Yesterday it was revealed that Broward County School Police Officer Scot Peterson refused to enter building for over four minutes during the active shooter rampage.  Today we discover that an additional three more Broward County Deputies arrived yet did nothing.

Officers from neighboring Coral Springs police department arrived on scene, noted the four Broward Deputies refusing to engage, and the CSPD immediately went into the building.   According to a CNN report, the following day, February 15th, Coral Springs City Manager Mike Goodrum confronted Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel over the dereliction of duty and cowardice exhibited by the Broward deputies.

I wish I could tell you I’m surprised; but I’m not.  As we previously researched and outlined, the conduct by the Broward Sheriff’s Office (BSO) is not unexpected.  Their behavior is shameful, but not unexpected. From the top down, officials within the BSO are focused on political objectives within Broward County and maintaining/defending a political status amid all county officials:

(Via CNN) When Coral Springs police officers arrived at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on February 14 in the midst of the school shooting crisis, many officers were surprised to find not only that Broward County Sheriff’s Deputy Scot Peterson, the armed school resource officer, had not entered the building, but that three other Broward County Sheriff’s deputies were also outside the school and had not entered, Coral Springs sources tell CNN. The deputies had their pistols drawn and were behind their vehicles, the sources said, and not one of them had gone into the school.

(more…)

Earlier today President Trump held a roundtable discussion on school safety with federal and local officials, state attorneys general, law enforcement, education officials and administration officials within the healthcare and mental health field.

The topic is overall school safety in the aftermath of the Parkland Florida school shooting. Many ideas are common sense and surround identifying ‘at risk’ behaviors, and changing the downstream processes when law enforcement intercedes with an individual exhibiting unstable behavior.

The U.S. mainstream media are exhibiting signs of frustration because the prudent and thoughtful responsiveness of the White House is not allowing POTUS Trump’s political opposition enough fuel to create antagonistic narrative.  One of the topics the President Trump has focused on is ‘hardening schools’ through stronger security to include empowering trained school officials to carry concealed firearms.

.

I will be strongly pushing Comprehensive Background Checks with an emphasis on Mental Health. Raise age to 21 and end sale of Bump Stocks! Congress is in a mood to finally do something on this issue – I hope!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 22, 2018

(more…)

In Part 1 we outlined a historic pattern of FISA-702 surveillance abuse by President Obama’s top officials within the DOJ and FBI. Here in Part 2 we outline how a specific application for a Title-1 surveillance warrant to the FISA court was intentionally misrepresented.

This Part 2 video report focuses on the Obama administration’s Illegal spying of the Trump Campaign through an American named Carter Page who was a brief volunteer on the campaign.  This video outlines the FISA ‘Title-1’ warrant on Mr. Page and the House and Senate investigations of the executive branch’s misleading application to the FISA Court.  Former U.S. attorney Joseph diGenova says he expects former top FBI officials to be charged criminally. WATCH:

.

The goal is to distill our research files into short high-quality ‘special report‘ type video segments that are easily digestible – and will help educate people on what the importance of what is happening. We hope you enjoy the content and will share with those who don’t have the exhaustive amount of time necessary to keep up on the issues.

(more…)

A large number of people who read the Mueller 13-person Russian Indictment released on Friday noted a transparent lack of actual substance.  Today the absence of substance turns toward the hilarious.

Much like the heavily touted sketchy 2017 Joint Analysis Report (the infamous “14 U.S. intelligence agencies report“) was really only three political intel agencies, FBI (Comey), CIA (Brennan) and ODNI (Clapper), Friday’s Russian indictment had a lot of pages and citations but in the aggregate was an assembly of nothing-burger reporting of various insignificant social media events.

Today the absurdity of the report becomes even more laughable.  As Gateway Pundit reports almost everything in the Mueller indictment was previously outlined in a Radio Free Europe report from 2015.   If that wasn’t funny enough, even the Washington Post finds the majority of the indictment was published last October in a Russian Business Magazine (RBC) article.

(WaPo) A 37-page indictment issued by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s team on Friday brings fresh American attention to one of the strangest elements of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election: The Internet Research Agency (IRA), a state-sponsored “troll factory” in St. Petersburg.

But much of the information Mueller published on Friday about the agency’s efforts to influence the election had already been published last October — in an article by a Russian business magazine, RBC.

(more…)

This outline is mostly a repost because it hits on the central framework of an obvious dynamic being missed by almost everyone within the larger discussion.

On December 2nd, 2017 (not accidentally ONE DAY after Mike Flynn’s guilty plea was announced), part of the intelligence community –sources inside the investigative unit– outlined specific examples of DOJ/FBI political corruption. The revelations surrounded FBI Agent Peter Strzok, FBI lawyer Lisa Page and DOJ Deputy Bruce Ohr.

The month of December 2017 brought to light everything within the larger storyline of a corrupt domestic intelligence apparatus filing for a fraudulent FISA ‘Title-1’ surveillance application, and outlined the process of the DOJ and FBI spying on the Trump campaign. This entire enterprise was/is white-hats fighting back against corrupt black-hats.

