The White House was given an arbitrary deadline of 5pm tonight (without any background information) for a participation response to a House Judiciary Committee December 4th hearing; at a time when President Trump is attending a NATO summit; for a hearing with unspecified witnesses; and for a hearing with unspecified purposes; and for a hearing with unspecified rules.
The White House responds accordingly (pdf here):

The full five-page letter is below:
(more…)

House Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins appears on Fox News to debate the insufferable gatekeeper of the swamp, Chris Wallace.
Despite the necessary obfuscation by Wallace, who is professionally trained to pretend not to know things, Collins points out the ridiculous proposition that republicans and the White House are required to respond to participation demands when the HPSCI impeachment report hasn’t even been produced.  The process construct therein highlights the purely political motive of the partisan Democrat agenda.  At this point it’s transparent.

Representative Andy Biggs appears on Fox News to discuss the next two weeks.  The Democrats are rushing to impeach President Trump prior to the Christmas recess.

• December 1st – Deadline for White House response for participation in “groundwork” hearing.
• December 2nd – Schiff’s HPSCI Impeachment Committee presents draft report.
• December 3rd – HPSCI Committee votes on impeachment report.
• December 4th – HJC “groundwork” impeachment hearing at 10:00am.
• December 6th – Deadline for White House response for participation in HJC Impeachment Hearing.
• December 6th – Deadline for House Republican witness list.
• December 9th – Hearing to deny House Republican witnesses.
• December 13th – House recesses for Christmas break?

(more…)

Candidate Trump was framed for stealing a horse; President Trump was subsequently accused of trying too hard to avoid hanging for it. Prosecutor Mueller eventually conceded that Trump didn’t steal the horse; however, by then the focus was on Trump’s efforts to avoid the hanging.  Eventually Mueller testified; it surfaced there was never a horse to begin with… Impeachment was stalled.   Prosecutor Jerry Nadler is attempting to resurrect a legal theory that President Trump can still be hung for attempting to avoid the hanging, even if there was no horse theft.   Yup, that’s were we’re at.
Earlier Friday House Judiciary Committee (HJC) Chairman Jerry Nadler sent another letter to the White House outlining a December 6th deadline for executive participation in the coup by impeachment.  The chairman also sent ranking member Doug Collins a similar letter asking for rebuttal witnesses by December 6th.  In anticipation of Nadler denying the republican rebuttal witnesses he has scheduled a committee hearing on the republican complaints for December 9th [yes, same day as IG Horowitz report release].

Both of these requests, along with the prior “groundwork hearing” request, come from the HJC before the judiciary committee has received the House Impeachment Inquiry report from Adam Schiff’s HPSCI partisan impeachment committee.  Apparently the HJC knows the report content from Schiff’s committee; which means there will be no full committee review by any republican members of the bunker basement impeachment group.
(more…)

In the past several days; and in anticipation of an inspector general report/release tasked to look into the FISA processes of the prior administration; I have been assembling a file, a series of reminder questions, that peer into the heart of the 2015/2016 FISA surveillance.  Today, is another reminder…  [*ahem* Sidney Powell, please note]

Left to right: Kathryn H. Ruemmler, President Obama, Lisa Monaco and Susan Rice.

Knowing what we know now, consider this long forgotten letter from Susan Rice’s lawyer Kathryn Ruemmler.  Ms. Ruemmler is currently the global co-chairman of the Latham & Watkins white collar criminal defense practice; she formerly served as White House Counsel to President Obama.  Ask yourself: how do these paragraphs reconcile?

[Feb 23, 2018] The memorandum to file drafted by Ambassador Rice memorialized an important national security discussion between President Obama and the FBI Director and the Deputy Attorney General. President Obama and his national security team were justifiably concerned about potential risks to the Nation’s security from sharing highly classified information about Russia with certain members of the Trump transition team, particularly Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
[…] While serving as National Security Advisor, Ambassador Rice was not briefed on the existence of any FBI investigation into allegations of collusion between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia, and she later learned of the fact of this investigation from Director Comey’s subsequent public testimony.
Ambassador Rice was not informed of any FISA applications sought by the FBI in its investigation, and she only learned of them from press reports after leaving office. (link)

How could Ms. Rice be aware of a “national security compromise”, “particularly surrounding Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn” after a “briefing by the FBI”, if she was not briefed on the existence of an FBI investigation”?
See the problem?
(more…)

