This announcement does not come as a surprise to those follow the details of corrupt systems closely and who have watched the scale of the problems surface through the years.
The problems within the FBI as an institution are systemic. Both Kash Patel and Dan Bongino faced a monumental challenge in trying to get their arms around the scale of the problem within the institution. There is no apple, only worms.
Any type of institutional confrontation at this scale can only succeed if the problems are first admitted. Bongino faced a big challenge with Director Patel refusing to accept institutional corruption was the biggest issue. You cannot correct problems of great consequence until you admit the core of the problem. No admission was made. The problems remain.
The blue slip process has been a part of the Senate’s judicial nomination procedure since at least 1917. When a President nominates an individual for a U.S. circuit or district court judgeship, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee sends a blue slip —a form colored blue— to the two Senators representing the nominee’s home state. This form allows the Senators to express their opinions about the nominee.
Positive Response: If a home-state Senator has no objections, they return the blue slip with a positive response, indicating support for the nominee. Negative Response or Withholding: If a Senator objects, they may either return the slip with a negative response or choose not to return it at all. In both cases, this is treated as a lack of support for the nominee, which halts the nomination process.
JD Vance notes this process is being used to manipulate the appointments of Judges in leftist states. This creates a dual justice system; one of the core issues within our extremely divided nation.
JD Vance is not wrong. However, as with all things corrupted within the state of our Republic, if the blue slip process is removed the next leftist President can corrupt the judiciary within Republican states.
Of course, all of this is an outcome of the 17th Amendment, which stopped the state legislatures from having control over their senators. Under the original constitutional framework, the Senate was designed to represent the interests of the state, as the Senators were appointed by state legislature, not popular votes. The Sea Island assembly destroyed this cornerstone when they triggered the 17th Amendment.
Repeal the 17th Amendment, and just about everything in federal government changes.
Tina Peters is a gold star mom who was a former Mesa County, Colorado, clerk during the 2020 election.
Mrs Peters, age 70, is serving a nine-year prison sentence in Colorado state prison after her politically motivated conviction for attempting to influence a public servant and criminal impersonation for aiding an unauthorized person in copying voting-machine hard-drive data during a 2021 software update.
Mrs. Peters and her lawyers have repeatedly stated she was attempting to preserve evidence of false voter data in the Colorado 2020 election. The judge who sentenced Peters stated she had white “privilege” in delivering the exceptionally harsh sentence.
Today President Trump pardoned Tina Peters, but state officials and Colorado Governor Jared Polis say the pardon is invalid because Mrs. Peters was convicted of a state crime, out of the reach of a presidential pardon.
PRESIDENT TRUMP – “For years, Democrats ignored Violent and Vicious Crime of all shapes, sizes, colors, and types. Violent Criminals who should have been locked up were allowed to attack again. Democrats were also far too happy to let in the worst from the worst countries so they could rip off American Taxpayers. Democrats only think there is one crime – Not voting for them!
Instead of protecting Americans and their Tax Dollars, Democrats chose instead to prosecute anyone they can find that wanted Safe and Secure Elections. Democrats have been relentless in their targeting of TINA PETERS, a Patriot who simply wanted to make sure that our Elections were Fair and Honest. Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the “crime” of demanding Honest Elections. Today I am granting Tina a full Pardon for her attempts to expose Voter Fraud in the Rigged 2020 Presidential Election!” (read more)
You know a deep state cover-story operation is underway when Natasha Bertrand and Evan Perez are pushing the narrative.
The narrative is laughable, claiming the 30-year-old black North Virgina resident, working for a bail bond company that supports illegal aliens, whose father previously sued the Trump administration and claims racism against their company opposition, is a Trump supporter.
Alas, that’s the story -according to FBI people familiar with the matter- and CNN are sticking to it.
