With media reporting that U.S. Attorney John Durham has expanded the timeline and scope of his investigation into U.S. government and intelligence community activity during the 2016 election, there’s an interesting quote from NBC:

…”Justice Department officials have said that Durham has found something significant, and that critics should be careful.”…

The expanded investigative timeline is now into May 2017 when Mueller was appointed special counsel, and would mean all of the preceding (and surrounding) activity leading up to Mueller would be reviewed.   With that carefully in mind….
During the 2016 effort to weaponize the institutions of government against the outside candidacy of Donald Trump, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) was headed by Richard Burr and Dianne Feinstein.  After the 2016 election Senator Feinstein abdicated her vice-chair position to Senator Mark Warner in January 2017.
While the SSCI was engaged in their part of the 2016 effort Vice-Chair Feinstein’s lead staffer was a man named Daniel Jones. Dan Jones was the contact point between the SSCI and Fusion-GPS.
After the election, and after Feinstein abdicated, Dan Jones left the committee to continue paying Fusion-GPS (Glenn Simpson) for ongoing efforts toward the impeachment insurance policy angle.
Feinstein appears to have left because she didn’t want to deal with the consequences of a President Trump, IF he discovered the SSCI involvement. Dan Jones left because with a Trump presidency the SSCI, now co-chaired by Senator Mark Warner, needed arms-length plausible deniability amid their 2017 operations to continue the removal effort (soft coup).
The trail for this plausible deniability process and ongoing soft-coup effort first surfaces with Dan Jones appearing in the early 2017 text messages between Senator Warner and the liaison for Christopher Steele, lawyer and lobbyist Adam Waldman:
(more…)

Nancy Pelosi continues to mislead her ‘impeachment’ constituents.  Unfortunately the compliant media is refusing to hold her accountable.  House Democrat leadership has taken a climate assessment of democrat House members and Speaker Pelosi announced they will not hold a House impeachment authorization vote.   As a direct and specific consequence all committee subpoenas do not carry a penalty for non-compliance.

(Source)

“Lawful subpoenas”, literally require an enforcement mechanism; that’s the “poena” part of the word.  The enforcement mechanism is a judicial penalty, and that penalty can only be created if the House votes to authorize an impeachment inquiry.
Absent a vote to authorize, the Legislative Branch has not established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they attempt to work through their quasi-constitutional “impeachment inquiry” process.
Instead of subpoenas, Adam Schiff (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence); and Chairman Eliot L. Engel (House Committee on Foreign Affairs) can only send out request letters. The compliance is discretionary based on the outlook of the recipient.
(more…)

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss ongoing politics in Washington DC.
McCarthy discusses the meeting between Speaker Pelosi and President Trump and the ongoing fiasco with Pelosi’s “official impeachment inquiry” by decree.

(more…)

The background context has already been outlined –SEE HERE– so we won’t repeat.  Instead, we look at today’s defensive narrative engineering from the New York Times with a similar perspective, but a different set of reminders.
Content and distribution tells us this information is from the DOJ and FBI faction of the “Small Group“.  Not accidentally, and VERY importantly, this is the same faction under the microscope of Inspector General Michael Horowitz and his pending IG report.  Additionally, and again very importantly, the principles within the IG report have already had an opportunity to review the part of the upcoming report that highlights their conduct.

So this New York Times reporting, from conversations with the DOJ and FBI small group participants, is coming out in advance of the IG report and with their review in mind.
Here’s the article, emphasis mine:

WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors reviewing the origins of the Russia investigation have asked witnesses pointed questions about any anti-Trump bias among former F.B.I. officials who are frequent targets of President Trump and about the earliest steps they took in the Russia inquiry, according to former officials and other people familiar with the review.

[Note “prosecutors” is plural; more than one.  “prosecutors” also implies a shift from investigative review, to a likelihood of criminal conduct.  The media presentation of John Durham has gone from a single U.S. Attorney with a mandate from his boss, to a group of people, ‘prosecutors’, working with the U.S. Attorney.]
(more…)

The activity of the “small group” of coup plotters consists of three generalized subsidiary agencies: (1) DOJ/FBI, (2) CIA/ODNI, and (3) The State Department.
Within each “small group faction” a years-long review of their narrative constructs shows the groups have specific and unique media outlets for their offensive (’16, ’17) and defensive (’18, ’19) propaganda efforts.
•The DOJ/FBI faction of the “small group” leaks to narrative engineers at the New York Times and NBC. •The CIA/ODNI faction utilize the Washington Post and ABC; and •the State Dept. faction use CNN and CBS. Each faction uses the same reporters & pundits for their distribution. This pattern, albeit generalized, has been consistent for several years.