Bill O’reilly had an extensive and semi-casual interview with President Trump a few days ago. Mr. O’Reilly released the full interview for Thanksgiving.  They cover a lot of ground.
O’Reilly is a decent interviewer, but doesn’t understand the complexity of the President Trump’s strategy in the geopolitical realm.  The underestimation is not an O’Reilly weakness; the apparatus of ‘media’ do not grasp the full context of the background work POTUS has put into a global trade reset.  The global reset is a massive and ongoing plan.
Specifically as it pertains to China, O’Reilly is stuck in the traditional financial perspective that no U.S. President could ever walk away from China; which is exactly what President Trump is doing. So at 19:00 of the video below, O’Reilly asks: “what’s holding up the China deal?”  To wit, President Trump pauses and matter-of-factually says:

….”ahhhhhh, ME!”

It’s a hilariously Trumpy moment. LISTEN:

On May 23rd, 2019, President Donald Trump gave U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr full authority to review and release all of the classified material hidden by the DOJ, FBI, State Department, CIA, FISA Court, and aggregate intelligence apparatus; 200 days ago.

It has been 200 days since President Trump empowered AG Bill Barr to release the original authorizing framework of the Mueller investigation which began on May 17, 2017. A Mueller investigation that concluded nine months ago, and yet we are not allowed to know what the authorizing 2017 framework was?…. Nor the 2nd DOJ scope memo of August 2nd, 2017?… Nor the 3rd DOJ scope memo of October 20th, 2017?….
The released Weissmann/Mueller report showed after the origination authorization in May 2017 there were two additional scope memos authorizing specific targeting of the Mueller probe. The second scope memo was August 2nd, 2017, OUTLINED HERE, and is an important part of the puzzle that helps explain the corrupt original purpose of the special counsel. [Now Confirmed Here]  Generally, the second scope memo (Aug ’17) authorized Robert Mueller to investigate the claims within the Steele Dossier.
The second scope memo came a month after the third renewal of the Carter Page FISA warrant.  We now know that FISA warrant was renewed using falsified documents by FBI Lawyer Kevin Clinesmith.  That means special counsel team requested the second expanded scope memo from Rosenstein in August after the DOJ was aware Kevin Clinesmith held political bias, and he along with four members of the original Crossfire Hurricane team were removed. (K Clinesmith, P Strzok, L Page, S Moyer and unknown).
(more…)

Well, well, well….  FOX Business’ Maria Bartiromo announced this morning that her sources are saying a USMCA vote is possible next week.   This DC source reporting would align with our CTH spidey senses from the visible DC trade twitches.

House Judiciary Committee (HJC) Chairman Jerry Nadler, together with Lawfare contracted impeachment agents Barry Berke and Norm Eisen (pictured below), are attempting to reframe a collapsing impeachment and pull-in White House participation.
Chairman Nadler has announced a December 4th hearing with a panel of democrat selected constitutional lawyers and legal ‘experts’, to discuss the procedural framework of an impeachment process. As Nadler states: “Our first task is to explore the framework put in place to respond to serious allegations of impeachable misconduct”. So the HJC initial objective to build their narrative is to explain what the impeachment process is about.
This is transparently an attempt by Nadler/Lawfare to give legitimacy to an illegitimate political exercise. The hearing purpose is framed as a trap to pull the White House in, and thereby create the optics of constitutional legitimacy.  Strong caution is advised and I would not be surprised to see the White House refuse to participate.  Here’s why:
With the House investigative portion of resolution 660 complete, per Adam Schiff and a yet invisible report from the HPSCI committee submitted, either the House Judiciary should follow their own process or not.  The White House and the minority have not even seen the one-sided report mandated by the House Impeachment Inquiry Resolution.
My advice to the White House would be to respond to Nadler’s letter by informing him the House “Impeachment Report” authorized by resolution 660 has not yet been delivered; therefore, without a basis for the HJC to consider the validity of the first phase, it would be presumptuous to engage in a second phase framework exercise without the origination material described by the House Democrats’ own procedure.
The HJC is putting the proverbial illegitimate cart before the invisible horse.  Hammer them with this ! How can the HJC construct a hearing on the framework of impeachment without the results from the impeachment inquiry report?
(more…)

Previously Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann attempted to prosecute President Trump, the fictitious horse-thief, for attempting to obstruct his hanging; now Adam Schiff is inferring guilt because President Trump didn’t present alibis for his whereabouts when the fictitious horse wasn’t stolen.
Earlier today President Trump responded:

An interesting use of the word “wolves” considering the recent attempts by the DC Coup-group to metastasize the impeachment effort into the military. Subtle like a brick through a window.