(VIA CNN) – During interviews with the FBI, the suspect arrested in the pipe bomb probe told investigators that he believed the 2020 election was stolen, providing perhaps the first indication of a possible motive for the bombs placed near the DNC and RNC headquarters, people briefed on the matter told CNN. (read more)
If you are to believe this narrative and simultaneously overlay the indictment evidence, the pipe bomber had remarkable predictive abilities in purchasing the explosive components for his devices before the 2020 election took place. Somehow, according to CNN, Brian Cole Jr knew the 2020 election would be “stolen” and was prepared for the outcome.
Ridiculous, all of it.
Meanwhile, Brian Cole Jr’s grandmother, Loretta, tells an entirely different story.
(Via Daily Mail) – […] ‘He’s not politically affiliated with anything,’ the grandmother told the Daily Mail during an interview at her home in Gainesville, Virginia. ‘He has no social media contacts. He’s never online going back and forth with politics or anything like that. He says he don’t like either party.
‘He’s borderline autistic,’ she added. ‘He’s slow. He may be 30, but he’s got the mind of a 16-year-old. That’s why we’re thinking – What the hell? What’s going on?’
While Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin advances the efforts of the Intelligence Community to undermine, isolate, ridicule and marginalize President Trump, ultimately a seditious coup, Virginia Senator Mark Warner now calls for the military to engage in supporting that coup.
As with all things espoused by the professional, the language is worded for plausible deniability; however the expressed intent is clear for those non-pretending. What else is meant by:
…”I think in many ways the uniformed military may help save us from this president and his lame people like Hegseth. Because I think that their commitment is to the constitution and obviously not to Trump.”
Now put your mindset back about a decade, and ask yourself what would have been the response from media if Senator Jeff Sessions said it was his hope the U.S. military would reject instructions from President Obama, and instead follow the guidelines of his political opposition?
But rather than play ‘whataboutism’, let’s evaluate if Mark Warner was successful. What exactly does that success look like?
A military overthrow of the United States government from within?
A follow up question should be: “Senator Warner, are you asking for a military led overthrow of the United States government?” If no, then how is your expressed preference any different? Please explain the distinction.
The authority for the United States government to capture the electronic records of all Americans without warrant falls under the auspices of FISA-702. The current authority expires in April of 2026.
Some administrative state defenders will argue this issue with me. However, having researched almost every aspect to the construct, and the argument, I am confident FISA-702 authority underpins the much bigger, quasi-constitutional justification for the wholesale collection of U.S. citizen metadata. Without the 702 authority, the legal justification for the apparatus of surveillance no longer exists. It really is that simple.
That said, there remains ZERO justification for the wholesale capture of U.S. citizen data by the government. It is not the searching of the database that presents the issue; the capture itself violates the Fourth Amendment.
The only way the government can justify the capture of U.S. Citizen data is if there is some quasi-constitutional or national security reason for it. That’s where FISA-702 comes in.
Take away “702” search authority, and the data collection argument collapses; ANY “incidental” search of the database then loses any plausible legal justification. 702 is the camel’s nose under the tent that forms the baseline for all data records to be intercepted, stored and ultimately available for review.
This is a very key component to fully understand. Most practical applications of surveillance are contingent upon the capture of electronic records for tracking. Ex. – if domestic travel records are considered private papers (never argued yet), then government agencies have no right to exploit them without a valid search warrant underpinned by a national security justification. The government, not private sector – government, tracking people becomes more difficult if privacy rules are applied.
The legal aspect runs through the 4th Amendment, which -while historically undefined in the modern era- likely stirs in the background of the recent TSA decision to provide a $45 opt-out, for the use of REAL ID in domestic transit (interstate commerce application notwithstanding).
The Fourth Amendment aspect to the ‘warrantless’ government capture of American citizen records has never been fully argued in court; the modern definitions are opaque, and the govt has a vested interest in retaining the untested status quo.
Two weeks ago, the seditious six congressional members began framing an op against the Trump administration under the auspices of military “defying illegal orders.” In the past few days, the same “illegal order” narrative has been used against Secretary Pete Hegseth; these two structured and timed sequence events are not disconnected.