In the aftermath, the FBI responded to media inquiry; and the DOJ responded to the revelations (December 3rd release) by specifically pointing attention to the Office of the Inspector General and Michael Horowitz (emphasis mine):

The January 2017 statement issued by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announcing its review of allegations regarding various actions of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in advance of the 2016 election stated that the OIG review would, among other things, consider whether certain underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations and that we also would include issues that might arise during the course of the review.

The OIG has been reviewing allegations involving communications between certain individuals, and will report its findings regarding those allegations promptly upon completion of the review of them.”

~ Justice Department Office of the Inspector General (link)

(more…)

Attorney General Jeff Sessions sat down with Maria Bartiromo for an extensive discussion on ongoing issues.  Topics include immigration reform, FISA court abuses, the DOJ and FBI corruption investigation(s), and more.  WATCH:

(more…)

Sometimes people who assemble information make wrong assertions; this is one such time. Unfortunately, Byron York’s assertion needs a quick deconstruction.

In a twitter reply today Mr. York makes a mistake in spreading false information that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is not investigating the DOJ/FBI corruption surrounding the “Trump/Russia Case”.

The fact is – the origination statement from the Office of Inspector General specifically says the review of DOJ/FBI politicization of their investigative authority is not restrained from following “other issues that may arise.”  There’s a years-worth of evidence that IG Horowitz is running an investigation on two-tracks, here’s how:

(more…)

Andrew McCarthy has an excellent must-read review of how the Susan Rice email paints a clear picture of James Comey’s instructions -from President Obama- to obfuscate the intent of the FBI counterintelligence operation during the early days of the Trump administration.

Andrew McCarthy – On her way out the White House door and out of her job as national-security adviser, Susan Rice writes an email-to-self. Except it’s not really an email-to-self. It is quite consciously an email for the record.

Her term having ended 15 minutes before, Rice was technically back in private life, where private people have private email accounts — even notepads if they want to scratch out a reminder the old-fashioned way. Yet, for at least a few more minutes, Rice still had access to her government email account. She could still generate an official record. That’s what she wanted her brief email to be: the dispositive memorialization of a meeting she was worried about — a meeting that had happened over two weeks earlier, at which, of course, President Obama insisted that everything be done “by the book.”  (continue reading)

(more…)

On a Monday night (February 12th, 2018) episode of Tucker Carlson a Democrat member of the House Intelligence committee said something interesting that almost everyone missed.  Appearing on the show to joust with Tucker, HPSCI member Eric Swalwell stated: “the House Intel Committee has not interviewed a single witness in over a month”.  [Video Here, quote @03:47]  This statement is rather enlightening.

A month earlier, January 4th, 2018, an agreement was finally made between House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes and DOJ Asst. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for complete disclosure of all unredacted documents AND a list of witnesses who Nunes wanted the HPSCI to question.

Included in those names was:  FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who exchanged anti-Trump text messages during an affair and previously worked on the special counsel’s Russia probe; FBI general counsel James Baker, who was reassigned; FBI head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap, whom ex-FBI boss James Comey testified made the decision not to brief Congress about the Russia case during last year’s election; and Bruce Ohr, a DOJ official reassigned after concealing meetings with figures involved in the dossier.

The January 4th agreement between Devin Nunes and Rod Rosenstein was made after a great deal of back-and-forth.  Chairman Nunes then documented the agreement in a letter.

On January 8th, Bruce Ohr was demoted for the second time.  [AND DOJ officials scheduled Bruce Ohr to be available to Devin Nunes on January 17th]

On January 9th, the DOJ provided the unredacted DOJ/FBI documents requested to Chairman Nunes; the documents the DOJ produced surrounded the Clinton-Steele Dossier and the FISA Title-1 application.   The documents were assigned to a SCIF in the basement of the House.  Those documents become the basis for Chairman Nunes to outline his memo; essentially a declassification request to the White House written by Trey Gowdy.

(more…)

In a curious article tonight Byron York presents an odd dynamic surrounding the Michael Flynn “lie narrative.”   York points out that in March 2017, James Comey told a closed session of congress that he didn’t think Michael Flynn lied to FBI investigators; yet in December 2017, Flynn accepted a plea therein.  York is puzzled – SEE HERE –

As we previously shared, the answer to the question(s) presented within the Flynn article are really not that difficult to figure out.

There was absolutely NOTHING wrong with the President-Elect’s Transition Team talking to any foreign government, or any official within any foreign government. Ever. Period.  Actually, that’s exactly what transition teams are supposed to do; they reach out and receive information from foreign government officials as the starting point to communication with a new administration.

Many people have asked the question why would Michael Flynn have lied about talking to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the first place?

It’s a great question.

The Occam’s Razor answer is the toxic political environment that existed in January 2017, where the administration was being hammered by a tsunami of media narratives and political opposition claiming that any scintilla of contact with anything Russian meant that Putin and Trump were “colluding BFF’s”,…. and Flynn didn’t want to fuel that nonsense.

(more…)