The originating media entity -utilizing the leaks, opinions and agenda of the faction most concerned- starts the process. The secondary media groups come in for support – reporting on the reporting; and then reporting on the reporting of the reporting… and so on. This process provides a concentric distribution effort to bolster the originating premise.
Similar to the Journ-o-list effort of Ezra Klein, all of the ideologically aligned reporters share information for the larger process of defending the prior activity and advancing a unified narrative. [Reference Buzzfeed’s Ali Watkins sharing leaks from SSCI Security Director James Wolfe to her peers at WaPo and New York Times while she had sex with the source to keep the information pipeline open.]
It is important to remember this concerted process whenever we are reviewing media articles concerning the matters of interest to each of the “small group” factions.
In essence, the propagandists within the media are the same; and the sources for the positions reflected in the articles are the same. Wash, rinse and repeat depending on the identified risk.
So today we see NBC and the New York Times going “out front” on behalf of their interests. Referencing the faction each outlet represents we see the *reporting* is to defend the interests of the DOJ and FBI.
(more…)

Office for Trade and Manufacturing Policy’s Peter Navarro discusses the China trade negotiations, the UAW General Motors strike, U.S. tariffs in European goods, and USMCA.
On the U.S-China ‘Phase-1’ construct the key issue is going to be the enforcement mechanism to ensure any agreement has strength.  On U.S. placing tariffs on the EU due to the Airbus ruling Navarro reminds everyone the WTO ruling does not permit the EU to place tariffs on U.S. productions.  On USMCA everyone avoids telling the truth; that is  Nancy Pelosi is waiting to see what happens in the Canadian election in three days.  If Trudeau wins re-election, the USMCA will likely be scrapped (tabled) by Pelosi.

.
{*Note* We are holding-back on BREXIT-EU deal outlines until we complete reading the majority of the 2,000+ pages of UK-EU legal agreement construct.}
(more…)

Earlier today Nancy Pelosi was questioned about why the House was not voting to pass the USMCA trade agreement.  Speaker Pelosi immediately fell back upon her talking point: “we are working toward yes.”   This is complete hogwash.  There are no discussions. Pelosi is doing what Pelosi does best, politicizing anything positive for the U.S. economy in a concerted effort to undermine Trump in 2020.
Here’s what is going on.
Nancy Pelosi and her far-left ideologues entered an agreement with their Canadian liberal allies and Justin Trudeau to stall the USMCA passage.
Trudeau’s government ideologues agreed not to call the USMCA up for a vote in the Canadian parliament.
Speaker Pelosi is waiting to see if Trudeau can win re-election.  If Canada re-elects Trudeau on October 21st, Pelosi will announce the labor provisions are not strong enough within the USMCA deal; discussions with the Trump administration are not resolving the issues; the U.S. workers are not protected enough, and she is tabling any vote.
Speaker Pelosi will then wait until after the 2020 election.  The purpose is political.
(more…)

House minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Mike McCaul, Rankimg Member of House Committee on Homeland Security, hold a press conference with the media pool immediately following the bipartisan White House briefing on Syria.
Apparently once Nancy Pelosi finished her political meltdown and stomped out of the briefing, the remaining democrats and republicans engaged in a healthy discussion with U.S. military leadership and President Trump about the purpose of the U.S. draw-down.

(more…)

“Nation Building” is a very lucrative enterprise in/around Washington DC.   Here’s what happens when that business opportunity is removed from the UniParty financial portfolio:
(more…)

The level of political nonsense today from the House of Representatives is off-the-charts.  Speaker Pelosi calls a resolution to the House floor to denounce President Trump for removing 28 troops from a foreign war never authorized by the same House.
If Pelosi wants to have a war with Syria, then declare one.  Or, Pelosi could call a resolution to the House floor to condemn Turkish President Erdogan for invading Syria. Instead, the House votes to denounce President Trump for getting our military out of the way.   The Democrats are the party of war, and a whole bunch of republicans are supporting them.  Why?  Simply, because war is a big business from K-Street.

.
Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Steny Hoyer walk out of a meeting with President Trump because, according to them, the president called the speaker a “third-rate politician”. Speaker Pelosi replied “I wish you were a politician”…. How typical is that?
(more…)