community’s collaborative effort to impeach President Donald J Trump in 2019.   {GO DEEP – BACKGROUND}

The HPSCI wants to take political credit for the release; however, the HPSCI was forced into this position by the diligent work of Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.

Without DNI Gabbard, these documents would never have seen sunlight.   This type of public information release is exactly why DNI Tulsi Gabbard has been targeted by friend and foe alike.

WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released two declassified transcripts from 2019 hearings with the former Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael Atkinson, following a security review from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). The Committee received the declassified transcripts from the ODNI the evening of Friday, April 10, 2026. These transcripts are from two hearings held to examine Atkinson’s role in an alleged whistleblower complaint, which ultimately led to Democrats’ first impeachment efforts against President Trump in December 2019. (link)

Looking closely at the information in these three documents makes it clear why the HPSCI never wanted them released. Both current and former members, including Republicans, are tied to a pattern of willful blindness, knowing the details yet choosing to stay silent for months and even years afterward.

Former HPSCI Chairman, then HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes was a participant in the testimony.  Former HPSCI member, now CIA Director John Ratcliffe was a participant in the testimony.  Former HPSCI staff, now FBI Director Kash Patel was a participant in the testimony. [Think about it]

♦ Principle Players – The National Security Council leaker was Alexander Vindman.  The CIA “Whistleblower” was Eric Ciaramella.  The Intelligence Community Inspector General was Michael Atkinson.

There is a lot of information to review as the documents include:

(1) The CIA complaint from Ciaramella and subsequent ICIG investigation. (pdf)

(2) The first interview of the ICIG Atkinson by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), dated September 19, 2019. (pdf)

(3) The second interview of ICIG Atkinson dated October 4, 2019. (pdf)

(more…)

Two weeks ago, after a lengthy back-and-forth process between the HPSCI and DNI offices, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) reported they released the transcript of former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).  No further information has surfaced following that announcement.

“The transcripts will be posted on the Committee website once they undergo the standard classification review with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.”  (source)

It has been two-weeks.  The transcript is not public. In my estimation, this transcript could potentially be exceptionally revealing.  The background ‘delay’ is likely due to the significant revelations within it.   Also, this is a rather extensive stakeholder equity.

The declassification process involves having every equity stakeholder named in the deposition ¹agree to allowing the information, their information, to be released.

Ex. if Atkinson discussed the Senate Intel Committee, they (Cotton/Warner) would need to allow and/or demand redaction. If the CIA was discussed, again another stakeholder who needs to review and approve. If HPSCI, same/same. If any of the internal agencies were discussed by Atkinson, National Security Council (NSC, White House, Rubio), National Intelligence Council (NIC, in CIA at the time), the same process has to flow through each agency.  Also, this testimony is in 2019, making it possible contact with FBI or DOJ-NSD coconspirators (Mueller Inc.) may have taken place; the same would apply.

Each stakeholder gets to review the transcript content that applies to their mention and determine if they ¹approve the declassification process.

This is how the silo defense mechanisms work.  You can see how convoluted these systems have become.

According to the originating HPSCI public release, remember, they are the originating stakeholder of the classified information; well, the transcript is then returned to the House Intelligence Committee for publication.

[¹If they don’t agree, a battle begins. Remember the battle over the Nunes memo?]

What would all these equity stakeholders be hoping to conceal?  That’s where things get interesting.

(more…)

ActBlue is to the Democrat party fundraising machine as WinRed is to the Republican side of the equation.

In a rather stunning outline by the New York Times [SEE HERE] the progressive outlet is reporting of serious concerns within the leadership of ActBlue related to their willfully blind reception of foreign sources of money to fund Democrat candidates.

The remarkable aspect is not just that ActBlue takes foreign funds, but rather the New York Times revealing internal legal discussions about it.  According to the Times reporting, the Eric Holder law firm Covington & Burling, the primary legal mechanism for the ActBlue/DNC machinery, lies at the heart of the matter.

(NYT) […] The firm concluded that ActBlue’s chief executive had given a potentially misleading response to congressional Republican investigators in a 2023 letter explaining how the organization vetted donations to ensure that they were not illegally coming from foreign citizens.

The letter from the chief executive, Regina Wallace-Jones, said ActBlue carried out “multilayered” screenings of contributions that helped “root out” those from overseas. In fact, the law firm found, some of the steps she had described were not always followed.

“This presents a substantial risk for ActBlue,” the law firm, Covington & Burling, wrote in one of two memos expressing legal concerns. One memo raised the specter of a criminal investigation if prosecutors believed that ActBlue had tried to conceal facts about its efforts to prevent foreign contributions. (source)

To really appreciate the scheme that seems to be outlined by the internal documents, it is worth remembering that James O’Keefe previously did some boots on the ground research into ActBlue [SEE HERE – 2023] and found that multiple, perhaps thousands, of “donor” names and addresses were assigned to contributions the donors said they never made.

(more…)

In a two-week period right after the 2024 election, the most energy expended by the transition team putting a cabinet together was toward Main Justice or the Dept of Justice.  As a consequence, those around Lutnick and Wiles spent an incredible amount of time thinking about the Attorney General pick.