The leftists and deep state IC are running a color revolution operation inside the USA. The first step in all color revolutions is to undermine the legitimacy and authority of the elected national leader; this is exactly what the seditious six are doing.
This version of the color revolution is not dissimilar to the Lawfare approach; however, this is using the Intelligence Community and Det of War as the impetus and target for the destabilization effort. The objective is the same, to delegitimize the administration of Trump and create purposeful crisis. WATCH:
While it is unnerving to watch this unfold, it is important to remember the #1 way to counteract the efforts of those who participate in the effort is to retain support for the intended target, President Trump. On the positive side, there is a very large percentage of the American people who can see right through these efforts now.
[Transcript] – KRISTEN WELKER: It’s wonderful to have you back after a really significant week. And I do want to start with the National Guard shooting. You, of course, served in uniform. You know firsthand the impact, the devastation of gun violence. We just heard Secretary Noem defend President Trump’s decision to, quote, “permanently pause migration from all third-world countries.” What is your response to how President Trump is handling this?
SEN. MARK KELLY:
Well, let me start by saying what happened to the two guardsmen, Andrew Wolfe, Sarah Beckstrom, horrific. And it shouldn’t happen. And I’m praying for him and for her family. It was a horrible, horrible thing. And there needs to be an investigation and accountability. But when I heard the secretary say that they’re going to pause immigration from third-world countries, I mean, I take that as a message that they don’t want brown people coming to the United States. And I find that disturbing. We are a country that has always welcomed individuals that are struggling, that are fleeing famine and violence. And it would be a fundamental change to the fabric of our nation to change that.
This could potentially be very good news; however, the battle between where we are today and where we would need to be in order to address unlawful sedition criminally is very far apart. Let’s hope the Pentagon and DOJ can harden up and start to take down these political bad actors.
In a social media post Monday, the Pentagon said it received complaints over former U.S. Navy Captain Mark Kelly’s efforts to undermine President Trump and destabilize the U.S. government.
The pentagon saying they received, “serious allegations of misconduct” against him, and “a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures.”
U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie has dismissed the cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James, under the grounds that U.S Attorney Lindsey Halligan was illegally appointed to the role of prosecutor when she secured the grand jury indictments. [SEE RULING HERE]
James Comey was charged with lying to and obstructing Congress, relating to his 2020 Senate testimony about the FBI’s investigation into President Trump and Russia. Letitia James was charged with bank fraud and making false statements.
WASHINGTON – […] U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie concluded that Halligan’s appointment as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia violated laws that limit the ability of the Justice Department to install top prosecutors without Senate confirmation.
“Ms. Halligan has been unlawfully serving in that role since September 22, 2025,” Currie concluded in opinions simultaneously filed Monday in both cases. “All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan’s defective appointment … constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside.”
However, Currie dismissed the cases “without prejudice.” That could allow prosecutors to attempt to obtain new grand jury indictments in each case. But Comey’s attorneys have already indicated that they will argue that he cannot be re-indicted because the statute of limitations in his case expired on Sept. 30. And Currie agreed that the deadline had passed without a valid indictment. (more)
Senator Elissa Slotkin (Mich), a former CIA analyst who worked in the State Department and Pentagon during the Obama administration, organized a viral video with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Rep. Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, and Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado.
The six congressional representatives directed their coordinated communication to members of the military and intelligence community. “Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders … you must refuse illegal orders,” they asserted.
However, when questioned about what “illegal orders” President Trump has created, the six members are suddenly very quiet. White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller responds:
.
Ultimately, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi could easily assign an FBI agent and U.S attorney to question the six members about the “illegal orders” they are telling the military and intelligence community to defy.
If Slotkin, Kelly and the rest cannot present evidence of an illegal order they are referring to, that would be a qualification that should presumably invoke a First Amendment defense claim, then charge them with simple sedition as defined in statute.