Following an insider discussion, I spoke with several people about positions and appointments, focused on pointing out that the transition’s priorities were misplaced. The AG needed to be someone with exceptional moral character, capable of gathering information and presenting it for public consumption, with the option of supporting criminal referrals if necessary.

The Attorney General wasn’t going to be the tip of the spear in any operation to confront the Deep State, because if Main Justice wanted to confront Lawfare they needed to confront the Intelligence Community first.  The IC controls all of the activity within the Dept of Justice.

Read that again for emphasis.  For the issues of greatest importance, the Intelligence Community controls all of the activity within Main Justice.  The IC is in control of the source material.  The IC is above the DOJ.  If you don’t strategize a confrontation with the IC first, it doesn’t matter what you do with the Dept of Justice.

The best example I could reference at the time was the Mar-a-Lago documents case and Judge Aileen Cannon.  In that example the Executive branch was targeting Trump through the DOJ/FBI, and representing the Judicial branch Judge Cannon was the firewall ensuring the appropriate administration of justice.

Trump’s defense, through Cannon, pushed back against the DOJ (Jack Smith) while Smith leveraged all his Lawfare tools back against Cannon.  You might remember the “classified document” issue went to the 11th CCA.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the government position that any documents defined as “classified” by the executive branch that claimed, “national security,” should not be disclosed to the defendant, Trump.  The 11th CCA said when it comes to matters of national security, the judicial branch must defer to the determinations of the executive.

Basically, if the intelligence community decides certain information is tied to national security and labels it as classified for the DOJ, that decision can’t be challenged. The U.S. Supreme Court has backed this view. As a result, when it comes to national security issues, the judicial branch has to defer to the executive, giving the IC significant control over the DOJ.

If you drag former CIA Director John Brennan into court and Brennan’s lawyers argue ‘national security’ as a defense against indictment, inquiry or questioning, it’s not the DOJ (Attorney General) who matters – it’s the ‘national security’ determination of the Intelligence Community (Tulsi Gabbard) who controls the outcome.

(more…)

The Daily Mail has written a rather explosive story saying Attorney General Pam Bondi was fired because she leaked or gave a heads up to Eric Swalwell about the FBI re-reviewing the investigative files about him [STORY HERE].

Without discussing the motive or background, the story itself just doesn’t make sense.

What most people probably don’t know is that former FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Counterintelligence Division, Joseph Pientka III, currently works for Congressman Swalwell [CITATION].

FBI Agent Peter Strzok’s former partner, Joe Pientka, works for Eric Swalwell.  Now, remember Joe Pientka’s very high security job inside the FBI Counterintelligence office? [REMINDER]

Because of his former role, Joe Pientka has deep ties to senior agents inside the current FBI, the type of agents who would know the inside details of any Swalwell investigative activity.

[SIDENOTE: Following the ridiculous Russiagate, and after the hand-off to Robert Mueller, Joe Pientka was transferred to the FBI San Francisco field office; hence, the regional alignment with Swalwell [CITATION].  Sometime in mid 2019, Joseph Pientka was promoted by FBI Director Christopher Wray and transferred to the San Francisco FBI Field Office where he showed up on their web page. END SIDENOTE]

Bondi wouldn’t need to tip off Swalwell. Pientka, currently working for Swalwell, would already know the ins/outs of every detail therein. [It’s a red herring]

FBI Director Kash Patel couldn’t start to review (or re-review) Swalwell activity without triggering one of those inside contacts aligned with Pientka.

(more…)

To say this report has been widely shared on conservative media would be an understatement; but something just doesn’t sniff right.

[Tweet Below: Samantha Power in Ukraine, October 2, 2024]

The essence of the reports is that Ukraine officials discussed a scheme to receive money from USAID, essentially from the CIA, then launder the money through fake Ukraine ‘clean energy programs’ using various front groups, eventually culminating with the money being transferred to the Joe Biden reelection effort.  That’s the gist of the report.

However, as much as this story is of great interest to me, for reasons outlined below, there are multiple red flags which should indicate serious caution needs to be applied.

First red flag.  Every single report about the issue links back to the original John Solomon report, written mostly by Jerry Dunleavy. [SEE HERE].  There is no follow-up reporting from any other outlet or source on this exceptionally explosive claim.

Second red flag.  Despite the report centering around a “declassified intelligence intercept” under review by DNI Tulsi Gabbard, there is no citation for the interpretation of the information itself.  There is no visibility into a declassified report, which if genuinely declassified would be easy to share with readers.

The absence of citation for the core claim, while simultaneously stating the information has been declassified, is a significant flag.  This type of reporting relies on the reader accepting the interpretation of the author who chooses -without saying why- to keep it hidden.

Third red flag.  The Office of the Director of National Intelligence has not commented on the declassified originating information, nor on the reporting or interpretation of it by Solomon.  This is not to say the reporting itself is inaccurate, but simply to note that no one is going on the record to substantiate it; and again, the information is hidden.

Fourth red flag.  If the core information was accurate, it would be attacked (spun and shaped) in a defensive posture by the leftist media who have direct contacts with allied intelligence officials who would know about it.  When an explosive IC claim is ignored by leftist media (NYT, WaPo, Politico, et al) generally that means they want to see the narrative advance or be emphasized.  This posture of advancement is generally made when information is being wrongly interpreted, and that plays positively toward their interests.

(more…)